Thread: National creates a Hunting and Fishing portfolio

Originally Posted by Micky Duck

about 10 years ago this young fella went hunting in wet crappy conditions,so when he got home,rifle got whipe over and put in hot water cupboard to dry out..

If you are going to be drying your rifles out in the hot water cupboard, and everyone does, then you should at least get a chain or similar to secure it. Hard lesson for the young guy, but its that kinda thing that leads to criminals getting their hands on firearms. Same as people leaving firearms in vehicles and that kinda thing.

I can't say I have full faith in the Police's figures, but thats all we have to go on.

Originally Posted by Micky Duck

Im buggered if that is logical @Lauries Hut .....because they/we/anyone doesnt know where guns came from does not in ANY WAY proove where they came from.
thats like saying because 127 children under the age of 15 were found with cigarettes ,logic says they were purchased by same children in 4 square supermarkets.
or that they were "straw bought" by older people from night n day stores.
there is NO WAY to tell if they were or were not....
it ignores the corner dairy...it ignores the ciggys being pinched in a ram raid (now there is a logical source if ever I ve seen one) it ignores the chance the 15 year old LOOKS like they are 17-18-19 and picked dairy with young person behind counter,who couldnt tell and was too shy to ask for ID or too lazy,it ignores the local store with young man behind counter and the big bossomed young lady with short shorts n even shorter top coming in to buy them,or being in shop when they were purchased...or next in line flashing big puppy dog eyes at young man,who hurried purchase through so he could serve (oh what a choice of word) young woman next.
you have agreed about smuggling parts and making locally...so its still logical there are some smuggled in whole,I can tell you right here and now having unloaded many shipping containers in a former life...it would be childs play to include lots of items inside one full of legitamate cargo ,absolute childsplay.not to mention how many ships slip in and out of port each day and how many larger pleasure craft we have that are more than capable of whizzing out to meet them at sea. the possibilities are endless,if the desire and or the $$$$ involved are high enough there is no way you could stop them getting in.

EG if you were to offer $5,000 right now to buy a sks ..how long do you think it would be before you would get one???
if you were to offer $10,000 for a handgun...again how long????
now pretend for one moment that money is NO ISSUE,you want a uzi and you want it in a hurry,will pay whatever is asked.....you honestly believe one wont magically appear quicksmartly if the finder fee is in say 5 figures and your happy to pay same to whoever they got it off...or double to just the "finder"??????

now that bridge I have to sell.....

Hell it’s not that hard.

Statistics works in a similar way to polling for an election. They ask a sample of 1000 people: who will you vote for?
You end up with 450 who will vote for National or 45%
390 for labour 39%
110 for the Greens 11%
And 50 who dont know 5%
1000 sample votes, your 5+11+39+45% adds up to 100%
So they’ll tell us from this sample this is how we will vote come Election Day. Where it’s different is the 5% who don’t know, have been left as dont knows.

In the case of the article, (this part I’m going by memory so the numbers will be wrong but the principal is correct)
They had something like 82% of recovered illegal firearms where they couldn’t trace the source. In other words they didn’t know how the person they recovered it from got it.
They just don’t know.

But, they did know with certainty, that 6% were stolen, and they knew where from. Presumably they owners had records of serial numbers, proof of ownership. And or they were caught red handed as part of a burglary investigation.
4% were found to have been sold by a licensed owner to an unlicensed. (Strawman)
There was another 8% which were imported illegally I think. Which actually seems very high to me. If I was to make a guess, I would have thought illegally imported would be the lowest percentage. But I’m not a crim, don’t know any crims, so I haven’t got any basis for why I think that, it’s just a hunch.

So you have 4% strawman sourced, 6% stolen, 8% imported illegally. 18% where they categorically know how they were obtained buy the crims.
82% where they don’t. Because there was such a large number of dont knows, they’ve taken the ratio of the ones they do know and applied it to the don’t know sample.

So it’s a very simple mathematical calculation to convert your 4% of the known number, to a percentage of ratio to the remaining 82% you don’t know the source to, which is 22%
This gives you a statistical data to make such a claim.
They larger the sample, the more accurate.
Sorry don’t know if I’ve made it as clear as it is in my head😉
So for sure 4% sounds like a very low number. Because it’s only out of 18% of the sample, but in all mathematical likelihood, 22% have been sourced by Strawmen..

I know it’s not what many of you want to hear. But this is how the police or whoever gathered the data will present it to the pollies.

Originally Posted by Lauries Hut

So you have 4% strawman sourced, 6% stolen, 8% imported illegally. 18% where they categorically know how they were obtained buy the crims.
82% where they don’t. Because there was such a large number of dont knows, they’ve taken the ratio of the ones they do know and applied it to the don’t know sample.

