Voluntary Hunting of Feral Animals in Our Parks

Congratulations John for a Very Well written Submission. I certainly hope it does a lot of Good. ron

Submission on Draft Regional Pest Management Strategy Part B: 2012-2015

Pesky Pigs That Won't Cause Any More Damage.

Pesky Pigs That Won't Cause Any More Damage.

By John Cummins
Mount Warrigal 2528 NSW

My submission will concern the humane control of feral animal pests and the protection of native animal and bird species from feral pests in our National Parks.

My first point of contention is the use by NPWS of sodium monofluoroacetate or as it is commonly known, 1080 poison in baiting programs. I understand cyanide poising with salt licks for deer is also being considered. Cyanide poising results in a terrible death for animals.
Death by 1080 is protracted and cruel. The Zoology Department at La Trobe University, Melbourne have said of 1080:
‘Animals can take up to four days to die from it.”
Animals poisoned with 1080 scream, vomit, defecate and suffer violent seizures. They die by final seizure who knows how long after ingestion of the poison. It is impossible to say the animal is not suffering and it is without question that 1080 poison inflicts great pain and suffering on affected animals. Aside from the physical pain endured over the many hours before death, the terror, fear and anxiety felt by these animals is unimaginable.

Doctors for Forests spokesperson Dr Frank Nicklason had this to say in the Illawarra Mercury Newspaper 10 January 2002,
‘1080 causes an horrific death and kills not only possums and wallabies but can also kill protected species such as bettongs, potoroos and wombats….also native birds which feed on poisoned carcasses’.

 A preliminary review of the use of 1080 by the Australian Pesticides and Veterinary Medicines Authority (APVMA) released on 23 May 2005 for public comment, shows without doubt that the dispersal of 1080 in ‘bait form’ presents a danger to non-target animals, and that the chemical is ‘easily leached from some materials by rain or even dew fall’.

 Non-target native species are as equally attracted to 1080 baits as the targeted animals. But its list of unintended victims does not end there, scavenging animals such as native rodents, goannas, magpies, kookaburras, crows, and currawongs are killed through secondary poisoning when they feed upon non-recovered carcasses.

It is claimed that native species cannot reach the 1080 bait in its original placement, however after the carnivorous feral animal has retrieved the poison, eaten it, and on many occasions vomited the bait up it can then be consumed by a native species and passed into the food chain.
Banned in most countries, 1080 is still used liberally throughout Australia to control so-called ‘pest’ species, and reduce ‘browsing damage’ caused by native animals on private land. 1080 has been banned in Brazil since 1982 and is banned in most states of the US.

1080 is primarily used to manage introduced species. However, this poison is an indiscriminate killer. Poison laid for rabbits is normally in the form of baited carrots and oats, but any other animal occupying a similar niche such as the kangaroo are just as likely to eat the poison. It has been estimated that baits laid for rabbits threaten a further 50-62 species.

1080 not only has devastating consequences for the animals who directly consume it, but it also affects the surrounding environment and its inhabitants. Scavengers and carnivores are killed through secondary poisoning when they feed upon non-recovered carcasses. Indeed 1080 spreads so thoroughly through an ecosystem that insectivorous birds have been killed in baited areas by eating insects that have fed on carcasses and poisoned food.

1080 is not a sustainable method of population control, and only temporarily removes the target animals from a given area. It also has no effect on the overall population of a pest species. The sudden removal of a group of feral pest animals along with the collateral damage to native species merely creates spaces that will quickly refill themselves with more feral animals as these are, by and large, much more territorially aggressive then native species.

Now I am not so naïve as to think that there is no place for the use of poisons in our National Parks and by private landholders however this use can be drastically reduced.
So what are the alternative methods of feral animal control in National Parks? Trapping and shooting immediately come to mind and are utilized by the NPWS. Trapping with a non injurious trap is ideal as if a native species is inadvertently captured it can be released however trapping is labor intensive and location specific.
That leaves shooting and for some reason there seems to be a barrier in NPWS thinking to allowing certified NSW Game Council R-License holders to eradicate feral animal pests in our National Parks.
I realize there are many excuses for this but very few valid reasons.

 Voluntary pest eradication by these ethical, well trained, and police licensed shooters in proscribed NSW State Forests has proven to be successful both safety wise and in the large reduction in feral animal numbers. This has allowed State Forests to re-allocate financial resources to areas other then feral animal pest control as the R-licensed hunters are volunteers. It has also put a lot more “eyes on the ground” to report on illegal activities such as drug plantations and poaching.

