NZ gun laws

To post in this sub-forum you must have made 100 posts or have Trust status or have completed our ID Verification

Forums › Politics › NZ gun laws

1 | ... | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | ... | 18

30048 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 9455

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#2200716 18-Mar-2019 11:51

networkn:

I actually haven't seen the sign properly. Assuming it's higher up, and near a road, it would likely require traffic management approval, not exactly something you can get instantly. Even throwing a tarp over it, needs to be secured, health and safety stuff to consider.

https://www.stuff.co.nz/business/111353635/gun-city-owner-quiet-over-controversial-billboard-outside-christchurch-store

Days ago, it was reasonably innocuous. Teaching kids to use an air rifle on targets. An activity, a sport, outdoors. Responsibility and safety. A Kiwi thing some might suggest

Today it doesn't fit the bill, as now, this means so much more to our ethnic cousins.

Fred99

13684 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 10018

#2200728 18-Mar-2019 12:08

I have an AR15. I also have an E-Cat licence and high capacity magazines for it. I use it for deer shooting and it’s fun.

I applaud this guy's attitude about the possibility of having to give up his AR15, but I'm going to comment on that, based on my experience as a deer shooter.

It might (for him) have been "fun", but it's not a suitable weapon for deer shooting of any kind I've ever done. It's (.223) too light calibre to ensure a clean kill of ie a large red deer stag, also too light calibre to use in typical NI hunting conditions (dense bush etc) where a larger calibre round has less chance of being deflected by a twig or leaves, whatever. It's not really accurate enough for longer range shooting in more open country, which combined with lower hitting power than a larger calibre and more accurate weapon, it's just not what I'd have ever chosen to use, calibre or style of gun.

IMO it's also (partly due to above factors) a liability in terms of accidental shooting of fellow hunters, pop a shot at a correctly identified target (deer) and because of increased risk of not dropping the deer with your first shot because of barely adequate firepower, you're left thinking that you hit the target, but the deer ran injured - this really happens - sometimes they'll run very very fast and quite a long way despite being hit a few inches away from where you'd have liked to get them, and it's not easy to find them to finish them off. Inexperienced (and no doubt some experienced) hunters do get hyped up in such a situation, the "thrill of the kill", or "buck fever", whatever. Probably better define that deer "hunting" as "stalking", as that's what you're trying to do, sneak up on a deer and/or try to get a stag to sneak up on you during the roar for example when there are lots of hunters in the bush. If you're with mates, then you're supposed to be aware of exactly where they are at all times, kind of difficult when you're trying to be invisible and unheard by your prey.

So nope, I don't think deer shooting with an AR 15 would be fun, and I sure as hell wouldn't want to be with mates or in areas where there was anybody hunting deer with that type of rifle.

Believe me that I was a gun fanatic, and typical of hunters spent many hours discussing the merits of calibres, projectiles, different rifles etc for various conditions, over a campfire, whatever. And we'd argue - as I expect another gun owner/hunter will probably argue with what I'm saying in this post.

They're ideal for shooting people in close combat conditions. If I have the history of it right, then I think that there was originally great reluctance by some to accept the utility of a .223 calibre weapon for jungle combat etc in Vietnam, compared to the better ability of larger .308 calibre to penetrate foliage etc without being deflected. This reluctance offset by lighter weight (of ammo to carry) and the growing realisation that because of the ban of the use of hollow/soft point ammunition and tendency for lighter calibre bullets to be deflected and spin, they were actually very effective at times, because a deflected (tumbling/spinning, misshapen) projectile didn't go cleanly though the target - thus exiting at almost the same velocity as it entered without transferring all that energy, but instead causing horrific injury which could stop the enemy even if not cleanly hit. And if they hit bone, then they did expand and transfer all the energy, more effectively than a larger calibre .308. So they became more liked.

Sorry for the gory explanation, but all said these weapons were designed to kill people, quickly and effectively. Also note that the limitations on use of hollow/soft point ammunition in war, does not apply to hunting ammunition, so although an AR15 you can at present buy off the shelf in NZ may not be quite as fully featured as a full military version, all other things equal, and as used by the terrorist on Friday, it's probably considerably more lethal and inflicts far more horrific injuries.

