Thread: Kiwis support stricter controls on gun owners

Originally Posted by Chilli_Dog

\ How many non-semi firearms out there hold more than 11 rounds?

The odd tube mag lever or pump action I guess. Changing the wording to 'detachable magazines' would leave out tube mag guns though if that was an issue.

Originally Posted by ebf

An end to the MSSA debacle. Only way I can see this ever working is to make all semis a special category. So go gotta join a club to own one ? What is the big deal ?

Start flaming boys

I'm presuming that you're suggesting all semi-automatic longarms fall under "E" category classification? If so, I think the horse has long since bolted in that regard with the amount of unregistered semiautomatics already in circulation. With police's resources already stretched, I cannot see how the registration of all of these firearms could be conducted.

As for belonging to a club as being a requirement to own a semi... Why? I can't see how it would make anyone safer? A farmer who rides around with his 10/22 probably doesn't have the time or the inclination to belong to a club just so he can have a .22 rifle which happens to be semiautomatic.

What is wrong with the current system?

H

Originally Posted by ebf

Does anyone want to give me an AR so that I can be the lone AR owner in NZ who wants tougher firearm laws ? Pretty please

Tougher penalties for crims using firearms.
Tougher penalties for poachers / illegal hunters.
Improved security requirements for storage - ffs put the thing in a safe !
Training tailored to the end use - target identification for hunters...
Consistency in terms of interpretation of the "law" by AOs in different districts.
An end to the MSSA debacle. Only way I can see this ever working is to make all semis a special category. So go gotta join a club to own one ? What is the big deal ?

Start flaming boys

I agree with everything except the training, having lived in a country where voluntary training for hunting is looking like becoming compulsory and having taken clients out from country's where it is compulsory,I can assure you it is pointless , buck fever cannot be trained for, idiots are idiots, and some of the NZ attitude to hunting does not help, quote " I don,t like blaze orange as it looks like the brown of a deer " a customer in the shop said to me.

ebf, thats tougher at the right end, the rest I can live with!

Oh boy oh boy......united we stand divided we fall...as you were


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Until someone can explain to me (convincingly and with facts) how making/enforcing yet more laws on law abiding firearms owners/user who are arguably the most law abiding of citizens, (as all of us have been vetted and licensed by the govt representatives ), in the country will make us all safer I prefer to stick with current status quo.

Actually I believe if you are fit an proper to have a license that should be it, there are not "degrees of fit an properness"
Not withstanding handguns only to be used on an approved club range should the above ever eventuate

The cynic in me says we firearms user groups will all line up to throw each other under the Govt Bus in the vage hope we might be allowed a reprieve for our own interest/hobby

i'd like to see the lower end of security improved. Giving me a license with a bike lock coach screwed into a stud is bullshit. Minimum of a an approved gun safe so the tin foil office folder type jobs don't cut it. At the end of the day i think the main issue is the wrong people having guns so first step is trying to prevent them stealing them. After that the other ways, dishonest people legally buying and supplying to crims etc need to be addressed. All firearms purchases are recorded in store, if they were in a central database someone could see a person had bought dozens and dozens of firearms so questions could/should be asked. The harder we make it the more they cost on the black market and therefore will cut half the useless crims out of the game and so on. Like it or not, these toys we have can change someones life for ever, either ending it or ending the life of a loved one. We do need to, and i'm sure everyone does appreciate that the assholes are ruining it for us and accept we will have to jump through a few more hoops to continue to enjoy them like we do.
I'm happy with the license proceedure, i'm not sure how they will predict when/if someone will flip mentally so that's just what it is. we are dynamic creatures, each day has different challenges.

Originally Posted by smidey

i'd like to see the lower end of security improved. Giving me a license with a bike lock coach screwed into a stud is bullshit. Minimum of a an approved gun safe so the tin foil office folder type jobs don't cut it. At the end of the day i think the main issue is the wrong people having guns so first step is trying to prevent them stealing them. After that the other ways, dishonest people legally buying and supplying to crims etc need to be addressed. All firearms purchases are recorded in store, if they were in a central database someone could see a person had bought dozens and dozens of firearms so questions could/should be asked. The harder we make it the more they cost on the black market and therefore will cut half the useless crims out of the game and so on. Like it or not, these toys we have can change someones life for ever, either ending it or ending the life of a loved one. We do need to, and i'm sure everyone does appreciate that the assholes are ruining it for us and accept we will have to jump through a few more hoops to continue to enjoy them like we do.
I'm happy with the license proceedure, i'm not sure how they will predict when/if someone will flip mentally so that's just what it is. we are dynamic creatures, each day has different challenges.

