Thread: The anti gun lobby

When you want to despair of the intelligence of your fellow NZers, no need to go as far as WhaleOil or the Kiwiblog troll farm, just read a few Stuff comments - that'll do the trick

These people are just making noise. Close to 1/4 million licensed shooters, 19 deaths in 10 years - what's the drama? That's fuck all. They could at least have the common decency to tell the truth - we hate everything about you and your sport, so we will use any pathetic excuse to put the boot in.

Lol if our current systems mandated 5 year checks, they would be crying for 2 year checks. There is no limit to what these morons want. We concede semi auto's, they'll whinge cuz we still have pump actions. No compromise.

Originally Posted by Beavis

No compromise.

That's not really correct, there are quite happy for us to compromise everything we have.

That's why we shouldn't compromise

Beavis, at the COLFO AGM this "noise" was discussed and the Pollies are saying that the pro-Gun lobby is all but invisible, meanwhile Amnesty International, and other anti-gun organisations are lobbying all the time. So really apathy could lose us our privaledges...that worries me. I mean look at the UK, every gun on a licence and anally applied rules. eg if the licence says 7.62x51 you cant buy a 308winchester, do we really want to end up there? Because with these bozoes lobbying against us that's what will happen. Also the stupidity of some and especially young males in ignoring the rules is going to f*** us over IMHO.

regards

Originally Posted by steven

So really apathy could lose us our privaledges...that worries me.

People referring to firearm ownership as a privilege worries me.

Originally Posted by Banana

People referring to firearm ownership as a privilege worries me.

That is it...it isnt a right, nor should it be IMHO.

Originally Posted by Banana

People referring to firearm ownership as a privilege worries me.

In New Zealand, firearms ownership is absolutely a privilege. It is not a right. The only right that we have is the right to make application for a firearms license. It is not a given that the application will be allowed.

Originally Posted by Rushy

In New Zealand, firearms ownership is absolutely a privilege. It is not a right. The only right that we have is the right to make application for a firearms license. It is not a given that the application will be allowed.

They cannot refuse to give you a firearms licence unless they can establish that you are not a fit and proper person, that decision is made firstly by the police and their decision is subject to court review if the applicant pursues it.

That is the law.

You have a right to apply, and a legal right to be granted a firearms licence, if you are not disqualified by not being fit and proper in the courts opinion, and not the police's - that is purely a regulatory function.

The word privilege is a made up concoction, to suit a purpose. It is not and never has been a reality. But it is used by the police to keep us firearms owners tame and quiet and dependant, just hoping that they will let us exercise our legal freedoms and rights.

The paternalistic BS that comes with its application should be avoided at all costs.

I do understand the reason that its use has grown... it is about responsibility..... why don't we use that term...?

The ownership and use of firearms is both a right and a responsibility. If you are irresponsible your legal rights are removed....

This is the legal position... the use of the word privilege is an uninformed, and harmful practice. Something which only has a benefit in conveying the seriousness of the way that we exercise our rights. We can do that in other ways without instilling in ourselves a subservient and harmful attitude...

You all have a legal right to your own property, and yet the Govt can come along and put a motorway through under the Public Works Act, and can grant a mining licence if oil is found..... maybe your property ownership is really just a "privilege"

Half of you complain about apathy, while not even really understanding why..... there would be considerably less if we weren't all so bloody brainwashed...

Originally Posted by Rushy

In New Zealand, firearms ownership is absolutely a privilege. It is not a right. The only right that we have is the right to make application for a firearms license. It is not a given that the application will be allowed.

If you meet the criteria for a firearms license, then it is a given that the application will be allowed. The police can't just refuse to issue you a licence because they feel like it. If you're up to spec, then you have a right (legal entitlement, whatever you want to call it) to a firearms license. A firearms license gives you the right to own firearms, as no one can refuse you access to firearms if you have a license.

Originally Posted by Banana

People referring to firearm ownership as a privilege worries me.

It's not a "privilege", it's a "right" if fit and proper.


Saying "it's a privilege not a right" is a bullshit pervasive meaningless soundbite used by the police to further intimidate firearms owners into submission + fear of asserting lawful rights.

In at least half of the "incidents" over the last couple of years where so-called responsible gun owners have been given a bad name or more ammunition provided for the anti lobby, the person responsible was not a youngster.

In fact, until the incident, several of them would have been held up as examples of safety conscious, responsible firearms users...

So far in May 7 people have been killed on our roads. these lobby groups really need to look at themselves and focus on where people are getting killed.

Personally, please don't bite my head off on this, but I would like more focus on firearms safety when getting your licence. Maybe there needs to be a Learners endorsement on a firearms licence if your under a certain age. That way they can spend some time with an experience Licence holder.

Originally Posted by ebf

It has always amazed me that you can simply walk into the bush and hand your buddy (who does not have a license) a firearm. We all know that "supervision" in the bush or maimai is not the same thing as supervision by a RO on a range...

If an unlicensed shooter is under your 'immediate' supervision as defined in the arms code, what does it matter where supervision is undertaken.
There should be little to no risk involved when someone is supervised in the manner required buy law.

Originally Posted by Trevs

Personally, please don't bite my head off on this, but I would like more focus on firearms safety when getting your licence. Maybe there needs to be a Learners endorsement on a firearms licence if your under a certain age. That way they can spend some time with an experience Licence holder.

I'll bite, what you suggest above is the exact system we have now. A licence holder can 'directly' supervise a licenced, or unlicenced individual. The idea is to mentor their approach to safety and proficiency. That person can be a father, a neighbour, a friend or club member. A simple system for us, the end user, with no need for additional controls. The arms code provides a crystal clear definition of immediate supervision.
As stated above, experience has little to do with the outcome of many of the most recent hunting incidents.
People need to stop with the graduated licence rubbish. I for one don't wish to have the current licencing system restricted or complicated unnecessarily at the request of an outspoken few.

Firearm deaths and injury are typically a hunting issue, leave the licensing criteria out of it.
I challenge anyone to identify an incident where at least one of the 7 safety rules has not been followed to its fullest, sadly hunter safety should be that simple.

Originally Posted by Banana

People referring to firearm ownership as a privilege worries me.

Better check the bottom of the first page of the arms code.