 I am a Game Council of NSW R-licensed hunter and also a member of the SSAA Hunting and Conservation branch. I undertake feral animal control for both organizations in NSW State forests and on private property eradicating feral pigs, feral goats, wild dogs, foxes, feral cats, rabbits and hare.
Both organizations require of participants high levels of ethical conduct when hunting feral and game animals. A particular virtue of hunting ethics is that the hunter has no gallery to applaud or disapprove of his conduct. This conduct is dictated by his/her own conscience rather then a mob of onlookers.
Without exception the members of both organizations I have spoken with have very high ethical standards when dealing with all animals. To a person they abhor cruelty to any animal. Hunting ethics are voluntary personal restrictions and codes of behavior we place on our activities and we are strongly influenced by peer pressure.

I would suggest there is a much higher level of ethical behavior toward animals by these hunters when compared to an organisation or individual that uses 1080, or any other poison for that matter.
These words may sound harsh but I have observed a ring tailed possum that was poisoned and the suffering of this poor animal was horrific before it was euthanised by a vet. This left on me a lasting impression as you could imagine.

There is a very good article on hunting ethics by Dr Matt Draisma in the April-June issue of Guns & Game magazine, number 66. Unfortunately I couldn’t find this article online.
To become accredited with the SSAA Hunting and Conservation activity I, and all applicants, must prove marksmanship with a rifle from various shooting positions and varying distances. If a participant fails these tests then they fail accreditation with this organisation and cannot participate in feral animal pest control activities for the organisation.

So shooting accuracy is a part of the ethics of the pest controller volunteering to participate for both organizations. It is closely tied in with the ethical desire of not wanting the animal to suffer unduly because of poor shooting, either by inaccuracy, improper shot placement, taking the shot at too great a distance, or using an innapropriate caliber on the particular species of feral pest. A well aimed shot will not result in a lingering death for innocent native animals in the food chain. By that I mean the only animal killed by a trained and accredited hunter in feral pest management will be the one he aims at.
I believe it is a gross violation of our rights as lawful firearms owners for NPWS to prohibit the passage of legally secured and licensed firearms and ammunition through our national parks on public roads whilst on the way to private property or a State forest where hunting/shooting is legal.

In closing, I would strongly recommend that the NSW NPWS introduce the voluntary hunting of feral animal pests into our parks under the control of The Game Council of NSW as is currently carried out in proscribed NSW state forests. This would greatly alleviate the suffering of both feral animal pests and innocent native animals and birds from the effects of the indiscriminate use of poisons in our National Parks.

As stated in 6.1 NSW Invasive Species Plan:

“…many pests are already widely established in NSW, and eradication across large areas is not achievable with existing resources.”
There can be no argument that voluntary hunting of feral pest animals in our National Parks would allow the allocation of more financial resources to other areas of management and would also provide extra surveillance for illegal activities in our parks.

 Voluntary hunting of feral pest animals would also drastically reduce the need to use poisons such as 1080 in our parks and therefore save many of our native species from agonizing deaths.

 Thank you for taking the time to consider this submission.


4.3 Million Registered Guns in Australia

4.3 Million Registered Guns in Australia.
Crim Trac have 4.3 million guns registered in Australia, but  figures are in a mess. That of course is only the legal registerd ones, why does CrimTrac want yours and my information. Well the answer to that is that the Government consider us all Criminals. All I can say is the feeling is mutral, whats more I could prove it to most people.

Radio National ‘Background Briefing’ program has found that Australia’s mandatory gun registration scheme is riddled with inaccuracies, and cannot be shown to have delivered any public health and safety outcomes.
Put together the patchy figures from all the state gun registries and it looks as if there are at least 2.7 million registered guns in the country. The national police information sharing… service, CrimTrac, says it has 4.3 million registered guns on its database. But it can’t say much more about it than that. That’s because the country’s gun statistics are in a mess.

Sure You Can Trust Your Government.

“Politicians should show some leadership and end this wasteful bureaucratic bungle. This would free up at least $74 000 each day for improved social services, healthcare, and policing,” said Dr McPhedran.

“Gun registration has not been shown, anywhere in the world, to be an effective way to reduce crime. It simply diverts resources away from where they are truly needed.”
“This is why Canada is currently getting rid of longarm registration, and why New Zealand abandoned registration in the early 1980s.”
“Those countries maintain sensible licensing regimes similar to Australia’s, but also recognise that wasting money on firearms registration does not improve public health and safety.”


