Thread: New range laws and shooting on unregistered ranges

It's an utter shit sandwich. Very much Catch 22.

On previous occassions we are certain written submissions were ignored or not even viewed. Or at the very least read by the world's top speed readers, yeah right. And as for the presentations......
That leaves a bad why bother taste in the gob and a why bother attitude which you cannot blame people for.

Problem is, by not submitting it plays further into their hands. "They were given the opportunity but didn't contribute, they must be in agreement".

It's a 3 Waters situation.

Then don't submit. Don't do anything.

I'm trying demonstrate how the process works. All of those submissions are read. Every single one of them. It doesn't matter if there are 20 or 2000. They are all read. From those submissions, a general consensus is established which gets deliberated on by the responsible committee. The committee is comprised of various politicians, subject matter experts, special interest groups, etc. They deliberate on the submissions, come to a consensus, and then it goes through the Parliamentary process. During this process, there are time where you can raise additional concerns.

I think we can all agree that policy decisions are not made in a vacuum. Everything exists in a political context and the tragic Chch shooting generated a lot of context. Only one MP voted against it. Whether you like it or not, a democratic system is by it's very nature majoritarian. Make of that what you will and use it to your advantage.

I don't know about you, but would rather be a part of the process and have my voice heard than do nothing.

@Daniel Kwon. Are you personally involved in the process of dealing with submissions? If not what makes you so sure the process is followed correctly. From my own perspective I am very cynical of the process. Submissions to govt. departments etc are meant to receive an acknowledgement of receipt within a specified time-frame, something which doesn't always happen. When speaking to a submission it can become immediately clear that the panel is reading your submission for the first time there and then. All makes one wonder why even bother going to the effort.

Originally Posted by Daniel Kwon

Then don't submit. Don't do anything.

I'm trying demonstrate how the process works. All of those submissions are read. Every single one of them. It doesn't matter if there are 20 or 2000. They are all read. From those submissions, a general consensus is established which gets deliberated on by the responsible committee. The committee is comprised of various politicians, subject matter experts, special interest groups, etc. They deliberate on the submissions, come to a consensus, and then it goes through the Parliamentary process. During this process, there are time where you can raise additional concerns.

I think we can all agree that policy decisions are not made in a vacuum. Everything exists in a political context and the tragic Chch shooting generated a lot of context. Only one MP voted against it. Whether you like it or not, a democratic system is by it's very nature majoritarian. Make of that what you will and use it to your advantage.

I don't know about you, but would rather be a part of the process and have my voice heard than do nothing.

The other MPs didn’t vote against it as it might be jeopardizing the chance of their re-election. (Cynical I know but likely close to the truth!)

Yes I am.

@Daniel Kwon as you will have gathered,there are still many ruffled feathers if not outright plucked arses from the debarkcle of semi confiscation .....people just do not trust government to look at thing logically when they already have predetermined agenda in play.

Timaru township used to have a range that .303 was used on regularly...its just about perfect and right inside township...big high backstop of clay bank some 30 meters high all along one side and the butt end....it hasnt been used for years,its a soccor field now as the land above bank has houses for miles.
good safe places to sight in have been harder to get for years,so local riverbed or beach with clear visibility have been a default setting for as long as I can remember.... or folks sight in on hunting grounds making racket and spooking game for days.
its not as bad as it was in the "mag dumping" era and a lot of the crowds who were issues no longer seem to be shooting at all....some might say thankfully.
there is thread on lake lyndon in here somewhere,it makes for interesting reading and may give insight to historical issues.

Originally Posted by Micky Duck

@Daniel Kwon as you will have gathered,there are still many ruffled feathers if not outright plucked arses from the debarkcle of semi confiscation .....people just do not trust government to look at thing logically when they already have predetermined agenda in play.

Timaru township used to have a range that .303 was used on regularly...its just about perfect and right inside township...big high backstop of clay bank some 30 meters high all along one side and the butt end....it hasnt been used for years,its a soccor field now as the land above bank has houses for miles.
good safe places to sight in have been harder to get for years,so local riverbed or beach with clear visibility have been a default setting for as long as I can remember.... or folks sight in on hunting grounds making racket and spooking game for days.
its not as bad as it was in the "mag dumping" era and a lot of the crowds who were issues no longer seem to be shooting at all....some might say thankfully.
there is thread on lake lyndon in here somewhere,it makes for interesting reading and may give insight to historical issues.

Yeah, I was one of them. I'm just trying to raise awareness of how to submit and how important of a process it is. It's a nuanced system that could do with some clarity, which is what I'm trying to bring. At the end of the day it's up to you to decide if you want to submit or not, but don't be surprised if our majoritarian system of governance doesn't work in your favor because we failed to be heard.

I wrote a six pager during the pistol grip saga. This is just as important to me, as it is to you. I'm trying to help.

