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 | ... | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | 18

343 posts

Ultimate Geek

#2200923 18-Mar-2019 17:21

Fred99:

I'd to see him, gun clubs, other industry insiders, and anybody else who's ever been associated with or lobbied for the NRA or any affiliated or similar organisation excluded from any formal debate.

Excluding the majority of the interested parties is exactly the opposite of democracy...

tdgeek

29746 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#2200928 18-Mar-2019 17:30

Nothing new in the telecast

There won’t be a debate with other sectors, you would expect they would participate to some degree. The gun debate that Tipple referred to was his. I think NZ wants to hear what dealers and owners think not that it will largely change the laws as its highly likely to be what AUS did.

My issue is that there are big efforts with intelligence. If it’s not guns it’s bombs. It’s a people issue. You cannot ban bombs. That leaves honing in on the people that want to disrupt. While I support major gun law changes, that won’t stop another Friday

tdgeek

29746 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#2200932 18-Mar-2019 17:37

Tracer:
Fred99:

I'd to see him, gun clubs, other industry insiders, and anybody else who's ever been associated with or lobbied for the NRA or any affiliated or similar organisation excluded from any formal debate.

Excluding the majority of the interested parties is exactly the opposite of democracy...

Exactly. But it’s now blurred. I’ve seen some here opposed to some things but alter that to exclude this behaviour on Friday. Affected parties need to assess carefully where they stand. Tipple said he had positive things to contribute. On the surface that’s him easing back on his general gun law stance. If so that’s a start.

Fred99

13684 posts

Uber Geek

#2200955 18-Mar-2019 18:05

Tracer:

Fred99:

I'd to see him, gun clubs, other industry insiders, and anybody else who's ever been associated with or lobbied for the NRA or any affiliated or similar organisation excluded from any formal debate.

Excluding the majority of the interested parties is exactly the opposite of democracy...

No it's not. We've got representative democracy - the public don't get to vote on every new law - our elected leaders do.

The NRA is also a powerful foreign organisation which will interfere in our democracy to suit their agenda at home, but couldn't care less about harm to NZ. Lord knows they don't seem to care one iota about the wellbeing of most US citizens - only their supporters.

They're also very evil in my opinion - and by many others.

Batman

Mad Scientist
29761 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#2200958 18-Mar-2019 18:08

According to Stuff today

Prime Minister has spoken to David Parker after early "announcement"

Ardern was asked whether she had spoken to her Attorney General David Parker, whose comments a Saturday rally led many to believe the Government had announced a semi-automatic weapons ban - a claim that has now been picked up on news websites all of the world and by Kim Kardashian on Twitter. He had to walk back the comments later that night. She said she had spoke to him - he will have been told off.

tdgeek

29746 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#2200962 18-Mar-2019 18:18

How will the NRA interfere with the law changes that have already been decided in principle? As with the nuclear issue we will do it end of story. I can’t see any issues post that

Tracer

343 posts

Ultimate Geek

#2200967 18-Mar-2019 18:24

Fred99:

No it's not. We've got representative democracy - the public don't get to vote on every new law - our elected leaders do.

The NRA is also a powerful foreign organisation which will interfere in our democracy to suit their agenda at home, but couldn't care less about harm to NZ. Lord knows they don't seem to care one iota about the wellbeing of most US citizens - only their supporters.

They're also very evil in my opinion - and by many others.

Absolutely agree the NRA are a horrible and evil organisation. There are many of those, and many responsible for monstrous crimes, e.g. the Catholic Church, yet we don't marginalise them when it comes to debating bills of special interest to them. In any case this is about NZ, not the USA, so the NRA are rightly not welcome.

Equinox IT

Cloud spending continues to surge globally, but most organisations haven’t made the changes necessary to maximise the value and cost-efficiency benefits of their cloud investments. Download the whitepaper From Overspend to Advantage now.

kingdragonfly

11190 posts

Uber Geek

Subscriber

#2201028 18-Mar-2019 19:48

Personally I think the US is the worst place to be giving advice on gun control. Sort of like asking Hannibal Lector for vegan cooking tips.

https://edition.cnn.com/2019/03/17/asia/gun-laws-new-zealand-intl/index.html

It's a watershed moment for gun control in New Zealand, but there are no quick fixes
Analysis by Tim Lister, CNN

...
Obtaining a license involves police background checks and firearms safety. But they are rarely refused, according to the latest figures. In 2017, of the 43,509 firearms license applications submitted, just 188 applications were declined. And a Category A license allows the holder to obtain any number of sporting-type rifles and shotguns. You don't need one license per weapon.

Visitors to New Zealand can apply for a firearms license that "will let you shoot for hunting or competition in New Zealand for up to a year," according to police.

