This Couldn’t Happen In Wyoming

An armed gunman has taken up to 13 people hostage inside a chocolate shop in Sydney while forcing two people to hold what appears to be a black flag with white Arabic writing on it, Sky News Australia reports.

Australian special forces have been called in to the city’s financial district and New South Wales police are advising people to stay out of the area.

Television footage shot through the store’s windows showed several people with their arms in the air and hands pressed against the glass. The footage showed two people inside the Lindt chocolate shop holding up what appeared to be an Islamic flag. It was not immediately clear what the flag said.

13 people reportedly being held hostage inside Sydney chocolate shop | Fox News

In Wyoming, someone would pull out their CCW and the siege would be over. Or more likely, the siege would never happen because the Religion of Peace would know better than to try something like that in Wyoming.

Looks like Diane Feinstein’s handiwork is doing exactly what people said it would do.

About stevengoddard

Just having fun
This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

47 Responses to This Couldn’t Happen In Wyoming

  1. Chillville says:

    5.2% in mostly the outack, meaning city folk are S.O.L
    Gun politics have only become a notable issue in Australia since the 1980s. Low levels of violent crime through much of the 20th century kept levels of public concern about firearms low. In the last two decades of the century, following several high profile multiple murders and a media campaign, the Australian government co-ordinated more restrictive firearms legislation with all state governments.

    A common misconception is that firearms are illegal in Australia and that no individual may possess them. While it’s true that Australia has restrictive firearms laws, rifles and shotguns (including semi-automatic), as well as handguns are all legal within a narrow set of criteria.

    As of 2007 about 5.2% of Australian adults (765,000 people)[1] own and use firearms for purposes such as hunting, controlling feral animals, collecting, security work, and target shooting.

  2. Jason Calley says:

    Part of me feels sorry for the Australians in this. I have not know a lot of Australians — but the ones I have met have been really nice people. Friends who have travelled to Australia have given the country high marks. And yet…

    Any free people who voluntarily give up their right to self defence (and in the modern world this means firearms) have essentially volunteered to be slaves and victims. It is only a matter of time. Sure, their new masters may promise to protect them and to be good masters — but how do you enforce a promise given by someone who holds the gun that you just threw away? Who is so naive as to believe that not only are their masters telling the truth now, but that they will forever and ever always be bound by a promise?

    In the early days of WWII, the British were expecting to be invaded and were very short of small arms. Americans across the US donated their privately held rifles and pistols, giving them to the Brits so that the island could defend itself. Many Americans gave expensive weapons or weapons that their family had held as heirlooms. It was a good cause and a good lesson to England that perhaps they should keep their nation well armed. And yet… after the war, the great majority of the donated weapons were rounded up by their government. They did not even bother to send the weapons back to the US. They just destroyed all those perfectly good firearms.

    I am not saying that the people of Australia or Britain deserve whatever comes to them because of their foolishness. Still, actions have consequences — and stupid actions (especially when practised on a national scale) may have horrific consequences. God bless their pointy heads — but honestly, I am having a difficult time pulling up much sympathy.

    • Fat Tony says:

      Jason – many of us tried to oppose the government confiscation of our weapons but we did not have any “right to bear arms” enshrined in our Constitution. We did not “voluntarily” give up our right to self defence – it was taken away from us.

      In the media, anyone who supported freedom to bear arms was labelled a “gun nut” and ridiculed.

      • Jason Calley says:

        Hey Fat Tony! Sorry if I went off on a rant. To all you Australians who did what you could to keep your ability to defend yourself — “Well done, and sorry that the battle was lost.”

        We here in the states are caught up in a similar battle where the governmental forces and their allies in the media are pushing to disarm private citizens. Sadly, the Constitution is now more often disobeyed than followed. Additionally, even though we both may be strong proponents of individual rights, the fact is that in Australia (and in the US as well), we as individuals often have to suffer for collective actions that we personally disapprove of.