So it’s a very simple mathematical calculation to convert your 4% of the known number, to a percentage of ratio to the remaining 82% you don’t know the source to, which is 22%
This gives you a statistical data to make such a claim.
They larger the sample, the more accurate.
Sorry don’t know if I’ve made it as clear as it is in my head��
So for sure 4% sounds like a very low number. Because it’s only out of 18% of the sample, but in all mathematical likelihood, 22% have been sourced by Strawmen..

I know it’s not what many of you want to hear. But this is how the police or whoever gathered the data will present it to the pollies.

so its "creative accounting" manipulation of the figures to give the desired result......

or in "me speak" if you cant dazzle em with brilliance baffle them with bullshit.

Originally Posted by Lauries Hut

Hell it’s not that hard.

Statistics works in a similar way to polling for an election. They ask a sample of 1000 people: who will you vote for?
You end up with 450 who will vote for National or 45%
390 for labour 39%
110 for the Greens 11%
And 50 who dont know 5%
1000 sample votes, your 5+11+39+45% adds up to 100%
So they’ll tell us from this sample this is how we will vote come Election Day. Where it’s different is the 5% who don’t know, have been left as dont knows.

In the case of the article, (this part I’m going by memory so the numbers will be wrong but the principal is correct)
They had something like 82% of recovered illegal firearms where they couldn’t trace the source. In other words they didn’t know how the person they recovered it from got it.
They just don’t know.

But, they did know with certainty, that 6% were stolen, and they knew where from. Presumably they owners had records of serial numbers, proof of ownership. And or they were caught red handed as part of a burglary investigation.
4% were found to have been sold by a licensed owner to an unlicensed. (Strawman)
There was another 8% which were imported illegally I think. Which actually seems very high to me. If I was to make a guess, I would have thought illegally imported would be the lowest percentage. But I’m not a crim, don’t know any crims, so I haven’t got any basis for why I think that, it’s just a hunch.

So you have 4% strawman sourced, 6% stolen, 8% imported illegally. 18% where they categorically know how they were obtained buy the crims.
82% where they don’t. Because there was such a large number of dont knows, they’ve taken the ratio of the ones they do know and applied it to the don’t know sample.

So it’s a very simple mathematical calculation to convert your 4% of the known number, to a percentage of ratio to the remaining 82% you don’t know the source to, which is 22%
This gives you a statistical data to make such a claim.
They larger the sample, the more accurate.
Sorry don’t know if I’ve made it as clear as it is in my head��
So for sure 4% sounds like a very low number. Because it’s only out of 18% of the sample, but in all mathematical likelihood, 22% have been sourced by Strawmen..

I know it’s not what many of you want to hear. But this is how the police or whoever gathered the data will present it to the pollies.

and TWICE AS MANY have been illegally imported..USING YOUR FIGURES ..yet that bit keeps getting ignored and the low hanging fruit of licence holders is targeted..... now if you going to trouble to illegally import,surely you would import naughtier guns than could be "otherwise sourced" hmm methinks resources would be better spent elsewhere..after all that 44% illegally imported is NEARLY HALF.......
see I can manipulate figures too.

Originally Posted by 7mmwsm

HG Man it would appear to me that you have a close association with the police.
I would suggest your time could be better spent pushing for regulations which ensure the penalties for being in possession of, stealing, and/or recieving items such as firearm is more severe than for having them stolen.
Because at present a burglar can break in to a house or car, steal a firearm, and the firearm owner is classed as the criminal.
Any thief who goes passed a lock, of any description is not an opportunist thief, and is acting with intent.

No association with the Police, why do you say that? Because I use Police data and figures in my posts?

I'm absolutely in favour of increased penalties for illegal possession. It should be an automatic 5 year sentence if you are found in possession of a firearm without a license. I have been harsh on the Police vetting and administration for decades, they are absolutely shit at it and this new firearms regulator is too little, too late.

The police proposals represent to my extended family an utter betrayal of the terrible costs to our fathers and grandfathers who sacrificed so much in order that we who succeed and remain are able to live as free and independent individuals and families. The current proposals are an affront to and betrayal of our traditions so dearly paid for by the blood of our fathers.

The proposals around increasing the fees charged for things? Or have I missed some other proposal?

A lot more to it than just fees. There are privacy and principles and the threat to the sacrosact of ones home and normal lifestyle rights.

Originally Posted by Micky Duck

and TWICE AS MANY have been illegally imported..USING YOUR FIGURES ..yet that bit keeps getting ignored and the low hanging fruit of licence holders is targeted..... now if you going to trouble to illegally import,surely you would import naughtier guns than could be "otherwise sourced" hmm methinks resources would be better spent elsewhere..after all that 44% illegally imported is NEARLY HALF.......
see I can manipulate figures too.

