Welcome guest, is this your first visit? Create Account now to join.
  • Login:

Welcome to the NZ Hunting and Shooting Forums.

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed.

Night Vision NZ DPT


User Tag List

+ Reply to Thread
Page 6 of 17 FirstFirst 1234567891011121314151617 LastLast
Results 76 to 90 of 262
Like Tree452Likes

Thread: Call to Arms

Hybrid View

  1. #1
    Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Location
    N/A
    Posts
    7,631
    Richard Prosser MP NZ
    Spokesperson for Outdoor Recreation
    20 APRIL 2017

    POLICE SECRETARY OUT OF LINE OVER HUNTING RIFLE COMMENTS

    Police Association president Chris Cahill should stick to police union-related matters, and not interfere in the choice of legal firearms law-abiding licence holders use in the safe enjoyment of their sport, says New Zealand First Outdoor Recreation Spokesperson Richard Prosser

    “Mr Cahill was on Radio NZ this morning repeating his questioning of the ‘need’ for-semi automatic hunting rifles and shotguns by hunters and duck shooters.

    “He claims firearms which resemble military weapons and other semi-automatics pose a danger to the public.

    The fact is police were unable to provide the recent Law and Order Select Committee inquiry into illegal possession of firearms with any figures to back up this claim – and that’s because they don’t pose any such danger.

    “Sawn-off shotguns and cut-down .22s are the weapons of choice for criminals, not MSSAs that don’t even appear in the crime stats.

    “Mr Cahill’s desire to further restrict and penalise law-abiding hunters and shooters will have no effect whatsoever on the criminals who are the problem.

    “Frankly it’s none of his business what type of legal firearm people choose to use; he needs to focus on catching criminals and keep his nose out of law-abiding people’s business,” says Mr Prosser.

    ENDS

  2. #2
    Member Tommy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2014
    Location
    W-BOP
    Posts
    6,576
    Cahill is a lying sack of shit. He needs to fuck off back where he came from.
    JasonW likes this.
    Identify your target beyond all doubt

  3. #3
    Member Chur Bay's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2016
    Location
    Cambridge
    Posts
    1,693
    I couldnt believe the shit Cahill was spouting on RNZ today.
    What a cock smoker.
    He's either dumb as shit or an out and out liar.
    Its not easy to turn semi autos into full auto
    They are not more high powered than other firearms
    They are useful in wide range of hunting applications.

  4. #4
    270 King of the Calibres oraki's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2015
    Location
    CSI Flatlander
    Posts
    2,743
    Burn me at the stake if ya like, but some comments I've seen only confirm to Joe Public what Mr Cahill wants them to see.
    Sure get passionate about it, but keep your emotions and comments civil. This is a public forum, and to an outsider we appear to be a pack of Neanderthal beasts beating our chests, waving threats etc around. Calling him names and saying how you're not going to abide by the proposals that are out on the table, makes us look like vigilantes.
    Voice your concerns, with facts, but keep emotion and name calling out of it.
    I'm concerned what is being proposed, and all the untruths, and incorrect facts being spouted to the public, but we're a minority in the grand scheme of things. There's 240,000 odd licence holders and only a proportion of them know anything about this. Theres probably 2.5-3 million others that don't give a toss. They're easily swayed by the police word, because they're the law. Little Ol granny's etc don't want swearing,cussing, name calling beasts in charge of 'extremely high powered weapons of destruction'
    This is what we're fighting against.
    Yes I have semi autos in my safe, and dammed if I want to give them up, but in the end majority normally rule. Next will be divide and conquer.
    I think all we can do is keep proving we are worthy off possession, and pointing out, in a civil manner how some facts and figures aren't quite as accurate as the leaders are portraying.

  5. #5
    Member clickbang's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2015
    Location
    South
    Posts
    394
    Quote Originally Posted by oraki View Post
    Burn me at the stake if ya like, but some comments I've seen only confirm to Joe Public what Mr Cahill wants them to see.
    Sure get passionate about it, but keep your emotions and comments civil. This is a public forum, and to an outsider we appear to be a pack of Neanderthal beasts beating our chests, waving threats etc around. Calling him names and saying how you're not going to abide by the proposals that are out on the table, makes us look like vigilantes.
    Voice your concerns, with facts, but keep emotion and name calling out of it.
    I'm concerned what is being proposed, and all the untruths, and incorrect facts being spouted to the public, but we're a minority in the grand scheme of things. There's 240,000 odd licence holders and only a proportion of them know anything about this. Theres probably 2.5-3 million others that don't give a toss. They're easily swayed by the police word, because they're the law. Little Ol granny's etc don't want swearing,cussing, name calling beasts in charge of 'extremely high powered weapons of destruction'
    This is what we're fighting against.
    Yes I have semi autos in my safe, and dammed if I want to give them up, but in the end majority normally rule. Next will be divide and conquer.
    I think all we can do is keep proving we are worthy off possession, and pointing out, in a civil manner how some facts and figures aren't quite as accurate as the leaders are portraying.
    Bang on. As frustrating as it is watching/listening to blatant lies.It drives us wild but the moment you start making silly threats, name calling and and swearing you do nothing for your/our credibility.