Originally Posted by Daniel Kwon

Yeah, I was one of them. I'm just trying to raise awareness of how to submit and how important of a process it is. It's a nuanced system that could do with some clarity, which is what I'm trying to bring. At the end of the day it's up to you to decide if you want to submit or not, but don't be surprised if our majoritarian system of governance doesn't work in your favor because we failed to be heard.

I wrote a six pager during the pistol grip saga. This is just as important to me, as it is to you. I'm trying to help.

The process for the new range laws I guess (I hope) should be different in that the first rounds were totally political with predesignated outcomes. Hence peoples' now why bother views.

I'll decide when there is something available to review whether to submit but in any case the organisations I belong to (like SSANZ) will receive my support and input in whatever they submit. I just hope there is sufficient time provided.

Originally Posted by Daniel Kwon

Yeah, I was one of them. I'm just trying to raise awareness of how to submit and how important of a process it is. It's a nuanced system that could do with some clarity, which is what I'm trying to bring. At the end of the day it's up to you to decide if you want to submit or not, but don't be surprised if our majoritarian system of governance doesn't work in your favor because we failed to be heard.

I wrote a six pager during the pistol grip saga. This is just as important to me, as it is to you. I'm trying to help.

Agree. It's the avenue we have, so it must be used.

Other than voting. But it does feel like the definition of insanity.

Originally Posted by Daniel Kwon

Yeah, I was one of them. I'm just trying to raise awareness of how to submit and how important of a process it is. It's a nuanced system that could do with some clarity, which is what I'm trying to bring. At the end of the day it's up to you to decide if you want to submit or not, but don't be surprised if our majoritarian system of governance doesn't work in your favor because we failed to be heard.

I wrote a six pager during the pistol grip saga. This is just as important to me, as it is to you. I'm trying to help.

When it is claimed that the submission are read at a rate of 1000 an hour for 24 hours straight, I don't believe it.

Just like when colfo sent out a template for an opposing submission and they were counted as a single submission, but when a north shore councilor sent out a supporting submission template on Facebook, they were individually counted.

90% of submissions opposed the legislation change. The submission process is a consultation box ticking exercise. The decision has already been made.

Originally Posted by Danger Mouse

90% of submissions opposed the legislation change. The submission process is a consultation box ticking exercise. The decision has already been made.

A submission process isn't simply about the number of submissions, it should be about the quality of the submissions.

It isn't good or sufficient simply to oppose a proposal (or legislation).
Well reasoned and logical arguments are a vital part of a submission.

A select committee (or a council committee or hearing panel) need to be able to understand the reasons underpinning and supporting a submission.

A well reasoned, well argued submission has a much greater chance of success.

A submission process isn't a referendum. A majority of votes (in favour or against) doesn't mean anything. It isn't just a numbers game.

Originally Posted by Cyclops

A submission process isn't simply about the number of submissions, it should be about the quality of the submissions.

It isn't good or sufficient simply to oppose a proposal (or legislation).
Well reasoned and logical arguments are a vital part of a submission.

A select committee (or a council committee or hearing panel) need to be able to understand the reasons underpinning and supporting a submission.

A well reasoned, well argued submission has a much greater chance of success.

A submission process isn't a referendum. A majority of votes (in favour or against) doesn't mean anything. It isn't just a numbers game.

True, I watched several submitters spout off conspiracy theories and wild claims, only for MPs from all parties to visibly disengage.

But when the members of the governing party on a select committee pretty much ignore all the points made from one side, you need to start questioning the functioning of "democracy". Having been through the process myself, I doubt if I would bother again in future...

Originally Posted by Cyclops

A submission process isn't simply about the number of submissions, it should be about the quality of the submissions.

It isn't good or sufficient simply to oppose a proposal (or legislation).
Well reasoned and logical arguments are a vital part of a submission.

A select committee (or a council committee or hearing panel) need to be able to understand the reasons underpinning and supporting a submission.

A well reasoned, well argued submission has a much greater chance of success.

A submission process isn't a referendum. A majority of votes (in favour or against) doesn't mean anything. It isn't just a numbers game.

True, but when you see them more or less ignore very well reasoned and well argued submissions (including well qualified experts in the field, and the likes of the law society and the human rights commission) because they've already made up their minds in advance... lets just say its difficult to have much faith in the system.

You would hope the principle of de minimis non curat lex gets applied otherwise the system may get buried under a mountain of applications. My "home range" stretches 400 m and has a cliff as a backstop. It only gets occasional use but there are steel targets permanently in place so from my reading of the above it would need certifying. Guess we need to wait and see what the discussion draft actually contains/ specifies.

Originally Posted by Marty Henry

You would hope the principle of de minimis non curat lex gets applied otherwise the system may get buried under a mountain of applications. My "home range" stretches 400 m and has a cliff as a backstop. It only gets occasional use but there are steel targets permanently in place so from my reading of the above it would need certifying. Guess we need to wait and see what the discussion draft actually contains/ specifies.

Just call your permanent steel targets "sculptures" and bingo it's no longer a range. Not your fault you can't afford expensive massive shit like Alan Gibbs but same idea