Yep.
My feeling too is that there is no way, nearly half of the guns in the unlicensed/criminal fraternities hands are illegally imported.
We are an island in the middle of nowhere, and a gun would be very difficult for average Joe to get in.
In saying that if your in the importation business, not so hard to hide a few in containers, but I’ve never heard/read of anyone being caught. So I’m not convinced, but doesn’t mean it’s not happening.

As someone said, they’re picking low hanging fruit, and want quick wins to show they’re making a difference.

However if you think about it logically: 21 year old gang prospect who’s got his license, up until the law change could jump on Trademe and buy a cheap semi like an sks or a pump action shotty.
Chop the barrel down and hock it on the black market, for what I would guess as considerable gain. Or if nothing good on TM, here, Gun City. Plenty of options.
It’s very easy to imagine, and I bet quite lucrative.

Like it or not, this is what they’re trying to stop. The Unfortunate consequence is they catch us all in such legislation.

Such extremely widely targeted so-called "legislation" is creating tyranny by stealth and fiscal deprivation. No MP with any respect for New Zealand freedoms and the costs of achieving and saving those could support the direction and police intent of this mess.
Putting my feelings another way; how can I as son of my decorated soldier Dad and grandson of one grandad who developed his waikato farm with 5 turkish bullets still in him, and my other grandad who was gassed twice and then sent home so ill that he was forced to walk off his farm with my nana and two children and all their remaining posessions on a single horse and dray, and me being fully aware of those sacrifices, watch this developing tyranny and stay silent?
I OWE THEM AND KIWIS OWE ALL LIKE THEM AND WE COLLECTIVELY HAVE TO HONOUR WHAT THEY GAVE US AND OUR COUNTRY.

Originally Posted by Lauries Hut

Yep.
My feeling too is that there is no way, nearly half of the guns in the unlicensed/criminal fraternities hands are illegally imported.
We are an island in the middle of nowhere, and a gun would be very difficult for average Joe to get in.
In saying that if your in the importation business, not so hard to hide a few in containers, but I’ve never heard/read of anyone being caught. So I’m not convinced, but doesn’t mean it’s not happening.

As someone said, they’re picking low hanging fruit, and want quick wins to show they’re making a difference.

However if you think about it logically: 21 year old gang prospect who’s got his license, up until the law change could jump on Trademe and buy a cheap semi like an sks or a pump action shotty.
Chop the barrel down and hock it on the black market, for what I would guess as considerable gain. Or if nothing good on TM, here, Gun City. Plenty of options.
It’s very easy to imagine, and I bet quite lucrative.

Like it or not, this is what they’re trying to stop. The Unfortunate consequence is they catch us all in such legislation.

This reasoning is spuruous. Consider the intent to impose scores of millions of dollars costs onto legit firearms users, clubs and businesses and ask yourselves why is all that funding not being directed specifically at the criminal element in addition to money already being spent, instead of investing it into penalising legit kiwi users, clubs and businesse?

Originally Posted by Lauries Hut

Yep.
My feeling too is that there is no way, nearly half of the guns in the unlicensed/criminal fraternities hands are illegally imported.
We are an island in the middle of nowhere, and a gun would be very difficult for average Joe to get in.
In saying that if your in the importation business, not so hard to hide a few in containers, but I’ve never heard/read of anyone being caught. So I’m not convinced, but doesn’t mean it’s not happening.

As someone said, they’re picking low hanging fruit, and want quick wins to show they’re making a difference.

However if you think about it logically: 21 year old gang prospect who’s got his license, up until the law change could jump on Trademe and buy a cheap semi like an sks or a pump action shotty.
Chop the barrel down and hock it on the black market, for what I would guess as considerable gain. Or if nothing good on TM, here, Gun City. Plenty of options.
It’s very easy to imagine, and I bet quite lucrative.

Like it or not, this is what they’re trying to stop. The Unfortunate consequence is they catch us all in such legislation.

No comment about locally grey manufactured or unlawfully manufactured or converted and also no comment about using replica/fake firearms to intimidate... Stats are bs again.

At work we average a container a week so yes a shit load come in everyday. Very very rarely one gets held up in customs for inspection.

When I moved back from overseas I just put all my stuff in work containers. Un-declared. Guys at this end just stashed it till I got back. Did get told off by the procurement team when they found out but hey.

So all you need is a person at each end.

Yes I believe that this is happening. I did see a while ago that a pistol was seized amongst some batteries or something for a forklift if i remember correctly.

They way that people carried on about this you would think that they had found the only pistol imported to NZ illegally since customs started.

Its just logical to accept that the easiest way to get guns into the country illegally, is this way. Why would the crims do it any differently or make it hard for themselves??

Originally Posted by Woody

A lot more to it than just fees. There are privacy and principles and the threat to the sacrosact of ones home and normal lifestyle rights.

Are you talking about the Register? You've mentioned legislation, what legislation?

What privacy and threat to ones home? I really don't know what you are talking about?