Some variants of the AR-15, which has been used in several mass shootings in the US, can be legally obtained by Category A holders in New Zealand. The power of such a weapon can then be enhanced by adding a high-capacity magazine. A police report two years ago warned that such adaptations opened the way to "criminal harm" and noted that "purchase of high-capacity magazines is unregulated and does not require a firearms licence."

One such adapted weapon was used in the murder of two people in New Zealand in 2017.

New Zealand's patchwork of gun laws have also allowed the import of semi-automatic rifles, of which there are about 15,000 legally in circulation, according to police estimates. The lack of a national register of gun ownership makes such estimates more difficult.

The New Zealand Police Association has long called for reform of the Arms Act and tougher measures to close loopholes on acquiring semi-automatic weapons.

Its president, Chris Cahill, said at the weekend: "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. We have seen what happens in the United States when gun radicals are involved. Nothing. That is not good enough for New Zealand."

Cahill also makes the point that Tarrant would have found it more difficult to acquire such powerful weapons in his native Australia, which had its "Christchurch moment" back in 1996.

That was the year of the Port Arthur massacre, when a lone gunman with a semi-automatic weapon killed 35 people and wounded more than 20, using an AR-15 with a 30-round magazine. The Australian government moved swiftly to outlaw such weapons after the attack. Rapid-fire rifles and shotguns were banned, gun owner licensing was tightened and remaining firearms were registered to uniform national standards. An ambitious government-funded gun buyback program was introduced.

The Dunblane massacre -- also in 1996 -- when 16 schoolchildren and their teacher were murdered in Scotland brought about tighter gun controls in the UK. But it took several years for the number of criminal offenses involving guns to begin to fall.

New Zealand now faces a similar watershed moment.

David Small, a lawyer and professor at Canterbury University in Christchurch, says it's a question of what's reasonable in a country where guns are important for hunting and pest control. "There is nothing reasonable about owning a gun whose main purpose is self-defense," he says, "and in New Zealand there is no constitutional right to bear arms. To introduce tighter gun control is not going to infringe basic liberties."

Even with public sentiment behind her, Arden's government still faces a daunting challenge in devising watertight legislation that begins to regulate the availability of guns in New Zealand.

Speaking to CNN on Monday, Philip Alper, editor of GunPolicy.org, a Australian website that tracks armed violence, firearm law and gun control, said that the New Zealand gun lobby will likely resist any attempt to adopt tighter controls.
According to Alper, there have been four inquiries into possible changes to New Zealand's gun laws during the past 22 years -- and the gun lobby has stymied every one of them.

"The gun lobby is already talking about consultation, no knee jerk reactions. 'Come out to the gun range and see were good people,' and that has the effect of watering down every gun law that's been tested," says Alper.

One possible new route would be the introduction of a buy-back program, as well as closing loopholes that allow the import and adaptation of powerful guns, says Small.
...>

dejadeadnz

2394 posts

Uber Geek
Inactive user

#2201077 18-Mar-2019 20:22

Who is David Tipple?

I have an answer: a waste of oxygen. In addition to the already discussed run-in with the police in 2016 for speeding/driving terribly twice in succession, this charmer also led the police on a 16 km chase and had to be road spiked in 2008, and was convicted in the US and did 21 months in jail for failing to declare weapons in the US (which he intended to export to NZ). Most normal people have a more straightforward description for the latter behaviour: weapons smuggling. Yet somehow he's a fit and proper person to be a gun dealer.

Someone in this thread claimed that aspects of our Arms Act are the envy of the world (hahahahahahah). Right now, I'd more argue this clown Tipple and his dimwitted apologists are making us the laughing stocks of this world.

Tracer

343 posts

Ultimate Geek

#2201162 18-Mar-2019 21:19

dejadeadnz:

I have an answer: a waste of oxygen. In addition to the already discussed run-in with the police in 2016 for speeding/driving terribly twice in succession, this charmer also led the police on a 16 km chase and had to be road spiked in 2008, and was convicted in the US and did 21 months in jail for failing to declare weapons in the US (which he intended to export to NZ). Most normal people have a more straightforward description for the latter behaviour: weapons smuggling. Yet somehow he's a fit and proper person to be a gun dealer.

I'm still surprised he dodged all that. He did lose is dealer license at one point though IIRC?

tdgeek

29746 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#2201189 18-Mar-2019 21:41

dejadeadnz:

Who is David Tipple?

I have an answer: a waste of oxygen. In addition to the already discussed run-in with the police in 2016 for speeding/driving terribly twice in succession, this charmer also led the police on a 16 km chase and had to be road spiked in 2008, and was convicted in the US and did 21 months in jail for failing to declare weapons in the US (which he intended to export to NZ). Most normal people have a more straightforward description for the latter behaviour: weapons smuggling. Yet somehow he's a fit and proper person to be a gun dealer.