Figures from the Australian Institute of Criminology (AIC) show that almost all firearms used to commit homicide are unregistered, and the offenders unlicensed. While legal firearm ownership continues to increase, firearm misuse has been declining steadily since the 1980s.
The director of the New South Wales Bureau of Crime Statistics and Research is Don Weatherburn:
Don Weatherburn: “It’s not just national gun statistics; national crime statistics are in a dismal state and they really need significant attention. We have some states counting things differently to other states; they’re often non-comparable—for a while there the Australian Bureau of Statistics even made it impossible to compare one state’s crimes with another state’s crimes. And that’s important, because that’s the statistical information that tells the public what’s going on and also helps organisations like ours to analyse the trends and identify patterns that can help police. So it’s true to say that national crime statistics are badly in need of repair and reform.”

Ian Townsend: If you want to know if numbers of guns are increasing in this country, it’s easier to look at what’s being imported. Customs figures show that last financial year we imported 44,000 rifles, 12,000 shotguns and nearly 20,000 handguns. They also show that in the past 15 years we’ve imported 730,000 firearms, and that’s more than were destroyed in the buybacks since 1996. We’ve put these figures on the Background Briefing website.
Investigation by the Radio National ‘Background Briefing’ program has found that Australia’s mandatory gun registration scheme is riddled with inaccuracies, and cannot be shown to have delivered any public health and safety outcomes.

The International Coalition for Women in Shooting and Hunting (WiSH) say this is a sign that Australia should follow Canada’s lead, and abolish registration of rifles and shotguns.
WiSH chair, Dr Samara McPhedran, said “There is not a shred of evidence that firearms registration has prevented crime, and these latest revelations prove that the Australian system has been nothing more than an expensive failure.”


The estimated cost of maintaining lists of legally owned guns over the past 15 years ranges from $405 million to $1.5 billion.
The error rate in the registries is thought to be up to 80 percent, meaning up to eight out of every 10 records held by firearms registries is inaccurate.


Send a Letter to Editor, Re ‘MP’ NOT Repesenting the People.

Send a Letter to Editor, Re ‘MP’ NOT Repesenting the People.

This Letter was printed to-day in the Gympie Times ‘Letter to The Editor’ page, David Gibson can then read this letter himself and so can 10,000 others of voters.  They will be crying in their Beer next election night.

David Gibson might not be smiling when he reads this letter in the Paper.


Letter to the Editor
Does our Member of Parliament represent the people of Gympie or the Liberal National Party?
On the 15th of November Mr Gibson with his LNP, voted with the Labour Party to affect another further ‘anchor chain’ of bureaucracy and red tape round the necks of the 15,000 licensed shooters in the Gympie Region. Mr Gibson has received, if not thousands, many hundreds of complaints from licenced shooters who have waited five months to get their licence renewed, or who have waited up to eleven months for a permit to acquire. He has received many submissions from local shooters asking him not to vote for further impositions.
Personally, I find Mr David Gibson very likeable, I enjoy the time I spend in his company, up to-date I believed he had high moral values. In comparison with the childish ignorance of most of his contemporaries who share the seats in that infamous house of ill repute, Mr Gibson shines with ability.
In parliament, on 08 Sep 2011, Mr Gibson referred to the Weapons Amendment stating.

“The LNP has a strong record of supporting law-abiding gun owners such as farmers and sporting shooters. We have long opposed the wasteful and inefficient systems introduced by this government, such as the weapons licensing management system that has seen a cost blow-out of $7.5 million so far and, more importantly, a blow-out in the time it takes to obtain a permit to acquire. We must stop targeting law-abiding gun owners and, instead, focus our resources on real criminals. We should not be afraid to look at wasteful and inefficient processes within government that provide no benefit. The current system has proven to be a costly and ineffective way to reduce the number of guns on our streets.”

We would disagree that the LNP supports law-abiding gun owners, as the National-Liberals introduced this disaster into Queensland, but after stating the above and many other worthwhile objections, anyone could be forgiven for presuming that he would join the “Noes” and not vote for this Bill. However the party discipline must have been too strong, or the ambition to go from a Shadow Minister, to a Minister too hard to put behind him, so he voted with his LNP and the Labour Party.
His electorate will suffer, sowing the wind, but David’s LNP will reap the whirlwind, as the 250,000 (47,000) licensed shooters repay the Liberal National Party for the 1997 Gun laws and every amendment since. David’s vote would not have made a difference to the outcome on the 15th Nov. Labour alone would have voted the amendments through, but if David and his party, had voted against it, the LNP could have counted on another 200,000 votes and on winning government now the Firearm Owners will ensure that the LNP does NOT regain power for at least another 14 years.
Ron Owen
24 Mc Mahon Rd
Gympie 4570


Latest Statistics Show Licensed Firearms NOT used in Crimes.

Latest Statistics Show Licensed Firearms NOT used in Crimes.