These weapons must be collected and destroyed in my opinion. It's just not right that they're so common.

Fred99

13684 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 10018

#2200736 18-Mar-2019 12:27

tdgeek:

Fred99:

tdgeek:

In that case you may as well defend the stupid argument comparing guns to cars, if you want to blame the firearms industry as well as owners who I guess are mainly zealots. Maybe Mike is correct when he said ban all firearms. After all it cant be a people issue its an issue over a piece of evil metal it seems

How dare you come back with a abjectly disingenuous BS response like that.

This largest gun dealer in NZ and a de facto spokesperson for the gun lobby didn't just "own" a fast car, he used it in an irresponsible manner thus blatantly endangering the general public, was apprehended, reportedly abused and intimidated a police officer to the extent that the police officer felt that the safest and only option available at that time was to just let him go (if he'd done that in the USA, he'd have possibly been shot), then drove off again and was apprehended shortly after. His response to being caught being an a-hole was utter contempt for the law, presumably raging anger, and that set him off driving in an even more dangerous manner.

You think it's appropriate to excuse him because he's a "family man", thus his extremely dangerous behaviour behind the wheel, contempt for reasonable laws, intimidation of a police officer is okay, and not reflective of his general "character" - which is something supposedly (but obviously at the moment arguably insufficient) vetted before granting any other person a firearm license.

That's just so deluded.

Talk about BS. Who says I excuse him??? If you want to complain about him ask the Police, they are the one supporting him supposedly or by your argument. The issue here is his sign. He will talk about that today and his opinion on the gun laws way forward. Irregardless of his behaviour thats relevant. For a number of reasons, but lets ignore all that and ignore my opinions on weapons , gun laws and so forth and just focus on one individual. His antics are not the issue, its a side story, and a side story that is between you and those who allow him to run a gun shop. The actual issue is his sign and what he will say about that. And as he has stated he will state his opinion on gun laws, that's relevant. To me it is anyway. And what about the gun association who doesn't want semis banned? Yes we ignore that. Tipple is not the issue. If he AND is other legal gun sellers are selling magazines, which they are, that's the issue. I want him to talk about that, even if no one else does

No comment to that response needed, other than to comment that you confirm what I've said, and completely miss the point.

Typical.

tdgeek

30048 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 9455

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#2200739 18-Mar-2019 12:35

Fred99:

No comment to that response needed, other than to comment that you confirm what I've said, and completely miss the point.

Typical.

Fine, and ditto

MikeB4

MikeB4
18776 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 12768

ID Verified

Trusted

Subscriber

#2200745 18-Mar-2019 12:45

I am not saying that this is what everyone should do I am simply sharing what I have done. In my youth I did considerable hunting for Deer, Goat and Rabbits. For the later I had a good number or property holders that allowed me to hunt on their property to keep Rabbits under control. The firearms I owned were, and ex army 303 fully wooded rifle that I eventually had cut down, a .22LR rifle and a Shotgun both used for Rabbit shooting. I kept these in three locked cabinets, one for rifles, one for fire mechanisms and one for ammunition. When my wife was pregnant with our first son I decided I did not want these in my home with young kids and also I did not wish them to lose me to a hunting accident so I surrendered the rifles and ammunition to the Police for disposal as I did not wish to sell them.

In later years I used to go to the locales that I hunted with a camera in our 4WD, I would see these guys coming out of the bush with military type rifles and thought what a waste of time rifle for hunting. They nearly always seemed to be wearing DPMs which is an incredibly stupid thing to wear in the bush. I guess that folks like to play soldier.

It became harder to find game and we had to go deeper into the wilderness to find game. It also seemed to be getting dangerous and we encountered often reckless cowboys that just wanted to in and blast away cases of ammunition and play games. I prefer(preferred) now to take photos of Game and have no interest in hunting. I don’t believe that there is a place in NZ for this anymore. Many of the places we went are now busy with trampers etc. It is just too dangerous. Deer and Goat culling can be achieved by professionals. Rabbit and other pest can be dealt with by other means and shooting was never going to keep up with them anyway.