Sounds a bit like a car.....truck .....bus "these toys can change someone's life..."


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Yeah and we all hear how tough they are getting on testing and enforcement. They have a few more safety features to

Sent from my workbench

I don't mind the lower level of security standard as long as its for occasional rather than regular use.

For example, there is a basic gun rack bolted to the wall inside a cupboard at relatives place so that when I or other family members are there visiting for a night or two and have guns with us, we can lock them up. They don't own any themselves and firearms are never stored there long term, to me its a quite acceptable standard for that use. I've even used a cable lock through the action and around a beam when staying at a mates bach, some security is better than none.

I wouldn't personally be happy with that level of security for regular primary storage, but for the intended use its fine.

Having discussed security with an arms officer in the past (probably when they were checking my safe), he thought the same thing - the lower end of permitted security is intended for occasional rather than regular use and is appropriate for that purpose, but he didn't like the idea of people using it for long-term storage.

I guess the problem they have in enforcing security requirements on all licence holders is you have to draw the line somewhere - if the security required is too expensive/onerous then some people who would otherwise have a licence (and be vetted etc) might not bother. Thinking about the sort of people who don't own a gun, but borrow one from a mate to go duckshooting for a weekend.

Originally Posted by GravelBen

Thinking about the sort of people who don't own a gun, but borrow one from a mate to go duckshooting for a weekend.

You would hope those guys had both kinds of license, or the loaner could be in a world of trouble

Originally Posted by Tussock

Started that way holding my Baikal next to the old man who had his pointer when I was 12. Its how we used to bring people to the sport.

That is an interesting point in itself that a lot of people here may not have picked up on. I started in a similar way but didnt really do any shooting after leaving school and have only got my license this year. That said I have had quite a bit of time handling a firearm and could have walked into the MSC course and passed it without reading the book as my Dad had drummed it all into me many years ago. What hit me in that course though was that there were probably half a dozen people out of 30 odd there that had never even touched a firearm before and there is a pretty big difference between being told you have to do this and that all the time and actually doing it, like pointing a firearm in a safe direction all the time etc. No idea how to fix this though.

Getting OT now but at age 12 I was handed the farm Gecado single shot and a packet of 50 ICI hollow points and sent out. When I returned I was asked how many rabbits for how many shots. I was chasticed if the ratio wasn't 1:1. That was back in the "good Ole days" when there were no accidents ha ha, or either spreading of news was a lot slower and less efficient.

Extract from the latest COLFO Newsletter -

"A recent poll commissioned by TVNZ indicated that 83% of New Zealanders favour tougher gun laws. Of course they did not specify what “Tougher gun laws” actually mean and we doubt whether many of those questioned know either let alone what laws apply to licensed firearm owners now.

However what this poll shows is that the New Zealand public at large has been persuaded by sensational and often biased media reporting that our firearms laws are lax. Invariably the media publish statements made by those opposed to firearm ownership but steadfastly refuse to publish counter arguments.

What we all need to do is counter this adverse perception at every opportunity. Explain that our current laws are effective and law abiding firearm owners are not the problem; that invariably gun crimes are committed by unlicensed individuals who show no regard for any laws; that tougher gun laws will most certainly divert police resources away from combating real criminal activity and have them focusing new restrictions on law abiding people.

This is how YOU can get the message out: talk to your MP and local politicians; write to newspapers challenging stories that call for “tougher gun laws”; and most important of all make submissions concerning any new changes to the Arms Act when you’re called upon to do so."

Originally Posted by zimmer

Extract from the latest COLFO Newsletter -

"A recent poll commissioned by TVNZ indicated that 83% of New Zealanders favour tougher gun laws. Of course they did not specify what “Tougher gun laws” actually mean and we doubt whether many of those questioned know either let alone what laws apply to licensed firearm owners now.

However what this poll shows is that the New Zealand public at large has been persuaded by sensational and often biased media reporting that our firearms laws are lax. Invariably the media publish statements made by those opposed to firearm ownership but steadfastly refuse to publish counter arguments.

What we all need to do is counter this adverse perception at every opportunity. Explain that our current laws are effective and law abiding firearm owners are not the problem; that invariably gun crimes are committed by unlicensed individuals who show no regard for any laws; that tougher gun laws will most certainly divert police resources away from combating real criminal activity and have them focusing new restrictions on law abiding people.

This is how YOU can get the message out: talk to your MP and local politicians; write to newspapers challenging stories that call for “tougher gun laws”; and most important of all make submissions concerning any new changes to the Arms Act when you’re called upon to do so."

I'm thinking the odd complaint to the broadcasting standards authority about unbalanced/biased reporting could be in order too.