Thread: Boycott 'The Petone Gunshop"...

Ok, to add fuel to the fire, roll your eyes when you read Greg O'conners submission... police association president
http://www.parliament.nz/resource/en...8d29e62416356b

But there are also a few good submissions as well...

...It seems a lot easier to put a submission in now after its closed, than when it was open???

From his submission it appears there's a lot wrong with NZP's reporting. Perhaps they might want to look at that first before they start looking for more stuff to report on. Seeing the words "Australia", "UK" and "...impose, at least, these same restrictions" brings me out in a rash.

Also note the repeated mention of the pistol-gripped shotgun. Several of the examples he's listed in Appendix 1 didn't actually involve any firearms? There's a huge difference between "believed to be in possession of a firearm" and actually being in possession of a firearm. You know, the old "possession being 9/10ths..." adage. Can't really be a firearm incident without a firearm, can it?

That, combined with several instances of airguns being found suggests to me that he's drawing a long bow on this "problem". No idea what a "magazine clip" is.

Originally Posted by Ryan

No idea what a "magazine clip" is.

It's like a Clipazine, but scarier.

Originally Posted by grunzter

Ok, to add fuel to the fire, roll your eyes when you read Greg O'conners submission... police association president
http://www.parliament.nz/resource/en...8d29e62416356b

But there are also a few good submissions as well...

...It seems a lot easier to put a submission in now after its closed, than when it was open???

Well reading that lot of drivel from Greg was not in the least bit informative.

Originally Posted by Rushy

Well reading that lot of drivel from Greg was not in the least bit informative.

I read Joe Green's submission instead, much more sensible and worthwhile.

Originally Posted by Rushy

Well reading that lot of drivel from Greg was not in the least bit informative.

I got plenty out of that Rushy. Basically he said his lads were too busy writing death reports at the bottom of the cliff. As a result of this he would like to remove everyone's legs to stop anyone getting to the top of the cliff. Unfortunately he completely missed the opportunity to just send a couple of his lads up the hill to turn the few walking to the cliff away.

Basically his lads need to get back to basic policing and stop the rot at a much earlier stage. This needs the backing of the Police hierarchy, courts, parliament and the rest of the good people of this country.

Originally Posted by gadgetman

I got plenty out of that Rushy. Basically he said his lads were too busy writing death reports at the bottom of the cliff. As a result of this he would like to remove everyone's legs to stop anyone getting to the top of the cliff. Unfortunately he completely missed the opportunity to just send a couple of his lads up the hill to turn the few walking to the cliff away.

Basically his lads need to get back to basic policing and stop the rot at a much earlier stage. This needs the backing of the Police hierarchy, courts, parliament and the rest of the good people of this country.

O'Conner is a union official. He has no more say over police operations than the Maritime Union do over the bosses at Ports of Auckland or Tauranga.

Originally Posted by systolic

O'Conner is a union official. He has no more say over police operations than the Maritime Union do over the bosses at Ports of Auckland or Tauranga.

Yes, and the inference is that they are members of the Police force rather than a knitting circle.

Originally Posted by gadgetman

Yes, and the inference is that they are members of the Police force rather than a knitting circle.

Surely they would Mike Bush's lads then?

Most union presidents or representatives I've dealt with over the years want their members to do less work, not more.

Why would the police officer's union be any different?

Originally Posted by systolic

Surely they would Mike Bush's lads then?

Most union presidents or representatives I've dealt with over the years want their members to do less work, not more.

Why would the police officer's union be any different?

Quite right there too. But I think the guts of the submission is to improve his members safety which is fair enough.