The very latest statistics on Firearm theft in Australia 2008–09

Monitoring report no.16
By Samantha Bricknell from the Australian Institute of Criminology, October 2011

Our Tax Payers money at work spends millions on this Institute with the sole aim of strengthening the chains they have built around our necks. They study Firearm Theft with the sole idea of formulation more restrictions on Law Abiding Firearm Owners who are trying to follow their idiotic laws. They use figures of thefts without supplying the total numbers of millions of firearm owners in Australia, or how many millions of registered firearms to justify further restrictive legislation.
On investigation through the report it is evident that the sole idea of the government, the AIC and the Police is to see further increases in prosecutions for un safe storage as a means of reducing firearm ownership in Australia. Not the policing and prosecuting of the Firearm Thieves as their figures show that the emphasis is on the easy victims the licensed firearm owners and that little work is done on apprehending the wrong doers as only 13 % are recovered. What is more revealing in this report is that throughout Australia during these years only 3 % of stolen firearms have been used in serious crime and only one loss of life ‘manslaughter’. That show to me that the registration of Long Arms and the restrictions on storage is only a government strategy to push out the licensed firearm owner. It is evident from this report that they are not happy that licensed firearm ownership is increasing.    
Just a mental comparison with stolen vehicles where the deaths between 2004 and 2009 would be in if not hundreds thousand. Where for instance, vehicle owners do not have to lock them up in a safe or get charged for allowing non licensed persons access to the keys. This all shows that the government/police excuse of we do not want these to fall into the hands of Criminals is exposed as a phoney sham. Registration did not solve a crime of save a life in 4 years nor did the security restrictions. More people would be murdered by stolen bottles of beer.
Ron Owen

Firearm theft in Australia 2008–09

Monitoring report no.16

Samantha Bricknell
ISBN 978 1 921532 94 8 ISSN 1836-2079
Canberra: Australian Institute of Criminology, October 2011

Theft represents one of most likely sources of firearms for the illicit market. Between 2004–05 and 2008–09, an average of 1,545 firearms were reported as stolen to Australian state and territory police. The National Firearm Theft Monitoring Program (NFTMP), which covered the period 2004–05 to 2008–09, was established at the Australian Institute of Criminology to compile more detailed information on the nature and characteristics of reported firearm theft events.

Proceedings Against Firearm Owners

Table 30: Proceeding against firearm owners found in breach of firearm laws
n %
Proceeded against 82 62
Charged 63 48
Charges pending 8 6
Disciplinary action 9 7
Disciplinary action pending 2 2
No formal action 48 36
Unknown 2 2
Total 132 100

Source: AIC NFTMP 2008–09 [computer file] (excludes Western Australia and the Northern Territory)

The proportion of firearm owners found in breach of firearm laws and not proceeded against increased from 22 percent in 2005–06 to 36 percent in 2008–09.

Charges laid

A total of 101 charges were laid (or pending) against 82 owners who reported stolen firearms in 2008–09 (see Table 31). Thirteen firearm owners (16%) had multiple charges against them. The failure to secure or correctly store firearms was once again the most common offence firearm owners were charged with, making up 57 percent of all charges laid. The possession of an unregistered firearm accounted for eight percent of charges, as did the failure to possess the appropriate licence for the firearm stolen.

Proceeding against offenders

Offenders responsible for, or found in possession of firearms associated with, 13 percent of reported incidents of firearm theft in 2008–09 were subsequently apprehended and dealt with (see Table 34). Apprehension rates were significantly greater for offenders if the theft was classified as a general burglary (76%; χ2=21.7, p< 0.01). No apprehensions were recorded from 76 percent of incidents classified as firearms theft only and it was not known whether an offender had been apprehended from 11 percent of incidents. Of the larger jurisdictions, Victoria and Queensland again recorded higher offender apprehension rates among the larger jurisdictions and South Australia recorded the lowest (3%). No offenders responsible for reported firearm thefts in Tasmania in 2008–09 were proceeded against.

Table 34: Offenders proceeded against, by jurisdiction
n % of theft incidents
NSW 26 12
Vic 25 19
Qld 23 17
SA 2 3
Tas 0 0
Total 76 13

Note: Excludes the Australian Capital Territory due to small theft numbers

Source: AIC NFTMP 2008–09 [computer file] (excludes Western Australia and the Northern Territory)

The type of offences with which offenders were charged and dealt with was provided by jurisdictions for 70 of the 78 applicable incidents and these are listed in Table 35. Data refer to the number of incidents in which a charge for a specific offence category (eg disposing of stolen property) was laid, regardless of whether one or multiple offenders were involved for that offence per incident. This has been done due to some ambiguity in the data as to the number of charges laid and offenders dealt with.

