Thread: Boycott 'The Petone Gunshop"...

Originally Posted by grunzter

I copied this from a facebook post (without permission)
But sums up Greg O'conners submission very well.

Attachment 50894

How about in paragraph 10?

My final comment on all this is how can a bloke who has built a business out of selling ex military service rifles (the technical term is Main Battle Rifle but I like to call them Baby Killers cos it's more emotional) have an opinion on how nobody should be allowed to buy commercial copies of the current military service rifle? A 303 may seem safe and cuddly cos grandad had one but it's a high powered baby killer with a high capacity magazine (10 shot) that can kill multiple babies at 1000m even if they are hiding behind a tree. The sooner the baby killer rifles are confiscated and replaced with harmless small caliber modern sporting rifles using restricted capacity magazines the better.

I read the submission he made several times and cannot see what the fuss is about. sure he wrote

"Membership of clubs and associations that promoted ‘traditional’ deliberate target shooting has been replaced by growth in organisations that promote competitions in which precision shooting is enhanced with movement, engaging multiple targets, and employing high rates of fire. This is not a reflection on committed and responsible users."

Which seems to be the target of a lot of the comments. But please read it carefully. All it states is that the nature of target shooting has changed from the "traditional" (lie down and poke a hole in a target) to the "precision shooting is enhanced with movement, engaging multiple targets, and employing high rates of fire"." which does describe the evolution of target shooting as it has moved into things like three gun etc. So no deception or misinformation there. Pretty simple statement of the situation.

The whole issue seems to be around the "This is not a reflection on committed and responsible users" comment. This, unfortunately can be taken two ways. The way everyone here seems to be reacting to is that this rapid fire dynamic movement is not a reflection of responsible users but the way I read it, and which I suspect it was supposed to be read is that the dynamic sea change in the activities is not a negative reflection on users but a natural progression that responsible users take. Thus the change itself is not a reflection on committed and responsible users.

I think that at the end of the day he has put his submission forwards and made his opinion known. If you disagree with his opinion then the place to do that would have been by making your own submission. If you did not bother then that s like complaining about the political party in power when you didn't bother to vote. If you don't say something when you have the chance, dont expect to be listened to afterwards......

I do not agree with a lot of his submission, but find it ironic that people are so upset when they did not bother to make a submission themselves.....

Originally Posted by timattalon

I read the submission he made several times and cannot see what the fuss is about. sure he wrote

"Membership of clubs and associations that promoted ‘traditional’ deliberate target shooting has been replaced by growth in organisations that promote competitions in which precision shooting is enhanced with movement, engaging multiple targets, and employing high rates of fire. This is not a reflection on committed and responsible users."

Which seems to be the target of a lot of the comments. But please read it carefully. All it states is that the nature of target shooting has changed from the "traditional" (lie down and poke a hole in a target) to the "precision shooting is enhanced with movement, engaging multiple targets, and employing high rates of fire"." which does describe the evolution of target shooting as it has moved into things like three gun etc. So no deception or misinformation there. Pretty simple statement of the situation.

The whole issue seems to be around the "This is not a reflection on committed and responsible users" comment. This, unfortunately can be taken two ways. The way everyone here seems to be reacting to is that this rapid fire dynamic movement is not a reflection of responsible users but the way I read it, and which I suspect it was supposed to be read is that the dynamic sea change in the activities is not a negative reflection on users but a natural progression that responsible users take. Thus the change itself is not a reflection on committed and responsible users.

I think that at the end of the day he has put his submission forwards and made his opinion known. If you disagree with his opinion then the place to do that would have been by making your own submission. If you did not bother then that s like complaining about the political party in power when you didn't bother to vote. If you don't say something when you have the chance, dont expect to be listened to afterwards......

I do not agree with a lot of his submission, but find it ironic that people are so upset when they did not bother to make a submission themselves.....

I read it the same as you mate.
Only thing I found annoying about the submission was registration of all firearms. Pointless imo.