Someone in this thread claimed that aspects of our Arms Act are the envy of the world (hahahahahahah). Right now, I'd more argue this clown Tipple and his dimwitted apologists are making us the laughing stocks of this world.

No one claimed that. Someone stated that is what you will find if you google us. So, ask the authors.

tdgeek

29746 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#2201190 18-Mar-2019 21:42

Tracer:

dejadeadnz:

I have an answer: a waste of oxygen. In addition to the already discussed run-in with the police in 2016 for speeding/driving terribly twice in succession, this charmer also led the police on a 16 km chase and had to be road spiked in 2008, and was convicted in the US and did 21 months in jail for failing to declare weapons in the US (which he intended to export to NZ). Most normal people have a more straightforward description for the latter behaviour: weapons smuggling. Yet somehow he's a fit and proper person to be a gun dealer.

I'm still surprised he dodged all that. He did lose is dealer license at one point though IIRC?

Why is he still here? Who allows him to trade? Who awarded him a commendation for the manner in which he runs his business?

I'd like answers for these three questions please. Instead of one liner avoidance foboffs.

Fred99

13684 posts

Uber Geek

#2201224 18-Mar-2019 22:07

tdgeek:

I'd like answers for these three questions please. Instead of one liner avoidance foboffs.

Not quite direct answers to direct questions, but hope you get the picture, as I think it covers the gamut in 3.

1. Well connected and uses those connections, church, whatever, to create the "family man" image.

2. Has made an absolute fortune selling guns, uses it to build his business, see 3. below

3. Gets the best legal representation etc which helps with 1. above, which probably costs a fortune, but see 2. above

Edit - oh I missed something, so I'll change the rules to add a 4.

4. "regulatory capture" (which occurs when a regulatory agency, created to act in the public interest, instead advances the commercial or political concerns of special interest groups that dominate the industry or sector it is charged with regulating) Requires the right connections (see 1. above) money (see 2. above) and great legal and PR representation (see 3. above)

I thinks that's it.

Ge0rge

2052 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#2201228 18-Mar-2019 22:14

Maybe he just owns the business? If he himself isn't actually selling firearms, does he need a D endorsement on his licence?

Something like owning a real estate business, but paying agents to sell houses - would you need your licence to simply own the business if you weren't actually selling houses?

I honestly don't know if either of the above are possible.

tdgeek

29746 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#2201247 18-Mar-2019 22:37

Fred99:

tdgeek:

I'd like answers for these three questions please. Instead of one liner avoidance foboffs.

Not quite direct answers to direct questions, but hope you get the picture, as I think it covers the gamut in 3.

1. Well connected and uses those connections, church, whatever, to create the "family man" image.

2. Has made an absolute fortune selling guns, uses it to build his business, see 3. below

3. Gets the best legal representation etc which helps with 1. above, which probably costs a fortune, but see 2. above

Edit - oh I missed something, so I'll change the rules to add a 4.

4. "regulatory capture" (which occurs when a regulatory agency, created to act in the public interest, instead advances the commercial or political concerns of special interest groups that dominate the industry or sector it is charged with regulating) Requires the right connections (see 1. above) money (see 2. above) and great legal and PR representation (see 3. above)

I thinks that's it.

1. Why is he still here? Despite his edgy lifestyle, he hasn't been shut down by Police, Statues. He is legal.

2. Who allows him to trade. Despite his edgy lifestyle, he hasn't been shut down by Police, Statues. He is legal.

3. Who gave him the commendation for his business procedures? The Police. Now, I only learnt of that today in the telecast, but I assume he would not lie to national TV so the Police can expose that also on national TV. So, it seems he follows the rules well.

4. I assume you mean the NZ equivalent of the NRA. There is no doubt that he and other dealers act to further their own interests. All do that in some form or other. Its common in politics to do that, rightly or wrongly. He has run that business since 1978, amongst many changes of Government. Before last week it was just a gun shop. Where you can import guns and sell them openly. He took the Police to court as they stopped an import or withheld it, or whatever, doesn't matter. Police lost, he got his guns, $25k and a settlement. The guns were legal as per the whatever Act decrees, guns that can be imported. He's sharp, and he's edgy, but he is not a lawmaker. Its hard to imagine a tinpot gun seller getting his mates together to pass a law allowing semi automatic military style weapons.

Despite what sort of person he is, he is legal, that is the issue. As are the imports of all dealers.

If he was an angel, nothing changes. I can't see the point of debating his moral standards when his business is using legal standards to trade.

1 | ... | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | 18