This is not meant asa lecture it is just sharing my experience and what I did . Others will have to make their decisions based on the own conscience and what any law change prescribes.

Here is a crazy notion, lets give peace a chance.

Fred99

13684 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 10018

#2200753 18-Mar-2019 12:55

MikeB4:

It became harder to find game and we had to go deeper into the wilderness to find game. It also seemed to be getting dangerous and we encountered often reckless cowboys that just wanted to in and blast away cases of ammunition and play games.

I was going to say just what you've said as a footnote to the post about my experience above. That's one of the reasons I gave up hunting, for fear of being shot myself, and that despite always being as careful as I could be, I could accidentally shoot someone else (I couldn't live with myself if that happened).

I don't own any guns now - sold years ago.

Lego

Shop now for Lego sets and other gifts (affiliate link).

Fred99

13684 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 10018

#2200758 18-Mar-2019 13:06

POLICE ASSOCIATION FULLY SUPPORTS PM’S CALL FOR GUN LAW CHANGES

NZPA | Sat March 16th, 2019

Police Association President Chris Cahill has welcomed the Prime Minister’s early commitment to changing New Zealand’s gun laws.

“Jacinda Ardern has said emphatically that New Zealand’s gun laws will change and that now is the time for that change. I absolutely agree with her and I believe many New Zealanders will be aghast that in our country someone can amass a cache of weapons like that discovered in this Christchurch tragedy,” Mr Cahill said.

“It is sickening that it has taken this horrific event to wake us up to our vulnerability. My first thoughts are with the families of those who have been killed or injured, and with our incredibly brave first responders – police officers, ambulance and hospital staff, and all those members of the public who helped in any way they could.

“However we cannot ignore the role of guns in this event.”

Mr Cahill says the debate that New Zealand is about to have on access to certain firearms should be short and swift.

“As we enter that debate however, we need to be mindful of the welfare of victims and their families and the people of Christchurch for whom Friday’s shocking events will remain raw for a very long time,” he said.

“There is no place in the upcoming debate for the radical gun lobby which has made its presence felt in previous attempts to make our country safer. That input undoubtedly contributed to the rejection of most of the select committee recommendations on tightening our gun laws. We have seen what happens in the United States when gun radicals are involved. Nothing. That is not good enough for New Zealand.”

“Reputable firearms owners have a role to play but I do not believe there is any place at the table for those who use social media to spew hate and vitriol as they wind each other up in the belief that it is their right to own whatever weapons they desire,” Mr Cahill said.

“The bitter irony with this alleged perpetrator in Christchurch is he would not have been able to buy the weapons he had in his home country of Australia, because immediately after the Port Arthur massacre in 1996 the then Prime Minister John Howard acted swiftly to ban semi-automatic weapons and Australians were with him.”

“New Zealanders and our politicians now need to step in behind Prime Minister Ardern as she takes decisive action on access to lethal weapons. I can pledge that the association will do everything it can to assist her in cleaning up our gun laws.”

networkn

Networkn
32873 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 15472

ID Verified

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#2200759 18-Mar-2019 13:06

I have never really been a fan of guns, though I have fired quite a few over the years. I came from a farm, guns were semi common for a variety of reasons.

I have only ever shot birds myself, but I had one instance where I shot on and it was injured, and went higher than I could reach to end it, so it died making a lot of noise. That was the last time I fired at a live target. I was nearly sick and thinking about it now makes me feel the same way.

When in Vegas a few years back, I did have some interest in what it would be like to fire bigger guns. I fired a variety of semi automatic weapons and honeslty, I am pretty jumping around sudden loud noises and I did not enjoy the experience at all. It was so loud and felt so powerful. I walked away with even more respect for those who are responsible for firing them in the line of duty. I was totally freaked out shooting paper targets. I can't imagine to shoot a moving target, let alone whilst I was being fired upon myself. I am no soldier, clearly.

