Does NZ need better gun laws?

Forums › Off topic › Does NZ need better gun laws?

1 | ... | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | ... | 16

846 posts

Ultimate Geek
+1 received by user: 193

#1121007 3-Sep-2014 10:06

DravidDavid: And if you are a hunter, your target isn't always stationary either, haha :) I don't hunt, but moving around targets shooting at them as quick as possible gets the blood pumping and adrenalin runs high.

I've resisted staying out of this thread... All I want to say is that is not a good pro gun example.

psychrn

1611 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 155

ID Verified

Trusted

#1121023 3-Sep-2014 10:23

Inphinity:
DravidDavid:
Even if this shooter is caught, he will get 6 months in prison and 12 months home detention because of some "mental condition" his lawyer cooked up.

This is the most disturbing bit for me. We need far tougher penalties for these things.

Speaking as a Mental Health professional if this does go down that road the person is often "incarcerated" longer in the "system" than if they went to Prison plus the gradual reintegration back into society with strict monitoring.
I havnt seen any obvious signs of this however in this case. Though his Defence may well request a Psychiatric assessment.
Plus all the media attention re his interactions with WINZ previously.
Sorry I digress-thought Id better comment on the above statement.
The question here is yes where did he get the gun from!!

GZMCC. Lenovo Yoga C640. 8 gb Ram and 256Gb SSD, Cam Am Spyder 2016 F3 LTD. GoPro 5 Black, Samsung S22 Ultra, Huawei Watch D. Samsung S6 Lite Tablet, Amateur Radio Callsign ZL1CJH

heylinb4nz

656 posts

Ultimate Geek
+1 received by user: 141
Inactive user

#1121028 3-Sep-2014 10:47

sdav:
DravidDavid: And if you are a hunter, your target isn't always stationary either, haha :) I don't hunt, but moving around targets shooting at them as quick as possible gets the blood pumping and adrenalin runs high.

I've resisted staying out of this thread... All I want to say is that is not a good pro gun example.

Only because you are using emotional stereotyping based on the drivel that media feeds you. You assume he is fantasizing about killing innocent people with a gun or pre-tending to be a spec ops operator.

Is it unreasonable to think that someone might just enjoying the skill and thrill of target shooting and competing in a sport against other athletes ? does it matter what equipment he uses ?

Then there is all the other unseen aspects of target shooting like equipment setup, reloading, muscle memory training, speed and agility training.....things that don't involve firing off live ammo.

jeffnz

2870 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 666

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1121035 3-Sep-2014 10:53

sdav:
DravidDavid: And if you are a hunter, your target isn't always stationary either, haha :) I don't hunt, but moving around targets shooting at them as quick as possible gets the blood pumping and adrenalin runs high.

I've resisted staying out of this thread... All I want to say is that is not a good pro gun example.

well said, its one thing running around shooting at things that don't shoot back to people that choose their own time to attack and usually when no one is ready for it.

Allowing people to have concealed weapons doesn't mean they will be able to react to stop anything happening although if they get over the initial shock they may limit what could happen. Even so giving the wider public this type of access to weapons will mean we are on the the same track as the States and whilst most shootings seem to be gangs shooting each other it will mean the those with weapons are more likely to use them in arguments when they would normally back down now.

Galaxy S10

Garmin Fenix 5

heylinb4nz

656 posts

Ultimate Geek
+1 received by user: 141
Inactive user

#1121036 3-Sep-2014 10:53

psychrn:
Inphinity:
DravidDavid:
Even if this shooter is caught, he will get 6 months in prison and 12 months home detention because of some "mental condition" his lawyer cooked up.

This is the most disturbing bit for me. We need far tougher penalties for these things.

Speaking as a Mental Health professional if this does go down that road the person is often "incarcerated" longer in the "system" than if they went to Prison plus the gradual reintegration back into society with strict monitoring.
I havnt seen any obvious signs of this however in this case. Though his Defence may well request a Psychiatric assessment.
Plus all the media attention re his interactions with WINZ previously.
Sorry I digress-thought Id better comment on the above statement.
The question here is yes where did he get the gun from!!

