Thread: Exactly how illegal is it to shoot C-Cat guns?

Originally Posted by Moa Hunter

'
Well Preacher you need to be converted not us. 'Man Speak' is statistically 90% humour mixed with 10% facts. Lets all keep it at that ratio and avoid the 'lesbian speak'

That is just sooooo abusive speech. It should be shut down, suppressed, outlawed. Help! I'm melting!!! [snowflake metamorphoses into snowdrop]

Originally Posted by TheWuce

Open question: do the DOC boys culling from helicopters use full autos? Why or why not?

No they don't, as you now know its not allowed for under legislation.

I found a full auto legal loophole!!! Airsoft!

@TheWuce, like your avatar.

Ah ok, life experience via YouTube

3-5 round bursts is how we were taught. Amazing how many rounds down range fairly accurately if using that method. In theory firing any more than that in a string is pointless anyhow as it becomes "spray and pray". However in a CQB situation I would personally rather have a shit load of lead in the opponent than in myself. But this isn't the forum for those discussions I think.

As for the OP, fair play it has caused banter. However there are no shades of legality. It is either one or the other. On another note when you are reloading drums/belts etc it gets pretty fucken boring fast.

Originally Posted by Preacher

As for the OP, fair play it has caused banter. However there are no shades of legality. It is either one or the other. On another note when you are reloading drums/belts etc it gets pretty fucken boring fast.

I've never seen so many shades of legality in NZ law unfortunately. I've also never ever seen a bored person load a belt bored, except in rear echelon or just kicking the shit. Loading a belt in my experience was a dire necessity and was not accounted for, as in an unexpected fire fight.

I have fired full auto for the government and I could hit a man sized target at 100m several times in a short burst, but I was probably the only one who could hit it with more than the first shot. But then, my outfit were hardly combat hardened. They taught us the first response to anything was a full mag on full auto. I privately decided I would have no use for full auto for anything other than such a response, or what is called suppressing fire, or exploratory fire. But then for house clearing and suchlike, I would want a PPSH. And grenades. Or better yet, a full and accommodating peace agreement.

Originally Posted by Carlsen Highway

I have fired full auto for the government and I could hit a man sized target at 100m several times in a short burst, but I was probably the only one who could hit it with more than the first shot. But then, my outfit were hardly combat hardened. They taught us the first response to anything was a full mag on full auto. I privately decided I would have no use for full auto for anything other than such a response, or what is called suppressing fire, or exploratory fire. But then for house clearing and suchlike, I would want a PPSH. And grenades. Or better yet, a full and accommodating peace agreement.

No argument from me Carlsen Highway.

Originally Posted by outlander

I've never seen so many shades of legality in NZ law unfortunately. I've also never ever seen a bored person load a belt bored, except in rear echelon or just kicking the shit. Loading a belt in my experience was a dire necessity and was not accounted for, as in an unexpected fire fight.

My point was more about it being illegal to own and or operate a firearm that requires such. It is simply illegal, there is no kind of legal situation whereby you can fire a fully auto weapon as a civilian.
The loading comment was more around training although multiple jams due to someone not really caring is pretty shit

Fcuk me ! This thread should be quoted as an example for "making friends and influencing people"

I'm just an greying simple hunter & target shooter, so will toddle off to bed now