A few years later I returned to a commerical gun range when I had some time spare in Honolulu. I wanted to try firing some pistols, including some high calibre ones. When I was there, without an appointment, the women said she could fit me in, but I had only 20 minutes or so because she had a family coming in with 4 young kids. I was initially pretty outraged. She was unsurprised in the slightest, but did a great job of explaining why she thought it a good idea. I hadnt considered the perspective put to me. The family was coming in, because all their kids play computer games, and the parents wanted them to understand the difference between shooting someone on a screen, and the reality of firing a real weapon. To me that seemed pretty solid parenting in some respects.

I don't go hunting now for a variety of reasons, but my own safety and the risk I could even remotely injure or kill someone unintentionally, makes any benefit I'd get, pale in comparison. I don't have issues with others doing it, so long as they are safe.

I don't believe hunting areas should be used for tramping or vica versa, I am surprised that any cross over exists.

SJB

2945 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 2287
Inactive user

#2200783 18-Mar-2019 13:49

I've just had a notice from the local council that they want to inspect my pool (that I no longer have) to ensure that it is properly fenced and secure so that nobody can accidentally drown in it.

This is in a country where by law you also need a helmet to ride a bike and any work on your house over the first floor needs scaffolding.

But people can buy semi automatic weapons that aren't out of place in a war zone. Sasha Baron Cohen could make a pretty funny movie here.

All semi automatic weapons should be banned and all guns registered, not just the owners. There should be annual checks on gun owners and if you don't use them regularly your license is revoked. End of story.

vulcannz

436 posts

Ultimate Geek
+1 received by user: 136
Inactive user

#2200785 18-Mar-2019 13:51

Fred99:

vulcannz:

Fred99:

hio77: The way I see it, banning semi autos or even ar 15s doesn't really fix this problem.

End of the day the guns used in the incident were modified in such a way that is not legal.

"Modified" WRT the AR15s was to simply buy a 30 round (or larger) magazine, which you can buy off the shelf from gun stores in NZ without holding a special category license, and practically no chance of being caught - unless you're very stupid.

In the wake of the Port Arthur Massacre (1996):

The Australian government “banned automatic and semiautomatic firearms, adopted new licensing requirements, established a national firearms registry, and instituted a 28-day waiting period for gun purchases. It also bought and destroyed more than 600,000 civilian-owned firearms, in a scheme that cost half a billion dollars and was funded by raising taxes.” The entire overhaul took just months to implement.

Between 1995 and 2006, gun-related homicides and suicides in the country dropped by 59 percent and 65 percent, respectively.

Gun ownership rates in NZ are about one per 8 people, vs about 1 per

Just to clarify this. The drop in homicides has been long considered unrelated to the buyback program, it has been attributed to a crack down on gangs and organized crime which were the root cause of homicides. The bulk of the buybacks happened well after the homicide rate started to drop. Today Australia has a higher gun ownership per capita (depending on who's stats you believe), with claims gun ownership is higher than 1996 rates.

I've read the same thing but call BS on it, probably "attributed" by One Nation and other gun-crazy extremists.

Explain how crackdown on gangs/organised crime results in a reduction in suicide death by gun consistent with the reduction in homicide by gun?

Increase in gang/organised crime related deaths in Aus over the past decade can mostly be attributed to one simple thing - their phenomenal "ice", (aka crystal meth) epidemic.

The homicides specifically track to dropping well before the Port Arthur massacre and gun amnesties. So unless you have a time travel machine it doesn't physically correlate - no matter how much BS you claim.. This was reported by Aussie police, not One Nation. Ironically this argument is spread more by the opposite end of the scale (Phillip Alpers and co).

It's also worth noting that Aussie politicians are claiming no gun massacres "if you don't use that standard definition of a massacre". Aussie still has a lot of guns, 15-25% ownership depending on who you believe.