        What will I personally do if the US imposes more and more firearm restrictions? At what point to I get off my fat behind and say “No. Not this. I will not comply.”? Not an easy question — and I cannot give you an honest answer. Anyway, to you Australians who know enough history to see where citizen disarmament so often leads, keep up whatever efforts you can. Maybe things can be reversed and power decentralized back into private hands. Good luck to you — and to us in the US as well.

      • Gail Combs says:

        Tony even though our Constitution says we have the right to bare arms and those who wrote that said it was to keep the government honest, we too are ridiculed as “gun nuts” and in some places in the USA guns are pretty much banned,or restricted.

        The District of Columbia asked a federal judge Monday to reconsider his July ruling that overturned D.C.’s ban on possessing handguns in public.

        Actually a strict reading of the Constitution combined with the thoughts of the writers implies citizens should have a right to the same arms as the Army. Also the professional army was to supply officers while the informal militia of the states provided the bulk of the armed forces.

        • rah says:

          “Actually a strict reading of the Constitution combined with the thoughts of the writers implies citizens should have a right to the same arms as the Army. Also the professional army was to supply officers while the informal militia of the states provided the bulk of the armed forces.”

          Yes that is correct. The 2nd amendment is not conditional in any way. But encoded in law or not there is no more fundamental human right than that of having the means and the legal and moral authority to be able to protect ones own life, family, property and liberty. And THAT is ultimately what has been taken away in the UK and Australia and so many other places to one degree of another.

          It should never be forgotten that In this country the very revolution which eventually gave us the Bill of Rights was sparked off by the British Crown’s attempt at gun control by force of arms. The shot heard round the world came only when the Brits were marching to Concord with the dual missions of confiscating arms, shot, and powder and if the opportunity presented it’s self capturing Patriot leaders with special emphasis on getting Hancock and Adams. There was no law granting the right to bear arms to the colonists. Only the realization that giving up their arms would naturally subjugate them to the crown and the will of many to prevent that by any means possible.

  3. Windsong says:

    The flag displayed inside the cafe appears to have the Shahada written on it, but PM Tony Abbott says it is unclear if the hostage taking “… is politically motivated …” Uhh, okay, mate. Wouldn’t want to hurt any Islamic terrorists’ feelings, after all.

    Hoping this is resolved without bloodshed, but not at all confident.

  4. Baa Humbug says:

    Tony the gun ownership situation in Oz is incomparable to that of the US.
    Trying to limit gun ownership in the US is stupid and unrealistic especially with porous borders. It’d be akin to asking Israelis to disarm.
    Australia has never had a problem with gun crimes. Citizens taking up and carrying guns would almost certainly lead to higher gun crimes. The very opposite is true in the US.

    • Citizens taking up and carrying guns would almost certainly lead to higher gun crimes.

      I understand Australia’s history and culture are different but I’m curious—why do you think so?

      • Baa Humbug says:

        IMHO those who currently would harm others at the drop of a hat don’t have easy access to firearms. Contemporary firearm crimes are few and far between, an increase in firearm numbers may lead to an increase in impulsive firearm crimes. Law of averages.

        My opinion of the US situation is completely different. Those who preach firearm restrictions in the US don’t seem to have a grip on reality. Tony is absolutely correct, some of the crimes may well have been prevented by a well armed citizenry. Facts prove him correct.

    • Fat Tony says:

      Baa – “Citizens taking up and carrying guns would almost certainly lead to higher gun crimes.”
      Do you have any proof of this? As far as I can see, the scumbags are now better armed than ever, and home invasions are quite commonplace (a rarity when gun ownership was easy).

      Before Howard took away our guns, did we have a high (rate) of gun crimes?
      No – as you yourself stated “Australia has never had a problem with gun crimes.”
      So why the self contradiction? You say we never had a problem, then you say we would have a problem (if we had easy access to guns).

      AS I see it now, the Islamic guys are well armed, and this hostage business shows the government can’t protect us. So will the government now allow us to protect ourselves? We all know the answer to that one…..

      • Baa Humbug says:

        Fatty that contradiction was by Howard when he tried to gain political credit from the Port Arthur Massacre. I only stated my opinion that a higher take up of guns would lead to higher gun crimes. Read my follow up comment please where I referenced law of averages etc

        • Tel says:

          Who cares about higher gun crimes? It’s a total red herring.