While the police dick around trying to push stupid laws on licensed owners (ie the whole MSSA\thumbhole grip thing), mag restrictions, import permits for inane things that are not really parts.

They keep failing to address the glaring holes in their A-Cat system (Rifles and Shotguns)

a) safe storage, the safes on TradeMe for A-cat stuff are woeful and easy to get into, it needs to be lifted up to B\E cat level

b) manual processes for acquiring permits to purchase via mailorder can easily be exploited

While they keep focusing on emotional issues like evil MSSAs (e-cat) and Pistols, there is a steady flow of stolen A-cat gear and illegal purchases happening right under their noses.

heylinb4nz

656 posts

Ultimate Geek
+1 received by user: 141
Inactive user

#1121038 3-Sep-2014 11:01

jeffnz:
sdav:
DravidDavid: And if you are a hunter, your target isn't always stationary either, haha :) I don't hunt, but moving around targets shooting at them as quick as possible gets the blood pumping and adrenalin runs high.

I've resisted staying out of this thread... All I want to say is that is not a good pro gun example.

well said, its one thing running around shooting at things that don't shoot back to people that choose their own time to attack and usually when no one is ready for it.

Allowing people to have concealed weapons doesn't mean they will be able to react to stop anything happening although if they get over the initial shock they may limit what could happen. Even so giving the wider public this type of access to weapons will mean we are on the the same track as the States and whilst most shootings seem to be gangs shooting each other it will mean the those with weapons are more likely to use them in arguments when they would normally back down now.

You have little faith in humanity if you think that simply owning a gun makes someone turn into a murderer over something as simple as an argument. You are using projectionism, meaning if you owned a gun you are afraid that's what you would do, but you don't want to own that feeling so you put it on someone else. In doing so you would deny another person effective self defense based on YOUR fears and thoughts.

As for training, the average CCW holder in USA has more trigger time, more training and higher skill level than most NZ Police officers, but you are happy for them to tote Glocks and M4s to come to your aid. FYI, other than STG and main center AOS, most AOS members are just regular beat cops that have a little more training than your average cadet.

AliExpress

Shop now on AliExpress (affiliate link).

jeffnz

2870 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 666

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1121043 3-Sep-2014 11:20

heylinb4nz:
jeffnz:
sdav:
DravidDavid: And if you are a hunter, your target isn't always stationary either, haha :) I don't hunt, but moving around targets shooting at them as quick as possible gets the blood pumping and adrenalin runs high.

I've resisted staying out of this thread... All I want to say is that is not a good pro gun example.

well said, its one thing running around shooting at things that don't shoot back to people that choose their own time to attack and usually when no one is ready for it.

Allowing people to have concealed weapons doesn't mean they will be able to react to stop anything happening although if they get over the initial shock they may limit what could happen. Even so giving the wider public this type of access to weapons will mean we are on the the same track as the States and whilst most shootings seem to be gangs shooting each other it will mean the those with weapons are more likely to use them in arguments when they would normally back down now.

You have little faith in humanity if you think that simply owning a gun makes someone turn into a murderer over something as simple as an argument. You are using projectionism, meaning if you owned a gun you are afraid that's what you would do, but you don't want to own that feeling so you put it on someone else. In doing so you would deny another person effective self defense based on YOUR fears and thoughts.

As for training, the average CCW holder in USA has more trigger time, more training and higher skill level than most NZ Police officers, but you are happy for them to tote Glocks and M4s to come to your aid. FYI, other than STG and main center AOS, most AOS members are just regular beat cops that have a little more training than your average cadet.

Its to do with human nature and what we do when we get into a situation when we are either fearing for our life or property or in a rage where we don't think straight, there is a lot of reading on this.