Criminal Activity

Information on whether firearms reported stolen in 2008–09 were used in subsequent criminal activity, or found in possession of persons charged with serious offences, was available for 65 percent of theft incidents (n=392). Of these, firearms stolen in 10 incidents (or 3%) were recorded as being used in subsequent criminal activity, or in the possession of a person charged with serious offences. Firearms stolen from two additional incidents were used or believed to have been used in two sudden death events.

A total of 51 firearms were stolen from these 10 theft incidents (33 rifles, 10 shotguns, 7 air rifles and 1 handgun) but it was not specified which of these firearms were linked to specific criminal offences. Of the offences listed, firearms from two theft incidents were linked with an offender who had displayed dangerous conduct with the stolen firearm and there were two incidents in which the firearm was found in possession of an individual involved in the cultivation or supply of a prohibited drug. In another case the firearm was found in possession of a member of an outlawed motorcycle gang. Only one theft incident resulted in the use of a firearm to commit a violent crime, in this case manslaughter.

To view the full report  got

Excerpt from their Conclusion

The twin purposes of the NFTMP were to assist state and territory police in identifying initiatives in reducing the incidence of firearm theft and developing a minimum standard for firearm storage common to all sectors of the firearm-owning community.

Options for consideration would include recommending changes to legislation regarding minimum storage requirements, promoting additional auditing of safekeeping arrangements, enhancing educative programs for the firearm-owning community or encouraging additional investment in crime prevention strategies.

Come and Steal OUR fireams, Shooting families stay together.

Come and Steal OUR fireams, Shooting families stay together.


DO NOT GET ANGRY, Get Even with Government Depts

DO NOT GET ANGRY, Get Even with Government Depts

Dear All

Have had a few messages recently from friends that have problems with Government Departments. Well one of the main things to keep in mind is DO NOT GET ANGRY, GET EVEN, and do not spoil your main goals in life along the way. As sometimes things seem to be as large as the world, Mount Everest and in the fullness of life are all molehills. You health is the important factor, your relationships with family and friends a sure close second. Once we have that out of the way we have to plan our action, very carefully.

Imposing, but this bank manager was a real gentleman. It is rare though.
Imposing, but this bank manager was a real gentleman. It is rare though.

A Chinese philosopher Sun Tzu 2000 years of so ago in his 29 principles of the ‘Art of War’, said that, To Know Your Enemy, better than to know yourself, and you will prevail in ten thousand Battles. Now at this stage, you may think, what this got to do with my problem. Problems with Government Departments are our Battles of the modern age, depending how big the problem is depends on how much effort you have to go to, to Get Even. Even, being problem satisfied. Compensation is Even.

Know your Enemy. First find out which Acts and Regulations governs their actions, look at anything from the Public Service Act to the Act that created the department. Read the Acts and the regulations on line if you can, make notes in a word processor cut and paste anything you see relevant in the legislation into your notes. Do the same with the Act Interpretation Act 1954 all Acts and legislation is on line State and Federal. Read your notes through, read again all the correspondence, and any conflicts into your legislation notes. If you are short of things in writing contact department hound them into making decisions ASAP in writing so you can, use it refusal to make a decision leaves them open for Judicial Review (see Judicial Review Act 1990 Queensland) in court as not to make a decisions is a failure in law and you will find those non decisions are easier to win then an arguable decision.

Get back to learning all about them, So you have any friends that work in that department, No well why not apply for a job in that department, doesn’t matter that you may never get it, apply anyway as you will gain knowledge about them along the way. Check out their dustbins, their shredder may not be working. Where do they all go for lunch, who makes the morning tea, where do they live, where do they go on holiday? Do any of them have any embarrassing habits? Have good cover, for your industrial espionage do not fall foul of ‘Stalking Laws” but you need to get inside their minds , you want to find out what their strengths and weakness are. You might find they have mutual facebook friends or one of the other blogs, if they don’t you want to make sure they find un named friends. Every phone call, every meeting take a hidden recorder.

I sometimes take a old fashioned tape one and pop it on the desk in front of them and say. This is just for the record, in fact I will give you a copy of it and will even sign a Statutory Declaration to say I will give you a copy. Mostly, they say if your are going to record this meeting it ends here, the meeting is over. So then you show them the tape taken out and put away in your pocket. Then they relax a bit and continue to exploit you, you draw them out. Keep your cool, at all times, try and show them documents that make them lose their temper. You need that for your hidden electronic digital recorder. It all comes within the dossier you are building on knowing your enemy. Try and make a file on each person. Don’t feel bad about it they do it to you. When your so pally with them your almost taking holidays together, later on when you have all your info, you can phone up and cancel their bookings because you will almost be them. Only at the end do you advertise their home address for a 5 am Garage Sale, make sure they get the bill for the advertisement. Then they may want to order some Readymix concrete for their drive, this is what friends are for. When they are on holidays. We can all fantasise about these things, it does you good, but don’t really do them. Don’t break the law, make them break the law.

