Thread: AR15 pending rule changes?

Originally Posted by Savage1

...

The car argument hardly works as they aren't used or designed to commit mass killings, personally I couldn't care less if they restricted all civilian vehicles to 110km/h, they do it with trucks at 90 and buses at 100 in Europe. There is no "need" to go faster and "wanting" to isn't a good enough reason as it endangers others including the people who have to pick up your pieces lying on the road.

Whoa, there!! Since when are sporting rifles designed to commit mass killings? If you don't like ARs, then fair enough, don't buy one. But don't buy into the hyperbole of the ignorant who promote gun hysteria either.

At the end of the day all guns are dangerous, that is why we're all responsible adults who take great care with firearms.

ETA. Apologies if this sounds a bit grumpy, am at home today with toothache, so normal thought filters aren't working at their best.

Originally Posted by scaggly

Whoa, there!! Since when are sporting rifles designed to commit mass killings? If you don't like ARs, then fair enough, don't buy one. But don't buy into the hyperbole of the ignorant who promote gun hysteria either.

At the end of the day all guns are dangerous, that is why we're all responsible adults who take great care with firearms.

Ohh that's about the most sensible , common sense reply i have seen on this topic..

Originally Posted by scaggly

Whoa, there!! Since when are sporting rifles designed to commit mass killings? If you don't like ARs, then fair enough, don't buy one. But don't buy into the hyperbole of the ignorant who promote gun hysteria either.

At the end of the day all guns are dangerous, that is why we're all responsible adults who take great care with firearms.

ETA. Apologies if this sounds a bit grumpy, am at home today with toothache, so normal thought filters aren't working at their best.

Yeah sorry I didn't mean that in the way it was taken, I mean't in the way that an AR is based on the M16 which was designed for killing people. As for used I am talking about how mass killings have been performed using guns but am un aware of any that have used a car.

I don't hate ARs at all, I own one myself!

Back to the original question, if you have an AR or AK derivative then I would be getting prepared to get an E endorsement, I have been.

Originally Posted by Savage1

Yeah sorry I didn't mean that in the way it was taken, I mean't in the way that an AR is based on the M16 which was designed for killing people. As for used I am talking about how mass killings have been performed using guns but am un aware of any that have used a car.

I don't hate ARs at all, I own one myself!

Back to the original question, if you have an AR or AK derivative then I would be getting prepared to get an E endorsement, I have been.

Most bolt actions are based on the 98 Mauser originally, and that killed plenty of people. It's all about what you use it for now though that counts.

Yes but bolt actions don't attract the kinds of nutters that go and shoot up schools. MSSA do. Like I said, if you want that type of rifle then get the endorsenment, they aren't saying you can't have one and I think that most people would agree that the current A cat FAL is a little easy to get.

Originally Posted by Savage1

Yes but bolt actions don't attract the kinds of nutters that go and shoot up schools. MSSA do. Like I said, if you want that type of rifle then get the endorsenment, they aren't saying you can't have one and I think that most people would agree that the current A cat FAL is a little easy to get.

Depends on intended use. Even if you have an E-Cat licence, if you tell the AO you want one for hunting he will most likely tell you to go get a hand in first - thats almost as effective as saying you cant have one.

Originally Posted by Savage1

Yes but bolt actions don't attract the kinds of nutters that go and shoot up schools. MSSA do. Like I said, if you want that type of rifle then get the endorsenment, they aren't saying you can't have one and I think that most people would agree that the current A cat FAL is a little easy to get.

I spewed in my mouth when i read this. I always do when i see utter dribble like the above post.

Originally Posted by Savage1

Yes but bolt actions don't attract the kinds of nutters that go and shoot up schools. MSSA do. Like I said, if you want that type of rifle then get the endorsenment, they aren't saying you can't have one and I think that most people would agree that the current A cat FAL is a little easy to get.

where did you study psycoligy again?
peer reviewed examples to back up your claims please, to make them relevant NZ examples only please.
just to show us how the currant system is failing

Originally Posted by Bill999

where did you study psycoligy again?
peer reviewed examples to back up your claims please, to make them relevant NZ examples only please.
just to show us how the currant system is failing

I haven't studied psychology, I never said I did or professed to be an expert in the subject.

What kind of rifle were Mollenar and Gray using? I'm not aware of any NZ peer reviewed studies, there wouldn't be enough data.Should I venture overseas to use examples from them? Just look at what types of weapons are used in the shootings, MSSAs and pistols.

The current system wasn't failing but then the Police went a bit far with the interpretation and then the judge favoured to far back in my opinion. Is it wrong to be pro active with law changes to reflect how society is changing or just better to react?

Originally Posted by Savage1

I haven't studied psychology, I never said I did or professed to be an expert in the subject.

What kind of rifle were Mollenar and Gray using? I'm not aware of any NZ peer reviewed studies, there wouldn't be enough data.Should I venture overseas to use examples from them? Just look at what types of weapons are used in the shootings, MSSAs and pistols.

The current system wasn't failing but then the Police went a bit far with the interpretation and then the judge favoured to far back in my opinion. Is it wrong to be pro active with law changes to reflect how society is changing or just better to react?

Molenaar was using illegal rifles because the police fucked up, additional restrictions would have made no difference. He was also hardly a mass killer, pretty sure some guy killed more people with a samurai sword. Samurai swords attract the wrong sort of person, ban them! Grey isn't relevant because it was before the current system, so how can it show a failure of the current system?

Making pistol grips on a rifle E cat again is simply a giant waste of time and money for legal, responsible gun owners as it's going to cost us either to change what was a legal rifle to make it compliant, or $200 for the endorsement plus safe costs plus the hassle of the interviews etc. And it is 100% banning based on cosmetics not any function, it is stupid as hell and will prevent nothing.

IIRC Charles Whitman used a bolt-action Remington to shoot a bunch of university students in Austin, TX? Lee Harvey Oswald (allegedly) on JFK?

Originally Posted by Savage1

Yes but bolt actions don't attract the kinds of nutters that go and shoot up schools. MSSA do. Like I said, if you want that type of rifle then get the endorsenment, they aren't saying you can't have one and I think that most people would agree that the current A cat FAL is a little easy to get.