FWIW I am a FAL holder, I don't have any semi's, and am not really interested them. I am happy with a ban or moving all semis to E-cat. So I am not arguing against restrictions of semis, I just want to make sure people get their facts right.

networkn

Networkn
32873 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 15472

ID Verified

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#2200798 18-Mar-2019 14:08

tdgeek:

networkn:

I actually haven't seen the sign properly. Assuming it's higher up, and near a road, it would likely require traffic management approval, not exactly something you can get instantly. Even throwing a tarp over it, needs to be secured, health and safety stuff to consider.

https://www.stuff.co.nz/business/111353635/gun-city-owner-quiet-over-controversial-billboard-outside-christchurch-store

Days ago, it was reasonably innocuous. Teaching kids to use an air rifle on targets. An activity, a sport, outdoors. Responsibility and safety. A Kiwi thing some might suggest

Today it doesn't fit the bill, as now, this means so much more to our ethnic cousins.

Yeah, this isn't what I thought it was. Pretty easy to cover this. A day or two was a reasonable timeframe. Will be interesting to hear what he has to say about this.

Lego

Shop now for Lego sets and other gifts (affiliate link).

Fred99

13684 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 10018

#2200803 18-Mar-2019 14:13

vulcannz:

it doesn't physically correlate

I just want to make sure people get their facts right.

These facts:

In the seven years before the NFA (1989-1995), the average annual firearm suicide death rate per 100,000 was 2.6 (with a yearly range of 2.2 to 2.9); in the seven years after the buyback was fully implemented (1998-2004), the average annual firearm suicide rate was 1.1 (yearly range 0.8 to 1.4).”

In the seven years before the NFA, the average annual firearm homicide rate per 100,000 was .43 (range .27 to .60) while for the seven years post NFA, the average annual firearm homicide rate was .25 (range .16 to .33).

tdgeek

30048 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 9455

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#2200804 18-Mar-2019 14:18

networkn:

tdgeek:

networkn:

I actually haven't seen the sign properly. Assuming it's higher up, and near a road, it would likely require traffic management approval, not exactly something you can get instantly. Even throwing a tarp over it, needs to be secured, health and safety stuff to consider.

https://www.stuff.co.nz/business/111353635/gun-city-owner-quiet-over-controversial-billboard-outside-christchurch-store

Days ago, it was reasonably innocuous. Teaching kids to use an air rifle on targets. An activity, a sport, outdoors. Responsibility and safety. A Kiwi thing some might suggest

Today it doesn't fit the bill, as now, this means so much more to our ethnic cousins.

Yeah, this isn't what I thought it was. Pretty easy to cover this. A day or two was a reasonable timeframe. Will be interesting to hear what he has to say about this.

He will give a mention of the event. Probably exaggerate what he has done since. Reports show they sold out, then not on display, then removed from display due to media interest. He will exaggerate that. He will say that semis should not be banned as its the person, although he will put forward something to support some law change, probably for media reasons. The test is will he come across as if the NZ firearms industry is the same as the NRA, which is the theme here. Irregardless of whatever industry it is, humans will defend what they already have and don't want to lose, that's standard human nature.

Speaking now, ill post and see

Fred99

13684 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 10018

#2200807 18-Mar-2019 14:31

His firm sold all 4 AR15s, and ammunition to the mass murderer.

No doubt conducted perfectly legally - but an unforgivably irresponsible thing to do.

tdgeek

30048 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 9455

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#2200828 18-Mar-2019 14:46

Fred99:

His firm sold all 4 AR15s, and ammunition to the mass murderer.

No doubt conducted perfectly legally - but an unforgivably irresponsible thing to do.

Thats incorrect. They sold over a months, 3 or 4 items online, no AR15's. As he saw the video and what he showed they did not sell. It was shotguns, and something else. He saw the shotgun, cannot tell if it was theirs, Police will find that out

Tipple said 2 or 3 times, they did not sell thew assault weapons used on Friday, shotgun is unknown yet. You heard him.

In Nov 2017 to March 2018 4 items sold. Legally, and processed legally. You cant use hindsight

1 | ... | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | ... | 18