For example, I once ran a ‘on -line’ house and garden competition for Politicians, with a photo’s of their garden and address of course, offered a bottle of wine for the best entry. They came in from all over Australia, after the Courier Mail lambasted me for putting them on my website, I received 53 000 hits a day on the site and my server closed as it, an they ran out of band width. That would not happen today, plenty of bandwith. None of these ideas are for first up only at the end when there is no going back.

The next phase after finding everything out about them, is to plan your assault, I like to go for three main thrusts not quite simultaneously.

First attack, is with an application for Right to Information Act used to be Freedom of information, it is not free anymore but if your poverty strickened you can apply for a fee waiver only $40 or so but if you have a Fee Waiver it makes you into a threat. Puts you in a class above all other serial complainers. The public servants know about the ” man of Straw”. A persons that can take them to the High Court and back, without legal advice of any sort and when loses has nothing to lose as he or she wins nothing. Once your always bankrupt, or officially bankrupt you are the biggest threat on the block but as long as the threat is there, lets hope you do not have to go that way. If you do end up taking them to court the paper work you get a few years down the track from discovery of the matter is often done by a different public servant and very often omits documents that they gave away when the stakes were not as high. As their solicitor signs and affidavits that he has given you all the relevant paper work he can be struck off for perjury. You might win that, and have a losing case but that may get it settled your way. Same as if you get given documents with Court discovery that have not been included in your Right to Information, you have a small win. The Right to information is great as you get to look at all their documents and all their electronic documents, all there recorded phone calls with you, they are even harder to hide. On the paper documents you find your own correspondence has little hand written notes at the side and some of it is about you, that makes them look like they are discriminating against you and puts them in a poor light. Of course as your going through all the official channels ombudsmen, complaints department at the same time and you fuel those fires with the information your getting from Freedom of Information, not that you give them your hard won documents.

What you do, is use the documents to ask very embarrassing questions. When your going through all the official complaints department NEVER make the threat that you will take the original Department to Court or they are entitled to drop your matter and you get a letter saying to come back when all legal proceedings are completed, it gets them off the hook. You do not want this at this stage. If you ever take them to court you never threaten you just file.

Stage two attack is to go to your local member of parliament and even if you hate them or they hate you, or you hate their politics, they are paid to represent you and take your case to the Minister who is responsible for that department, then the ones giving you trouble have to talk up to the Ministers office, instead of talking down to you. No matter, more than likely they will just criticise you to the Minister in writing and then they will refer it back to the local MP and back to you, then you file it and use it against them.

Stage Three, the third fire on their perimeter is to have a friend, its better coming from another source than your self, as if your reporting it about your self it sound self serving, but coming from an other has more credibility and power. Go to the media, it does not matter much which one, it has more power of course if it’s a National paper or TV station but even your local radio station has power, the people giving you a hard time more than often live in your community. They don’t like there names talked about in a condescending way on the radio. They believe they have a born right to anonymity and of course you don’t. Just a journalist phoning up and asking to speak to them is enough for them to be re born again and see the light. The thought of themselves being on the 6 o clock new scurrying into there front door saying ‘no comment’, to the reporter gives them the horrors. You should not have to go to all this trouble to get them to do their jobs, but this media power can also be used in any of the above instances with ombudsmen, or politicians or those that work in there office who won’t help you. Even if the media will not help, do it yourself. Interview the public servants with your recorder and video going put them on You Tube open a lot of facebook sites pointing links at the You tube. By lighting these three fires, or more if you can, and ‘shaking their tree’, then using the information you get from one to put fuel on the fire of the other two, more often than not you get the rat that is hiding in there. If not you have generally at that stage got enough information, and if you by that time have given away all your assets, then you can become a self litigant in court, by filing on them. Of course I am not recommending that occurs, the best you can expect out of it is pain and derision for your opposition and an education for yourself as self litigants do not get awarded costs in Queensland even if you win. If you lose they take everything and bankrupt you, but if you have nothing, you still win. That’s why its important to have nothing if your expecting a war with our government or banks. For Revision the first step of finding everything out about your problem and enemy is where the whole thing is either won or lost, as you must have that to cross reference the other stuff you get from Stage one, two and three come into play. Hope these methods help they have served me well in lots of scraps.

Ron Owen


Quotes For Christain Candidates on Firearm Ownership.


Christian Slaves who have No Guns have No Rights. Resistance is the only way to preserve life.