          What matters is overall crime rate, not gun crimes.

          Getting killed by head chopping or by cricket bat is the same death as getting killed by shooting. Besides just murder, Australia’s growing rape incidence is nothing to be proud of.

          Anyhow, let’s not judge the cops before they have had their chance to do their job. The NSW cops are armed with hollow points (that the army aren’t allowed to use) and they tend not to shoot as many times as the NYPD.

        • Jason Calley says:

          Hey Tell! “What matters is overall crime rate, not gun crimes.”

          Great point! Differentiating “gun crime” from “knife crime” or any other kind of crime misses the point. Crime is crime and the tool used does not make much difference. A “knife rape” is no less heinous than a “gun rape.”

          I have noticed that almost every criminal uses shoes in the commission of his crime. Obviously, shoes make crime easier. The criminal can run faster and farther while wearing shoes. He does not have to be concerned with stubbed toes, with broken glass on the ground, with small rocks in his path. He can hide in the bushes while waiting to rape, even when there is snow on the ground. I propose that shoes be outlawed for citizens. Only police, private guards and the military will be allowed to wear shoes. My prediction? The amount of “shoe crime” will plummet.

        • Gail Combs says:

          You are correct. It is very Politically Correct to blame an inanimate object but NO Racial Profile Please!

          We can see where that gets citizen in the UK.
          Rotherham: 1400 Children Groomed, Drugged and Raped by Multiculturalism

          …Well we’ve already answered that, pretty much. It’s because the kind of politically correct, left-leaning and basically rather thick people that local authorities like Rotherham Council tend to have working for them are so paralysed by modish concerns about cultural sensitivity that they have made an obscene judgement call: better to allow at least 1400 kids to be hideously abused than to be thought guilty of the far greater crimes of being thought a bit racist or accidentally offending someone.

          (And this isn’t an incident confined to Rotherham by the way. The same thing happened recently in Oxford, again involving men with decidedly un-Anglo-Saxon names, again over a long period of time because all the relevant authorities were scared of sounding the alarm in case they came across as racist)….

          This is obscene. The authorities KNEW what was going on and the rapes were carried out with the BLESSINGS of the authorities who were tasked with protecting the girls:

          * These practices have long been widely known to the police, to social workers, to child-care charities and local councils. All found an excuse to absolve the rape gangs of criminal behaviour by claiming that these sexual activities were consensual – ie that these girls, some as young as 11, were sluts who had it coming to them.

          * Each child is worth about £200,000 (around $300,000) a year to the gangs – which makes them even more lucrative than the drugs trade.
          Money is also one of the reasons for the complicity of so many local councils. At a time of general spending cutbacks, money can always be found for jobs in the all-important “Diversity” industry. On salaries as high as £100,000 a year, senior council workers have a vested interest in not rocking the boat. Better to cover up these scandals and preserve the illusion of community cohesion then to have unwelcome public attention drawn to these unsavoury goings-on.

          * Does the broader local Muslim community know what’s going on? Of course. Remember, the 200 prosecutions so far have been brought mainly against the gang organizers – not against the many thousands of men who have participated in these rape parties.
          Also, the Muslim community has deliberately exploited white liberal squeamishness by threatening race riots and by warning off police that if they try to take the matter further they will report them for “racism.” ….

          I suggest you read the rest Islamic Rape Gangs: Rotherham is Just the Tip of the Iceberg

          August 2013: Is Australia staring down the barrel of a gun crisis? Looks like the answer is yes.

          THERE is a gun battle going on in Australia. As bikie gang members and drug dealers gun each other down on a regular basis, sending fear through the community, authorities seem to be fighting a losing battle to keep firearms out of their hands.

          Without scaremongering, here are the facts:

          * There have been 39 people shot in Sydney this year, most related to an ongoing bikie war.

          * Conservative estimates say there are more than a quarter-of-a-million illegal firearms in Australia.