    Sent from my SM-A510Y using Tapatalk

  6. #6
    Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Location
    Middle Earth
    Posts
    4,501
    Can he be sued for misleading the public?
    veitnamcam likes this.

  7. #7
    Member dogmatix's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    Northern Gaul (Pukekohe)
    Posts
    6,208
    Yes, we do need to keep it civil and focus on the facts and message, not the messenger.
    I'm no lawyer, but Cahill is not directly slandering as to cause a direct financial loss by drop in income earnings or directly harm a persons or groups reputation, so no legal action would work.
    Nor is he a public servant anymore, he is employed by the union, so not subject to any State sector legislation.
    Welcome to Sako club.

  8. #8
    Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Location
    North Shore Auck
    Posts
    664
    Quote Originally Posted by dogmatix View Post
    Yes, we do need to keep it civil and focus on the facts and message, not the messenger.
    I'm no lawyer, but Cahill is not directly slandering as to cause a direct financial loss by drop in income earnings or directly harm a persons or groups reputation, so no legal action would work.
    Nor is he a public servant anymore, he is employed by the union, so not subject to any State sector legislation.
    That is a maybe , it all depends on who negotiates his pay if it is the PSA then he falls under the Public service .

  9. #9
    270 King of the Calibres oraki's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2015
    Location
    CSI Flatlander
    Posts
    2,743
    Another thing.... Sensation sells stories. We've seen it over and over. Write a true and factual blurb, or film the whole story, it then goes to the editing room, and the published story bears no resemblance to the original.


    They try and hit you with a sledge hammer, create an uproar, then offer something not quite as bad as originally proposed. Compromise they'll call it,we'll let you keep this, but give us this

  10. #10
    Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Location
    N/A
    Posts
    7,631
    Let's continue discussing the subject at hand in an objective and non-emotional manner.

    Personally, I am pleased to see that this has finally brought to light just how devious these people (the Police Association and the upper echelons of the NZP) are in their approach to address "firearm crime". If it was actual crime they were talking about, they would not be making secret submissions.

    They would be very public about how they were going to do things - you know - to "send a message" to criminals. Like they do at press conferences when a uniformed panel sits in front of a Police banner in front of multiple cameras after a drug bust (like on Police 10/7).

    Drugs for example, are a far more serious problem than firearms in this country. The evidence is in the media coverage afforded to the number of:

    * Lab / grow operations bust
    * People arrested for drug related offences
    * Properties that have meth contamination

    Reduce drug offending and the criminal entity that controls their supply and maybe the number of illegal firearms in circulation will diminish? Too difficult? Easier to target and arrest the users arrested and increase their likelihood for dependence on the state (i.e. prison, rehabilitation programs, being a general social benefit sponge).

    The allusion that Customs purportedly have a lid on imports coming into the country is a joke - if that was the case - why does there continue to be such a significant influx of drugs and / or precursors into this country? Does it not stand to reason that firearms and / or their components can similarly be imported? Yet these "recommendations" by the select committee do nothing except pay lip service to addressing the (perceived) problem and only seek to further restrict the law abiding, quite non-criminal, vetted licensed firearm owners.

    The absolute irony of the situation is that people will continue to use / misuse drugs, as they have done for millennia regardless of penalty.
    Last edited by Ryan; 20-04-2017 at 08:13 PM.

  11. #11
    Member Sasquatch's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2014
    Location
    The Forest
    Posts
    3,036
    The part that gets me from what Mr. Cahill has said was this: “He claims firearms which resemble military weapons and other semi-automatics pose a danger to the public." Little does he know that pretty much ALL firearms resemble military weapons one way or another. Where do you think your favorite hunting rifle originates from?

    This comment annoys me because there seems to be a sector divided between firearm owners (fudds) about anything that resembles a black rifle. Not naming names but there are a few on this forum who certainly don't live in apathy about it and make it very clear they don't appreciate a certain type of semi-auto. You can't tell me you're that naive that your favorite Sako 85 in the whole wide world doesn't resemble a military weapon.

    I could use the same analogy on cars: fast cars, slow cars, electric cars, red cars, blue cars, ones with spoilers & wheels - you get the idea?

    I care about your rights & right to own your firearm of choice just as you should do for mine.
    veitnamcam, mikee, Banana and 4 others like this.