Sent from my SM-G900F using Tapatalk

The Rural Women in NZ is asupportive submission http://www.parliament.nz/resource/en...0df0bb3caa6a4a

Originally Posted by stug

The Rural Women in NZ is asupportive submission http://www.parliament.nz/resource/en...0df0bb3caa6a4a

Concise and logical submission. Expand the NZP budget and enforce the existing laws. Need to work on their editing though, lol - "4000 firearms ceased by Customs".

Originally Posted by Ryan

Concise and logical submission. Expand the NZP budget and enforce the existing laws. Need to work on their editing though, lol - "4000 firearms ceased by Customs".

If they ended up being destroyed it wouldn't be completely wrong.

Just read three mentioned above. All well thought out and articulate. To me the common thread is police are under resourced to handle this even now.
Like the submissions or not it was their right to make them. They got off their arses and did something.
You have to engage in a process like this imo to have the right to comment on the actions of someone who does.
"All it takes for evil to flourish is for good men to do nothing"
I made a submission probably not as articulate as these, but I suspect far too many "good men " did not.

from stuff

the-gun-problem-too-many-of-the-wrong-type-in-the-wrong-hands-police-union-says

Originally Posted by mikee

from stuff

the-gun-problem-too-many-of-the-wrong-type-in-the-wrong-hands-police-union-says

I've made some comments on that article, awaiting moderation (censorship to match the desired narrative?).

"Association president Greg O'Connor​ said no-one knew how many weapons were in the hands of criminals."

"Too many guns of the wrong type are in the wrong hands, the Police Association says."


Mmm, kay. So they don't know how many illegal firearms are out there but there are too many of the "wrong type"? I'd have thought any illegal firearm would be the wrong type.

The below is taken from Petone Gun Shop site under the sale Banner of a Saiga "A" Cat semi Auto Sporting Rifle
What I am stuck with is
Is the below some sort of disclaimer?
Public Service Announcement?
In complete contrast to his submission.

SAIGA sporting firearms are manufactured in Russia by the firm 'KALASHNIKOV CONCERN' - a merger between Izhmash and Izhmekh. The company also builds Kalashnikov rifles for the Russian military and export. Many years ago Mikhail Kalashnikov worked at the factory and SAIGA rifles retain a number of the rugged features of the original AK-47 assault rifle.

A word concerning the possible future of 'A' cat semi-automatic rifles.
* The original intent of the 1992 Arms Amendment Bill was to severely restrict possession of semi- automatic rifles that had a high rate of fire and were attractive to particular people. Similar laws were enacted in a number of countries at around the same time.
* Arms laws are generally 'toughened up' as a result of either (a) - a number of illegal shooting incidents, or (b) - a Politician or high ranking Police Officer believing certain firearms 'should not be available to the public' Such situations could occur anywhere in the world - but still effect our laws.
* The current international situation is now focusing world attention on the availability of firearms patterned after military weapons and/or other firearms capable of a high rate of fire.
* It follows that there could be changes to our laws and possession of firearms such as the SAIGA could be further restricted.
* For many years the possession of particular firearms by New Zealand's Responsible Firearms Community has depended on the actions of others, and right now the possession of semi-automatic rifles such as these 'A Cat Semi-auto Sporting Rifles' is in the hands of various international terrorist groups.
* The Responsible NZ Firearms Community should consider how to deal with this situation BEFORE an incident triggers law changes.

And he is the one contributing to the change of that law, and still making money out of it, the bastard!

Hi all i have just moved to auckland from perth wa, our gun laws are crap i have 6 rifles and had to apply for each of them, be carefull of the gun shops selling the second hand rifles as once it happens they offer you nothing as they would rather sell a new set up and the price of the second hand one they do sell is marked up just below the new rifles on the shelf . Will kill the second hand market.

Originally Posted by Stoog1974

Hi all i have just moved to auckland from perth wa, our gun laws are crap i have 6 rifles and had to apply for each of them, be carefull of the gun shops selling the second hand rifles as once it happens they offer you nothing as they would rather sell a new set up and the price of the second hand one they do sell is marked up just below the new rifles on the shelf . Will kill the second hand market.

Hi welcome to the forum

Could you explain that a bit more please? - I don't understand your drift