Christian Slaves who have No Guns have No Rights. Resistance is the only way to preserve life.

Communist V.I. Lenin said, “A system of licensing and registration, is the perfect device to deny gun ownership to the bourgeoisie.”

As we list what Christians need to know concerning gun control, we shall use the term “gun control” to mean ANY infringement upon the right to posses and bear arms.

Those Christian men who resisted gun control by opening fire at Lexington Green, April 19,1775, were familiar with both the Bible and the writings of John Locke and as a result knew who an enemy was when they saw one.


Concerning a state of war, Locke wrote:

And one may destroy a man who makes war upon him, or has discovered an enmity to his being, for the same reason, that he may kill a wolf or a lion; because such men are not under the ties of the Common Law of reason, have no other rule but that of force and violence, and so may be treated as beasts of prey, those dangerous and noxious creatures, that will be sure to destroy whenever he falls into their power.

The words of Locke on slavery seem to match the Scriptures, “It was for freedom that Christ set us free; therefore keep standing firm and do not be subject again to a yoke of slavery.” (Gal. 5:1)


In like spirit, the new year of 1773 was rung in by the men of Marlborough. “Death,” they proclaimed unanimously on the first of January, “is more eligible than slavery. A free born people are not required by the religion of Jesus Christ to submit to tyranny, but may make use of such power as God has given them to recover and support their laws and liberties…we implore the Ruler above the skies, that He would make bare His arm in defence of His Church and people, and let Israel go.”

Jesus said, “When a strong man fully armed, guards his own homestead, his possessions are undisturbed; but when someone stronger than he attacks him and overpowers him, he takes away from him all his armour on which he had relied, and distributes his plunder.” (Luke 11:21-22)


The principle of first disarming the people before full scale oppression of the people, was seen first hand by Reverend Wesley Millen who, as a missionary, witnessed the communist take over of Asia. In his lectures he would explain how in the first 90 days the communist were so benevolent, humanitarian and helpful and at the same time laboured vigorously to confiscate all weapons. The people were told peace had arrived and they would no longer have need of weapons. Once the people were disarmed Reverend Millen said, “Then at the end of ninety days we learned the difference between theoretical communism and Bolshevik terror.”

Know that history supports the teaching of Luke 11:21-222. Prior to the Communist enslavement of Hungary and Czechoslovakia firearms were taken into police custody to “protect” the people. On the other hand, consider Afghanistan, a country full of armed citizens. That country is a modern historical example of this point. The communists have never been successful in taking over a country without first disarming the citizens!


Today certain of Australia’s leaders say that their motive for disarming the citizens has to do with the citizen’s health, safety and welfare, has to do with crime reduction, has to do with accidental gun deaths, etc. Jesus has told His followers to “Beware of the false prophets, who come to you in sheep’s clothing, but inwardly are ravenous wolves.” (Matt.7:15)

Know the pattern, history, and laws of God revealed in the Holy bible oppose gun control. The Bible has much to say concerning weapons, war, and self defence. Perhaps none are more clear and pertinent to the issue at hand than Luke 22:35-36, “And He said to them, ‘When I sent you out without purse and bag and sandals, you did not lack anything, did you? And they said, ‘No, nothing.’ And He said to them, ‘But now, let him who has a purse take it along, likewise also a bag, and let him who has no sword sell his robe and buy one.”


Note the words, “LET HIM WHO HAS NO SWORD SELL HIS ROBE AND BUY ONE.” Are these words not every bit as much a command as “love your neighbour” or “turn the other cheek?” How often have you heard them in a sermon? How often have you heard them explained in the present day Christian church world? For most, the answer is NEVER.

A Christian who does not own a firearm and/or does not resist gun control disobeys the will of His Lord Jesus Christ, who has clearly instructed him to purchase a major lethal weapon of the day. The Bible has stories of assassinations, murders, and war deaths numbering in the multi millions all with swords. Then Jesus Christ, prior to His departure, tells the Apostles to BUY A SWORD. Naturally, this doesn’t fit modern concepts of Christ and Christianity. Suffice to say, a Christian without a gun is disobedient to the intent of those words in Luke 22:35-36.


1 Corinthians 10:6 and Romans 15:4 explain that the Bible history of Old Testament times was written for our learning and instruction. This means we are to learn from the story in 1 Samuel chapter13. In reading it you will find God’s people Israel oppressed and conquered by the nation of the Philistines. Guess what the Philistines thought was best for Israel? Yes, that’s right, sword control. 1 Samuel 13:19-22 tells the story well. “Now no blacksmith could be found in all the land of Israel, for the Philistines said, ‘Lest the Hebrews make swords or spears.’ So Israel went down to the Philistines, each to sharpen his plowshare, his mattock, his axe, and his goad, whenever they had to sharpen the edge of the goads, of the mattocks, of the forks, and of the axes, and to fix the goad points. So it came about on the day of battle that neither sword nor spear was found in the hands of any of the people who were with Saul and Jonathan, but they were found with Saul and his son Jonathan.”