  12. #12
    Almost literate. veitnamcam's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    Nelson
    Posts
    25,071
    Quote Originally Posted by Sasquatch View Post
    The part that gets me from what Mr. Cahill has said was this: “He claims firearms which resemble military weapons and other semi-automatics pose a danger to the public." Little does he know that pretty much ALL firearms resemble military weapons one way or another. Where do you think your favorite hunting rifle originates from?

    This comment annoys me because there seems to be a sector divided between firearm owners (fudds) about anything that resembles a black rifle. Not naming names but there are a few on this forum who certainly don't live in apathy about it and make it very clear they don't appreciate a certain type of semi-auto. You can't tell me you're that naive that your favorite Sako 85 in the whole wide world doesn't resemble a military weapon.

    I could use the same analogy on cars: fast cars, slow cars, electric cars, red cars, blue cars, ones with spoilers & wheels - you get the idea?

    I care about your rights & right to own your firearm of choice just as you should do for mine.
    I cant say I have noticed any anti black gun sentiment on this forum? plenty of reference to it but I dont recall seeing any?
    Im not saying that there are no anti black gun firearm owners there are plenty it is just that most if not all that participate on here even if they dont personally like or own one support your right to have one and use it.I for one am the second.
    mikee, Sasquatch, Steve123 and 1 others like this.
    "Hunting and fishing" fucking over licenced firearms owners since ages ago.

    308Win One chambering to rule them all.

  13. #13
    Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Location
    N/A
    Posts
    7,631
    Quote Originally Posted by veitnamcam View Post
    I cant say I have noticed any anti black gun sentiment on this forum? plenty of reference to it but I dont recall seeing any?
    Im not saying that there are no anti black gun firearm owners there are plenty it is just that most if not all that participate on here even if they dont personally like or own one support your right to have one and use it.I for one am the second.
    Oh it exists on this forum and I can certainly reference it if required, however doing so would be selfish and counterproductive as it only serves to achieve the PA's goal which appears to be "divide and conquer" (referring to Cahill's supposed campfire chat with hunters claiming that they don't semi-autos).

    We must not fall into that trap - we need to remember that this is about all licensed firearm owners.

  14. #14
    Member Beavis's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    Taupo
    Posts
    4,951
    Quote Originally Posted by veitnamcam View Post
    I cant say I have noticed any anti black gun sentiment on this forum? plenty of reference to it but I dont recall seeing any?
    Im not saying that there are no anti black gun firearm owners there are plenty it is just that most if not all that participate on here even if they dont personally like or own one support your right to have one and use it.I for one am the second.
    I have witnessed it from time to time, but I can't site any specific examples off the top of my head, mainly because I don't get hung up on other peoples ignorance or troll attempts. By far and large this is an inclusive board that paralells attitudes displayed on social media. Cahills comments provoked outrage among hunters and shooters on facebook yesterday. To be fair the select committee report has shaken the fence pretty hard. Regular Joe A cat hunters and shooters can see that the recommendations would have a direct effect on them, and they are not happy. This isn't just a pissing contest between MSSA owners and police HQ, like we have experianced being on the thin end of the wedge. Everybody is on board and it is great to see.
    dogmatix and veitnamcam like this.

  15. #15
    Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2013
    Location
    Napier
    Posts
    1,612
    Quote Originally Posted by Beavis View Post
    I have witnessed it from time to time, but I can't site any specific examples off the top of my head, mainly because I don't get hung up on other peoples ignorance or troll attempts. By far and large this is an inclusive board that paralells attitudes displayed on social media. Cahills comments provoked outrage among hunters and shooters on facebook yesterday. To be fair the select committee report has shaken the fence pretty hard. Regular Joe A cat hunters and shooters can see that the recommendations would have a direct effect on them, and they are not happy. This isn't just a pissing contest between MSSA owners and police HQ, like we have experianced being on the thin end of the wedge. Everybody is on board and it is great to see.
    Our current crop of leaders have a history of this sort of thing however - produce a report or series of recommendations that are over the top hard on a particular group, and then look like the good guys when they revise the proposals back: you still lose privileges but you feel better because it could have been worse.... Think recreational Snapper catch reduction not too long ago (with no commercial catch reduction...)
    Incremental change doesn't hurt as much as radical change but long term it achieves the same result.
    veitnamcam, mikee and oraki like this.

 

 

Similar Threads

  1. OMG call the PC police
    By HNTMAD in forum Hunting
    Replies: 17
    Last Post: 13-02-2016, 09:28 AM
  2. mallard call to parrie call
    By RichieRich in forum Game Bird Hunting
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 24-04-2015, 10:15 PM
  3. Quail call...
    By EeeBees in forum Game Bird Hunting
    Replies: 14
    Last Post: 09-04-2015, 03:28 PM

Tags for this Thread

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
Welcome to NZ Hunting and Shooting Forums! We see you're new here, or arn't logged in. Create an account, and Login for full access including our FREE BUY and SELL section Register NOW!!