Training only gets a person used to a weapon it doesn't train them how to react in a real situation. Although I've never fired a shot in anger I saw people that one would think was a model soldier not react well when in a situation that was outside the norm.

My point was that no one really knows how they will react when in these types of situations given they mostly aren't prepared for it regardless of training in using firearms. I don't see changing our laws so Joe Public can carry concealed weapons as being in anyway a good way of trying to prevent situations like the Ashburton shooting.

Galaxy S10

Garmin Fenix 5

heylinb4nz

656 posts

Ultimate Geek
+1 received by user: 141
Inactive user

#1121046 3-Sep-2014 11:29

jeffnz:
heylinb4nz:
jeffnz:
sdav:
DravidDavid: And if you are a hunter, your target isn't always stationary either, haha :) I don't hunt, but moving around targets shooting at them as quick as possible gets the blood pumping and adrenalin runs high.

I've resisted staying out of this thread... All I want to say is that is not a good pro gun example.

well said, its one thing running around shooting at things that don't shoot back to people that choose their own time to attack and usually when no one is ready for it.

Allowing people to have concealed weapons doesn't mean they will be able to react to stop anything happening although if they get over the initial shock they may limit what could happen. Even so giving the wider public this type of access to weapons will mean we are on the the same track as the States and whilst most shootings seem to be gangs shooting each other it will mean the those with weapons are more likely to use them in arguments when they would normally back down now.

You have little faith in humanity if you think that simply owning a gun makes someone turn into a murderer over something as simple as an argument. You are using projectionism, meaning if you owned a gun you are afraid that's what you would do, but you don't want to own that feeling so you put it on someone else. In doing so you would deny another person effective self defense based on YOUR fears and thoughts.

As for training, the average CCW holder in USA has more trigger time, more training and higher skill level than most NZ Police officers, but you are happy for them to tote Glocks and M4s to come to your aid. FYI, other than STG and main center AOS, most AOS members are just regular beat cops that have a little more training than your average cadet.

Its to do with human nature and what we do when we get into a situation when we are either fearing for our life or property or in a rage where we don't think straight, there is a lot of reading on this.

Training only gets a person used to a weapon it doesn't train them how to react in a real situation. Although I've never fired a shot in anger I saw people that one would think was a model soldier not react well when in a situation that was outside the norm.

My point was that no one really knows how they will react when in these types of situations given they mostly aren't prepared for it regardless of training in using firearms. I don't see changing our laws so Joe Public can carry concealed weapons as being in anyway a good way of trying to prevent situations like the Ashburton shooting.

True, no amount of training can prepare you for real life scenario.

BUT No one would argue against having (for example) an armed special forces soldier in the WINZ office that day. Other than the physical aspect, almost anyone (with TRAINING) can attain a high level of proficiency with multiple weapon systems for both offensive and defensive roles.

For every mass murder you see on the news in USA there are hundreds of unreported stories where CCW holders have taken out the bad guy, or even better diffused a situation and prevented a crime (simply by drawing on a wouldbe attacker).

A good vetting system like we have in NZ, should (and does) weed out the majority of people who would be inclined to blow someone away over a non life/death situation.

For the majority of people, taking a life is the utmost last resort, and although pulling a trigger is easy, its not that easy, you need a darn good reason.

DravidDavid

1907 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 305

#1121048 3-Sep-2014 11:36

jeffnz:
well said, its one thing running around shooting at things that don't shoot back to people that choose their own time to attack and usually when no one is ready for it.

Allowing people to have concealed weapons doesn't mean they will be able to react to stop anything happening although if they get over the initial shock they may limit what could happen. Even so giving the wider public this type of access to weapons will mean we are on the the same track as the States and whilst most shootings seem to be gangs shooting each other it will mean the those with weapons are more likely to use them in arguments when they would normally back down now.

