Thread: The am show this morning

Originally Posted by Bigbang

Ya'll getting pissed off enough yet to do anything about it?

Provocative post. New user. Low post count.

Yeah, you seem legit.

Originally Posted by Bigbang

Ya'll getting pissed off enough yet to do anything about it?

I intend to vote for a party other than Labour.

Watching that.

As an aside, I will be competing in a three gun competition at the club this morning for the first time in a very long time (early 2020). I will be using a 9mm pistol, a 12g semi auto shotgun and a .22 semi auto rifle hopefully all with good effect but I can’t help but think that I will be using two fit for purpose firearms and a poor substitute and to me there is an absolute irony that I can be trusted with a pistol for which I will use five magazines with a 19 round capacity but I cannot be trusted with a rifle with which I previously used three magazines with a 30 round capacity. The law makers that affected this situation really were as dumb as a bag full of hammers.

Originally Posted by Rushy

As an aside, I will be competing in a three gun competition at the club this morning for the first time in a very long time (early 2020). I will be using a 9mm pistol, a 12g semi auto shotgun and a .22 semi auto rifle hopefully all with good effect but I can’t help but think that I will be using two fit for purpose firearms and a poor substitute and to me there is an absolute irony that I can be trusted with a pistol for which I will use five magazines with a 19 round capacity but I cannot be trusted with a rifle with which I previously used three magazines with a 30 round capacity. The law makers that affected this situation really were as dumb as a bag full of hammers.

I saw a facebook post at confiscation time, a well known firearms salesman had a picture of the fully functioning 7.62X54R belt feed machine gun he was keeping and the .22short pump action rifle that was too dangerous for him to be trusted to possess anymore. Evil things, these .22short pump actions! Not to mention all the guys keeping their M16s but handing in their AR15s.

Meanwhile some brave dudes shot up a heap of houses in Auckland. The good old drive by then take off fast. Takes a hard man to do that!!!! Not. And I’ll put money on it those rifles or shotguns were all held illegally. Our system now hounds jo average who plays by the rules while the bottom hides behind excuses…..

Here's the video... https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s5DxyBbhIuE

I crack up about how they keep banging on about banning "assault rifles", when ironically assault rifles are unaffected by the law changes.

The fact also that Matthew Hunt was murdered with a Norinco NHM90 unfortunately proves just how arrogant and out of touch they are.

Originally Posted by Beavis

I crack up about how they keep banging on about banning "assault rifles", when ironically assault rifles are unaffected by the law changes.

The fact also that Matthew Hunt was murdered with a Norinco NHM90 unfortunately proves just how arrogant and out of touch they are.

Yup, already forgotten about that fact by the powers that be.

Perhaps Mr Parker needs to see what being shot with a shotgun actually looks like.............

I guess MSSA rifles are associated with higher number of deaths and injury per event.
The 'public' perspective seems to find a single event far less tolerable than 8,10 or 15 separate events with the same toll.

The public perspective is what the "gov" tell the msm to say it is

Go and canvas it yourself.

I'm not going get into the minutiae, of the pro and anti gun laws, argument.

I will however, make an observation, on the American, "freedom to own guns without restriction", people.

The starting point, in the defence of this stance, is almost always, the second amendment of the constitution of the U.S.A.

The amendment reads: “A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed.”

Let's examine the first four words - “A well regulated militia...”

Read this bit slowly - What is gun control legislation, applied to people who own guns, if not regulation?

The regulated bit, of the regulated militia.....

And yet the people trumpeting the “A well regulated militia...” are violently opposed to having any regulation.

I think I've laboured the point enough.


further reading https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/...eaning-history

Originally Posted by MarkN

I'm not going get into the minutiae, of the pro and anti gun laws, argument.

I will however, make an observation, on the American, "freedom to own guns without restriction", people.

The starting point, in the defence of this stance, is almost always, the second amendment of the constitution of the U.S.A.

The amendment reads: “A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed.”

Let's examine the first four words - “A well regulated militia...”

Read this bit slowly - What is gun control legislation, applied to people who own guns, if not regulation?

The regulated bit, of the regulated militia.....

And yet the people trumpeting the “A well regulated militia...” are violently opposed to having any regulation.

I think I've laboured the point enough.


further reading https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/...eaning-history

They are regulated, you need a special permit to own fully automatics!!!

I agree with your point, and I don't think the US 2nd amendment would have been meant to be understood the way it has been. However, much like the Tow, what was then has become what is now and with all the animosity amongst both sides it is hard to turn the clock back.

What annoys me far more is our PM suggesting NZs highly regulated firearms licensing system was in any way similar to the US 2A. We HAD a very regulated system, particularly regarding semi auto centrefires E cat. The knee-jerk law changes in NZ will have more influence than Ardern probably intended, and will just polarise the debate far more. She should have kept her mouth shut in relation to highly emotive US domestic issues and not try to imply the NZ law changes were in any way relevant to their totally different legal situation.

Originally Posted by MarkN

I'm not going get into the minutiae, of the pro and anti gun laws, argument.

I will however, make an observation, on the American, "freedom to own guns without restriction", people.

The starting point, in the defence of this stance, is almost always, the second amendment of the constitution of the U.S.A.

The amendment reads: “A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed.”

Let's examine the first four words - “A well regulated militia...”

Read this bit slowly - What is gun control legislation, applied to people who own guns, if not regulation?

The regulated bit, of the regulated militia.....

And yet the people trumpeting the “A well regulated militia...” are violently opposed to having any regulation.

I think I've laboured the point enough.


further reading https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/...eaning-history

The well regulated part, in the language of the day, meant properly equipped.

Most of the artillery used in the early part of the Rev war was privately owned - and this wasn't uncommon for the time. Many ships carried cannon for protection against pirates, and additionally private artillery was necessary as the westward movement ran into resistance from the current inhabitants - necessitating blockhouses and forts wrapped around trading posts.