this post was submitted on 23 Dec 2025
52 points (94.8% liked)

Australia

4690 readers
80 users here now

A place to discuss Australia and important Australian issues.

Before you post:

If you're posting anything related to:

If you're posting Australian News (not opinion or discussion pieces) post it to Australian News

Rules

This community is run under the rules of aussie.zone. In addition to those rules:

Banner Photo

Congratulations to @Tau@aussie.zone who had the most upvoted submission to our banner photo competition

Recommended and Related Communities

Be sure to check out and subscribe to our related communities on aussie.zone:

Plus other communities for sport and major cities.

https://aussie.zone/communities

Moderation

Since Kbin doesn't show Lemmy Moderators, I'll list them here. Also note that Kbin does not distinguish moderator comments.

Additionally, we have our instance admins: @lodion@aussie.zone and @Nath@aussie.zone

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
lodion@aussie.zone
bestusername@aussie.zone
eatham@aussie.zone
Nath@aussie.zone
52
Australians Overwhelmingly In Support Of Gun Law Reform (cityhub.com.au)
submitted 6 days ago by okwithmydecay@leminal.space to c/australia@aussie.zone
17 comments fedilink hide all child comments
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[โ€“] princessnorah@lemmy.blahaj.zone 0 points 2 days ago (1 children)

While you're right that guns wouldn't be needed at a protest, and I absolutely agree, similar to the government in the UK there has been a lot of crackdowns on pro-Palestine protests that have been labelled as antisemitism. My worry is that this incident will result in further crackdowns on legal protest rights that don't have anything to do with guns. My concern is also validated by the article, which mentions the NSW government is working on laws to restrict protest rights. That might have been unrelated and prior to this incident, but this is only going to galvanise this effort.

[โ€“] vas@lemmy.ml 1 points 1 day ago

Aww, I think I just failed to read the article carefully, because how otherwise could I have missed the mention of protest laws? (It's really there, even though once.)

Thanks for the explanation!

I'm curious about this, will also be watching how it evolves