          * Gun ownership in Australia is back at pre-Port Arthur massacre levels.

          * Carrying a gun is becoming more common and ingrained in outlaw culture.

          * Gun amnesties barely put a dent in the number of weapons.

          * Innocent people are being caught up in gun battles.

          * There has been a steady increase in gun-related crimes over the past seven years.

          In the seven years from 2005 to 2012, gun murders across Australia almost doubled. The incidence of guns used in kidnappings trebled. the total number of crimes in which a firearm was used rose from 823 in 2005 to 1217 in 2012 an increase of 47 per cent….

          It looks like climate is not the only subject where you see P.C. lies.

        • Gail Combs says:


          Don’t give the elite any ideas….

        • Tel says:

          Well looks like he started shooting the hostages and the police gave up negotiating and just took him down. As I suggested above, didn’t take many shots to finish him, our police a a bit more accurate than the New Yorkers.

          Seems the culprit was a well known nutter, who had been in and out of court on a bunch of charges including murder and sexual assault. I’m sure a few questions will be asked about this one, but overall I think the cops did a reasonable job.

        • Baa Humbug says:


          Who cares about higher gun crimes? It’s a total red herring.What matters is overall crime rate, not gun crimes.

          I was asked about prevalence of guns so I don’t see how it’s a red herring.
          If more people carry guns, there’ll be more gun crimes. If more people carry knives, there’ll be more knife crimes. If more people carry knuckledusters…….etc.

          We shouldn’t confuse the US situation with that of OZ. I’m against gun control in the US, they’re way past that. In fact restricting guns there will and does lead to citizens being left defenseless.
          I’m also against BANNING guns in OZ.

  5. Ernest Bush says:

    There would be very little gun crime in the United States now if the Democrat run cities seriously wanted to reduce gangs in black neighborhoods. About 75% of gun deaths in the U.S. are one black shooting another. Another 13% is the same problem with latino gangs.

    Another solution is to make it easy in those cities for residents to defend themselves with legally owned firearms.

    • Gail Combs says:

      True. The Blacks/under privileged are the victims and the middle class DESERVES the thefts, rapes, beatings etc. Under no circumstances should Blacks be held accountable for their actions. It is ALWAYS the fault of the whites.

      Antonio Gramsci
      * There are no objective standards by which we may judge one culture to be better than another. Anyone who claims that there are such standards is an evil oppressor.

      * The prosperity of the West is built on ruthless exploitation of the Third World; therefore Westerners actually deserve to be impoverished and miserable.

      * Crime is the fault of society, not the individual criminal. Poor criminals are entitled to what they take. Submitting to criminal predation is more virtuous than resisting it.

      * The poor are victims. Criminals are victims. And only victims are virtuous. Therefore only the poor and criminals are virtuous. (Rich people can borrow some virtue by identifying with poor people and criminals.)

      * For a virtuous person, violence and war are never justified. It is always better to be a victim than to fight, or even to defend oneself. But ‘oppressed’ people are allowed to use violence anyway; they are merely reflecting the evil of their oppressors.

      Gramsci was a disciple of the master, Willi Muenzenberg, tasked with “…Lenin’s vision to bring America to its knees required penetration of the wellsprings of its civil identity, the “transmission belts” of American culture.”

      The goal of the operations was to make Americans feel that their country was bad. The KGB utilized Willing Accomplices to spread the message that America was an evil, racist, imperialist war- monger and that Communism was a benign, noble experiment designed to rid the world of corruption, oppression and injustice.

      Covert Influence Payload
      Babette Gross, wife of KGB agent Willi Muenzenberg, explained the content of the Soviet payload to Stephen Koch:
      * You claim to be an independent-minded idealist.
      * You don’t really understand politics, but you think the little guy is getting a lousy break.
      * You believe in open-mindedness.
      * You are shocked, frightened by what is going on right here in our own country.
      * You’re frightened by the racism, by the oppression of the workingman.
      * You think the Russians are trying a great human experiment, and you hope it works.
      * You believe in peace.
      * You yearn for international understanding.
      * You hate fascism.
      * You think the capitalist system is corrupt.