Jesus Christ himself made and used weapons against evil men. This may sound incredible, even blasphemous to some, but it shouldn’t for the story is right there in the Bible. “And He found in the temple those who were selling oxen and sheep and doves, and the money changers seated. And He made a scourge of cords, and drove them all out of the temple, with the sheep and the oxen; and He poured out the coins of the moneychangers, and overturned their tables.” (John 2:14-15)


Consider the following excerpt on the War for Independence from pages 290-291 of the history book, “The Light and the Glory.”

Nor were the exhortations of their ministers confined to words. These men did not hesitate to put their own lives on the line. During the battles of Lexington and Concord, Chelsea’s minister, Philips Payson, captured singlehandedly two British supply wagons. John Craighead raised a company of militia from his parish and himself led them off to join Washington in New jersey, where it was recorded that he fought and preached alternately. So numerous in fact, were the fighting pastors that the Tories referred to them as “the black regiment,” and blamed them for much of the resurgent zeal of the Colonial troops. One of the most colourful examples is what happened in a staid Lutheran church in the Shenandoah valley of Virginia, one Sunday morning in 1775. The thirty- three year- old pastor, Peter Muhlenberg, delivered a stirring sermon on the text, “For everything there is a season, and a time for every matter under heaven.” (Ecclesiastes 3:1)

He reached the end of his sermon and said a solemn prayer – and then continued to speak. “In the language of the Holy Writ, there is a time for all things. There is a time to preach and a time to fight.” He paused, and then threw off his pulpit robe to reveal to the startled congregation the uniform of a Colonel in the Continental Army. “And now is the time to fight!” he thundered and then he called out, “Roll the drums for recruits!” The drums rolled and that same afternoon he marched off at the head of a column of three hundred men. His regiment was to earn fame as the 8th Virginia and Muhlenberg was to distinguish himself in a number of battles, rising to the rank of brigadier general, in charge of Washington’s first light infantry brigade.


Jesus said we were not to live by the sword. This statement was made by Jesus in the garden of Gethsemane after Peter tried to stop His arrest by swinging a sword and cutting off the ear of a slave of the high priest. (Matt. 26:52). Notice, Peter had a sword in keeping with the command of Christ (Luke 22:36,38), but he misused it by trying to interfere with the foretold arrest and crucifixion of Christ. The point is, a Christian is not to live by the sword. Christianity is a way of life wherein a disciple is not to live by the sword. Christianity is a way of life wherein a disciple is to endure and suffer a wrong, go the extra mile, forgive, petition, pray. It is not a militant, aggressive life style of one living by the sword.

It is true a Christian is not to live by the sword but it is equally true he is not to live without one. The actions, petitions, prayers, and long suffering of our forefathers are evidence they did not live by the sword but their refusal to lay down their guns showed they also refused to live without the sword.


Jesus said to love your enemy and turn the other cheek. Jesus did teach this in Matthew 5:38-44 in the Sermon on the Mount and we should consider each verse in light of the rest of the Scripture. First of all, it should be understood that a key to understanding the meaning of Matt.5:38-44 lays with Matt. 5:17. “Do not think that I came to abolish the Law or the Prophets;..” Although the ceremonial laws added 430 years after the time Abraham (Gal. 3:17) were fulfilled and eliminated by the death, burial, and resurrection of Christ (Gal. 3:15-25), the Laws, Statutes and Judgements codified by Moses and existing even before that with Abraham obeying them (Gen. 26:5) were not done away with and exist even today. At the time of Christ the law had been twisted and perverted by the Pharisees (Mark 7:13)

The following taken from the June 24, 1988, “Wall Street Journal” should be carefully considered.

Further, guns prevent many crimes from even being attempted. A 1982-83 study of prison inmates by The National Institute of Justice showed that two fifths of them had decided not to attack a victim when they found out that he or she was armed. In the 1960s the Orlando police responded to a rape epidemic by training 2,500 women to use guns. The next year rape fell 88% and burglary by 25%.

Hopefully, the foregoing information will help the Christian soldier to resist tyranny and better prepare himself for the battles ahead. To be physically disarmed the soldier must FIRST be disarmed in the mind. Through a long process of conditioning the people have been brought to the place where they will just about accept anything that the false gods of the state are only too happy to dish out.