I'm not saying "Adjust the law, so people can go to a dairy and purchase the "Gun & Ammo Combo". I'm saying give the trained individuals that have proven they are capable of handing firearms the option to carry as a last resort for self defense. I'm not suggesting the wild west as previously stated. I'm ALL for making it HARDER than it currently is for those who wish to conceal a firearm, but at least give them the OPTION.

Gangs and guns won't change. Gangs will always have guns. Those who are "backing down right now" probably don't have the means to acquire an illegal firearm let alone go through the rigorous task of ensuring their pistol or rifle remains within the scope of the law (No pun intended), only to end up carrying it illegally. Which is why gangs and other offenders don't bother with a firearms license in the first place. Say they are caught in possession of an illegal firearm, it gets confiscated, they get fined and maybe get some community service that they never bother attending.

I used to live In Wellsford. It was a few years ago now, but not 5KM away from where I lived, was an unsecured arsenal enough to kit a small army with many high powered automatic weapons and rocket launchers. It was kind of scary to know that kind of firepower isn't just limited to what you see in other countries and on the news in war zones...It's in your back yard too.

Lets put it this way, large gangs have been carrying weapons (on their person, in their cars...small armory type facilities at their headquaters...etc) for decades. It's not really a problem until they use them against the rest of the population. But when it comes to arming an already licensed individual, all of a sudden it's going to cripple our country and turn us in to crazy gun wielding murderers.

jeffnz

2870 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 666

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1121052 3-Sep-2014 11:40

heylinb4nz:

True, no amount of training can prepare you for real life scenario. BUT No one would argue against having (for example) an armed special forces soldier in the WINZ office that day.
For the majority of people, taking a life is the utmost last resort, and although pulling a trigger is easy, its not that easy, you need a darn good reason.

I think we are getting off topic here but in your example what if the offender walks in and shoots the special forces guy first what has it achieved, as I have said if you don't know what is going to happen you can't react, normally, until after it is initiated and it maybe too late to save anyone even if the person reacts well to the situation.

I agree it would be the last resort but not all as we aren't all in control of rational thinking when we are in certain situations, also you are assuming most people that get a license will be suitable under all situations.

Galaxy S10

Garmin Fenix 5

heylinb4nz

656 posts

Ultimate Geek
+1 received by user: 141
Inactive user

#1121053 3-Sep-2014 11:42

DravidDavid:
jeffnz:
well said, its one thing running around shooting at things that don't shoot back to people that choose their own time to attack and usually when no one is ready for it.

Allowing people to have concealed weapons doesn't mean they will be able to react to stop anything happening although if they get over the initial shock they may limit what could happen. Even so giving the wider public this type of access to weapons will mean we are on the the same track as the States and whilst most shootings seem to be gangs shooting each other it will mean the those with weapons are more likely to use them in arguments when they would normally back down now.

I'm not saying "Adjust the law, so people can go to a dairy and purchase the "Gun & Ammo Combo". I'm saying give the trained individuals that have proven they are capable of handing firearms the option to carry as a last resort for self defense. I'm not suggesting the wild west as previously stated. I'm ALL for making it HARDER than it currently is for those who wish to conceal a firearm, but at least give them the OPTION.

Gangs and guns won't change. Gangs will always have guns. Those who are "backing down right now" probably don't have the means to acquire an illegal firearm let alone go through the rigorous task of ensuring their pistol or rifle remains within the scope of the law (No pun intended), only to end up carrying it illegally. Which is why gangs and other offenders don't bother with a firearms license in the first place. Say they are caught in possession of an illegal firearm, it gets confiscated, they get fined and maybe get some community service that they never bother attending.

I used to live In Wellsford. It was a few years ago now, but not 5KM away from where I lived, was an unsecured arsenal enough to kit a small army with many high powered automatic weapons and rocket launchers. It was kind of scary to know that kind of firepower isn't just limited to what you see in other countries and on the news in war zones...It's in your back yard too.