      This payload exactly matches today’s PC-Progressive message. The message that Soviet covert operators propagated through American Willing Accomplices. The Willing Accomplices, wittingly or unwittingly, spread the anti-American message. And this message bloomed and grew into the pernicious set of taboos and strictures that we call PC today. It is important to note that Soviet espionage simply planted the seeds of PC. The seedlings did not need continued communist cultivation. The Soviets’ American Willing Accomplices nurtured the anti-American message in universities, newsrooms, and in Hollywood.

      From the book Willing Accomplices: How KGB Covert Influence Agents Created Political Correctness and Destroyed America by Kent Clizbe

  6. omanuel says:

    Social schizophrenia may be a side effect of less-than-successful public deception.

    The protracted climate debate has perhaps convinced a large section of the population that their government is not trustworthy.

    Even Homeland Security has recently admitted the grave danger to society from large solar eruptions – events unpredicted by the standard solar model of stable H-fusion reactors.

    • Jason Calley says:

      “The protracted climate debate has perhaps convinced a large section of the population that their government is not trustworthy.”

      While climate change is one small part, consider how many other parts there are.

      Does anyone believe the government’s inflation figures? Or the unemployment figures? The deficit figures? Does anyone believe that our politicians do not pad or misuse their expense accounts? Does anyone even believe that our politicians obey the law? How many people think that they would receive a fair day in court if they were ever arrested for some serious charge? Seriously… is there anyone still that naive?

      Everyone knows that our government is not trustworthy. The big question though, is “what is to be done?”

      • Gail Combs says:


        The problem for governemts is once the rose colored glasses have been destroyed for a large segment of the population it is very very tough to win back their trust.

        UKIP is an example of that loss in trust.

      • cdquarles says:

        I don’t believe the government’s inflation figures and never have. Inflation can’t be measured (too many hidden variables). I do believe some deficit figures, because you can follow the ebb and flow of treasury or other government bond sales and redemptions. I do believe that some politicians do not pad or otherwise misuse their expense accounts as well as that some do misbehave (they’re human). Ditto for following the law and that also applies to ‘law abiding’ citizens. My personal interactions with the ‘justice system’ as a potential juror, expert witness, lay witness, plaintiff, and defendant, suggests that you may or may not get a fair (defined by following the law as written and ensuring due process) day in court, depending on what judge and jurisdiction (thus demonstrating that we do not have the Rule of Law).

  7. Truthseeker says:

    It is a Lindt Chocolate Shop!

    I am devastated …

  8. Andrew says:

    What’s funny is that the multi-culti progressives are urging us to support our muslim neighbours in Sydney this week instead of spewing hatred and violence in response. Sounds reasonable, right? The hilarity kicks in when you hear their logic for it: We shouldn’t punish the whole group for the actions of just one.
    Correct, and where was that clear thinking attitude when the opportunity to disarm the public arose in 1996?

  9. SMS says:

    I was looking at the murder rate as a result of guns in Australia and it shows that deaths due to guns has gone down since the inception of the gun confiscation law. What is not well publicized is that deaths due to knifings and hammer clubbings has gone up, giving almost no decline in the number of murders in Australia.

    • nielszoo says:

      The Prog’s forget that people were killing each other for many millennia before the invention of firearms. The same thing happened in the UK. Assault, burglary, armed robbery shot and rape rates up after they banned most private ownership of firearms. It’s the same with that stupid “assault weapon” boogyman. Statistics show that more people are killed every year with blunt objects like hammers and baseball bats than rifles of ANY type in the US.

      The peons must be disarmed so that they must be totally dependent on government for their safety, they must also be disarmed so that they cannot stop government from doing what’s “best” for them. It’s all about power and control. Ask the few surviving German or Russian Jews how that disarmament thing works out in the end.

  10. Robertv says:

    Families of nine of the 26 people killed and a teacher injured during the December 2012 shooting at Sandy Hook Elementary School in Newtown, Connecticut have sued the manufacturer, distributor, and seller of the rifle used by shooter Adam Lanza.