Lets put it this way, large gangs have been carrying weapons (on their person, in their cars...small armory type facilities at their headquaters...etc) for decades. It's not really a problem until they use them against the rest of the population. But when it comes to arming an already licensed individual, all of a sudden it's going to cripple our country and turn us in to crazy gun wielding murderers.

Totally agree with you here. We allow under trained cops to tote weapons for inane things like scene gaurding, yet a competition IPSC shooter cant even use a pistol at home against a home invader without being dragged though the courts by the same people (Police) who bend\break rules and even kill the occasional innocent. Self defence is a right not a privilege, and the law needs to recognise and enable it.

Samsung

Shop now on Samsung phones, tablets, TVs and more (affiliate link).

jeffnz

2870 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 666

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1121054 3-Sep-2014 11:43

DravidDavid:
jeffnz:
well said, its one thing running around shooting at things that don't shoot back to people that choose their own time to attack and usually when no one is ready for it.

Allowing people to have concealed weapons doesn't mean they will be able to react to stop anything happening although if they get over the initial shock they may limit what could happen. Even so giving the wider public this type of access to weapons will mean we are on the the same track as the States and whilst most shootings seem to be gangs shooting each other it will mean the those with weapons are more likely to use them in arguments when they would normally back down now.

I'm not saying "Adjust the law, so people can go to a dairy and purchase the "Gun & Ammo Combo". I'm saying give the trained individuals that have proven they are capable of handing firearms the option to carry as a last resort for self defense. I'm not suggesting the wild west as previously stated. I'm ALL for making it HARDER than it currently is for those who wish to conceal a firearm, but at least give them the OPTION.

Gangs and guns won't change. Gangs will always have guns. Those who are "backing down right now" probably don't have the means to acquire an illegal firearm let alone go through the rigorous task of ensuring their pistol or rifle remains within the scope of the law (No pun intended), only to end up carrying it illegally. Which is why gangs and other offenders don't bother with a firearms license in the first place. Say they are caught in possession of an illegal firearm, it gets confiscated, they get fined and maybe get some community service that they never bother attending.

I used to live In Wellsford. It was a few years ago now, but not 5KM away from where I lived, was an unsecured arsenal enough to kit a small army with many high powered automatic weapons and rocket launchers. It was kind of scary to know that kind of firepower isn't just limited to what you see in other countries and on the news in war zones...It's in your back yard too.

Lets put it this way, large gangs have been carrying weapons (on their person, in their cars...small armory type facilities at their headquaters...etc) for decades. It's not really a problem until they use them against the rest of the population. But when it comes to arming an already licensed individual, all of a sudden it's going to cripple our country and turn us in to crazy gun wielding murderers.

train peop,e in what exactly, using a weapon is one thing but how do you train people how to react in real life situations, you can't and certainly no Licensing authority could or it would be such a long training period it would be unrealistic.

Running around playing war games isn't training

Galaxy S10

Garmin Fenix 5

Geektastic

18012 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 8470

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1121055 3-Sep-2014 11:44

jeffnz:
sdav:
DravidDavid: And if you are a hunter, your target isn't always stationary either, haha :) I don't hunt, but moving around targets shooting at them as quick as possible gets the blood pumping and adrenalin runs high.

I've resisted staying out of this thread... All I want to say is that is not a good pro gun example.

well said, its one thing running around shooting at things that don't shoot back to people that choose their own time to attack and usually when no one is ready for it.

Allowing people to have concealed weapons doesn't mean they will be able to react to stop anything happening although if they get over the initial shock they may limit what could happen. Even so giving the wider public this type of access to weapons will mean we are on the the same track as the States and whilst most shootings seem to be gangs shooting each other it will mean the those with weapons are more likely to use them in arguments when they would normally back down now.

Not really.

In the US, you do not need a licence to own a pistol or any other firearm (with some exceptions we will ignore) and you can buy them as easily as buying milk - they are just another item for sale.

If NZ allowed concealed carry, first you would have to actually have a firearms licence. Then you'd need a concealed carry permit, which I expect you would have to pass a test in order to get.