    The negligence and wrongful death lawsuit, filed by a firm representing the victims’ families, states that the semiautomatic Bushmaster AR-15 rifle is a military-grade weapon, and thus should not have been available for civilian use.

    “My biggest frustration so far is the fact that this society has not been willing to take some basic steps to keep guns out of the hands of people who can do just unbelievable damage. We’re the only developed country on earth where this happens. And it happens now once a week. And it’s a one-day story. There’s no place else like this,” Obama said.

    “A couple of decades ago Australia had a mass shooting similar to Columbine or Newtown, and Australia just said, ‘Well, that’s it. We’re not doing — we’re not seeing that again,’ and basically imposed very severe, tough gun laws, and they haven’t had a mass shooting since. I mean, our levels of gun violence are off the charts. There’s no other advanced, developed country on earth that would put up with this,” Obama added.

  11. Hans Conser says:

    This crime would likely not happen in Texas or Montana either

    • nielszoo says:

      They happen in “defense free” zones otherwise known as “gun free” zones like schools, public buildings and other “sensitive” areas. Most nut jobs are smart enough to know that going into a location where people might be armed is more dangerous than going into a location where the benevolent government has banned self defense. Easier to kill unarmed people with ANY weapon when they don’t have one to fight back with.

  12. Look at the Econuts in OZ in the shadow of the Islamic Terror Hostage Drama…

    Hostage taker with Islamic flag gives Wendy Bacon a pleasant vision of a green future | Herald Sun Andrew Bolt Blog

    Wendy Bacon, global warming crusader and Professor of Journalism at the Australian Centre for Independent Journalism, sees the upside of a gunman with an Islamic flag holding hostages and shutting down central Sydney:

    Wendy Bacon @Wendy_Bacon – 6m
    Clearing of cars in CBD gives you idea of how pleasant carless city might be (despite context) #martinplace

    To repeat: a professor of journalism.

  13. aussie says:

    Yup, the Sydney hostage event may have been prevented, but what about this sort of random shooting thing which happens all to often;

  14. globalcooler says:

    Reblogged this on Agenda 21: Your Freedom Under Attack and commented:
    These brave gunmen like to pick on gun free zones which are set up for your protection. Really???

  15. Baa Humbug says:

    Religion of peace spreading the good word in Pakistan. As we speak over 126 kids killed by the Taliban in Peshawar. It’s a siege situation so more deaths to inevitably follow.

  16. wyoskeptic says:

    Speaking as a Wyoming native, I would actually say that the rifles in the gun racks in the pickups might have more deterrence than CCW. A .30-06 with a well sighted nine power scope and loaded with 180 grain boat tail semi-jacketed ammo tends to moderate most difficulties with little chance of collateral damage. A concealable handgun is likely to be a mite less accurate and lacks the stopping power of the rifle. Also, the rifles are visible and can be counted. CCW has to be guessed at.

    Walking down the sidewalk counting the number of vehicles with a gun rack tends to cause the unconvinced to re-consider the issue. It may not stop them all, but it does tend to reduce the number somewhat.

    In all honesty, I might point out that the rack in my outfit tends to haul around a 4 foot carpenter’s level more often than anything else, but that only tends to add to the uncertainty of it all.

    Have a good day, everyone.

    • Jason Calley says:

      “In all honesty, I might point out that the rack in my outfit tends to haul around a 4 foot carpenter’s level more often than anything else, but that only tends to add to the uncertainty of it all.”

      You are, no doubt, a level headed citizen, and a square shooter to boot.

  17. Hugh K says:

    “I think that there have been a number of situations in which you’ve seen this administration intervene in a meaningful way, that has substantially furthered American interests and substantially improved the, uh, you know, the – the tranquility of the global community.” – Zero Administration Spokesman

  18. Sophie says:

    Here in the UK, in Birmingham, a guy pretended to be a police officer and scared the hell out of a poor woman. But apparently the police accepted the outcome, that it was a misunderstanding. Look at it yourself, can you guess the reason why?

    Madness in these times!

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s