Whilst crims do not obey laws so no gun law will affect their behaviour in this respect, law abiding citizens who have satisfied the police that they are fit holders of a pistol licence will not resort to using them in arguments, any more than they do now. There are 6000 licence holders for pistols who can have up to 12 pistols on their licence. When was the last instance one of them was used in an argument?

Geektastic

18012 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 8470

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1121056 3-Sep-2014 11:45

jeffnz:
DravidDavid:
jeffnz:
well said, its one thing running around shooting at things that don't shoot back to people that choose their own time to attack and usually when no one is ready for it.

Allowing people to have concealed weapons doesn't mean they will be able to react to stop anything happening although if they get over the initial shock they may limit what could happen. Even so giving the wider public this type of access to weapons will mean we are on the the same track as the States and whilst most shootings seem to be gangs shooting each other it will mean the those with weapons are more likely to use them in arguments when they would normally back down now.

I'm not saying "Adjust the law, so people can go to a dairy and purchase the "Gun & Ammo Combo". I'm saying give the trained individuals that have proven they are capable of handing firearms the option to carry as a last resort for self defense. I'm not suggesting the wild west as previously stated. I'm ALL for making it HARDER than it currently is for those who wish to conceal a firearm, but at least give them the OPTION.

Gangs and guns won't change. Gangs will always have guns. Those who are "backing down right now" probably don't have the means to acquire an illegal firearm let alone go through the rigorous task of ensuring their pistol or rifle remains within the scope of the law (No pun intended), only to end up carrying it illegally. Which is why gangs and other offenders don't bother with a firearms license in the first place. Say they are caught in possession of an illegal firearm, it gets confiscated, they get fined and maybe get some community service that they never bother attending.

I used to live In Wellsford. It was a few years ago now, but not 5KM away from where I lived, was an unsecured arsenal enough to kit a small army with many high powered automatic weapons and rocket launchers. It was kind of scary to know that kind of firepower isn't just limited to what you see in other countries and on the news in war zones...It's in your back yard too.

Lets put it this way, large gangs have been carrying weapons (on their person, in their cars...small armory type facilities at their headquaters...etc) for decades. It's not really a problem until they use them against the rest of the population. But when it comes to arming an already licensed individual, all of a sudden it's going to cripple our country and turn us in to crazy gun wielding murderers.

train peop,e in what exactly, using a weapon is one thing but how do you train people how to react in real life situations, you can't and certainly no Licensing authority could or it would be such a long training period it would be unrealistic.

Running around playing war games isn't training

By that definition, neither the police nor the army are trained...

heylinb4nz

656 posts

Ultimate Geek
+1 received by user: 141
Inactive user

#1121061 3-Sep-2014 11:49

jeffnz:
heylinb4nz:

True, no amount of training can prepare you for real life scenario. BUT No one would argue against having (for example) an armed special forces soldier in the WINZ office that day.
For the majority of people, taking a life is the utmost last resort, and although pulling a trigger is easy, its not that easy, you need a darn good reason.

I think we are getting off topic here but in your example what if the offender walks in and shoots the special forces guy first what has it achieved, as I have said if you don't know what is going to happen you can't react, normally, until after it is initiated and it maybe too late to save anyone even if the person reacts well to the situation.

I agree it would be the last resort but not all as we aren't all in control of rational thinking when we are in certain situations, also you are assuming most people that get a license will be suitable under all situations.

So the answer is basically sit back and do nothing out of fear ?

FYI conceal carry is effective in 3 ways

a) it doesn't cause general fear in public or law enforcement seeing an armed civilian
b) people with bad intentions dont know who in the room has the capacity to stop them
c) the only time you expose yourself is in self defence

Not that someone hell bent on killing WINZ worker is thinking rationally, he would be to amped up to pay attention to the CCW guy (grey man) who has already got a shot lined up on him.

1 | ... | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | ... | 16