Printable View
Sounds like a painful experience. I deal with them a fair bit and I haven't had any issues like you have. From what I've heard, its cases like yours where theres not a SOP to guide them, thats where it all goes wrong.Quote:
Originally Posted by No.3
What do you recon the second most common centerfire semi after the sks would of been in nz not including collector ones?Quote:
Originally Posted by No.3
IRD have a huge budget..they get a huge hunk of OUR money to play with...this register isnt a fixed amount job as the thing will continue to grow continually.someone will still have to do the admin and follow up....Quote:
Originally Posted by HG Man
no 208 million over 4 years isnt even close unless it runs for a further 16 years ...its a fifth of a million so if they keep the circus going for 20 years..longer than others have..it WILL have chewed up a billion taxpayers dollars....if we round figures and say population of 6 million and guestimate that 2 in 6 are working (that would be extremely on generous side I would think) that gives 2 million taxpayers so thats near enough to $100 per taxpayer per year.Quote:
Originally Posted by HG Man
I would be thinking something in the sporting designs like a Browning? I'm honestly unsure as to the exact answer here, and I have pondered it a bit. The Browning would be up on my list just because of the length of time it has been manufactured vs the more modern options giving more time for them to dribble in.
Yep, software provision (including engineering support and updating/cock up repairs). The 208mill (or 52 a year + rats and mice) is now around 1.5mill a week at the last figures I heard, so consider 780mill for 10 years an indicative before inflationary calcs are done - pretty safe to go out on a limb and say it will crack the 1billion for the 11 year initial funding period I reckon. I'll add to that, Coster reckons that we won't start to see any 'benefits' from the registry for at least 2 decades - which begs the question if we are so short of funding for the Police to tackle today's issues what's the point of chasing something that "MAY" start to show results in 20 years? 1.5mill a week is what, 500 extra officers on the street a year including their personal kit?Quote:
Originally Posted by HG Man
skkQuote:
Originally Posted by blip
Ahh yep, I was grouping them all together as 'SK-type' firearms...Quote:
Originally Posted by Micky Duck
well possibly easier to ask what OTHER semi centrefires were actually still legal here....there may well still have been a few M1 carbines but BAR remington woodsman and the ruger mini 14 would be most common....probably have to be the mini 14 mini 30 in its various calibres hands down
rightteho -weve had a memvber sxtate on here via a FACsource that the register is up for review ...with option to discard after 5yrs if not viable ...hmmm seems massive lack of comms somewhere saw PC Coster 48hrs ago state it could take a decade to be implemented fully to 100%function ..now gone to 20yrs.............???????????MAKE YA BLOODY MINDS UP
Andy me old china-your beloved register could be kicked into touch post OCT14 -or have you forgotten??????.
As for Chris Cahill-a dyed in the wool trade unionist with pronounced echolalic proclivities overun with boundless optimism yet to be proven in any way shape or form.
Yeah, Coster intimated a 'decade or two' to 'see the benefits'... And in his next sentence that the "arms regulatory space is not where we want it in NZ".
I had to google that, right you are though my old china. :DQuote:
Originally Posted by kotuku
Thats not just the cost of the register, thats the total funding for the Firearms Safety Authority.$52 m a year.Quote:
Originally Posted by Micky Duck
There are approx 3.85M taxpayers in NZ, so $50M/3.85M = $13.50 per taxpayer per year.
I haven't read anything like that and that $208M over 4 year is from June 2023. I can't find anything for those numbers on a quick google.Quote:
Originally Posted by No.3
And who says we are short of funding? Its not lack of funds for Policing, its lack of experienced cops and a lack of new recruits.
so just a drop in the bucket...no worries to pay for it so no need for user pays...perfect HGMan has shown we will never need to pay anything at all to hold firearms...perfect.Quote:
Originally Posted by HG Man
gentlemen gentlemen gentlemen....and heathens .270owners and lastly aspiring politicians -good that should cover the field..sit!
Id suggest you google professor Gary Mauser out of Simon Fraser University BC Canada -Mauser is regarded as being without peer on the research of the issues associated with firearms regulation and is a well published authority on it. He was asked to peer review the awful load of crap one philip alpers and his offasider provided to jimandertons croney to take to the 2003 Unfirearms summit-a grandiose talkfest resultant in 6 7/8 SFA bar a two sentnecew summary saying nowt could be agreed upon!
mausers peer review showed up alpers and co for the bloody clowns they were-using totally irrelevant onfo to reach totally erroneous conclusions -sound familiar.
gop goole it persue at your leisure -theres a lot more juice in this orange yet!
Yep. Thats about the size of it, problem is Alper's BS is still being spouted on about as 'legitimate research'...
Ha, so what you are saying is that the numbers for costs are being fudged already. That's reassuring...Quote:
Originally Posted by HG Man
Dude, thats not what I'm saying at all. You've just made up some nonsense, I never talked about user pays or anything, I've simply relayed the figures I have come across.Quote:
Originally Posted by Micky Duck
No, I'm not saying that at all. I'm saying that the only figures I have read are the $208M over 4 years. You are claiming you've heard different, not me, if you have something to back up your numbers, then lets see it.Quote:
Originally Posted by No.3
Ihave ample evidence downloaded onto paper and in my file over this issue .a classic case i came across was an article years ago post the port arthur massacre-it was writte n by a post graduate in psychogereontology in the NZNO magazine -one of my colleagues asked me to critique it -I wouldnt have wiped my arse with it~!yet this sort of crap was used by their then PM to justify his version of our dilemma. Ive also got a few aussie academic research articles too on file which again highlight the shortsighted pomopisity of politicians and knowalls.
Give it time, up grades , resources, a top heavy administration, more managers than front line staff, it will be a billion! I guarantee it!Quote:
Originally Posted by HG Man
Well to be fair it's only a chuck away out of a newspaper article, but given the timeframes vs the 208mill over four years figure you're listing and the increasing price of 'everything' currently I would have to say that 1.5mill a week is a fair number. Ties in with 208 divided by the number of months equalling 1 mill a week followed by the rough guesstimate of all cost increases running at circa 25% plus the usual Govt department underestimation figure running at 25%. I think your 3.85million head of population is a little high, we are bloody near on track to lose that number to Aussie haha.Quote:
Originally Posted by HG Man
you said $13.50 per taxpayer per year.......you said it ,not me,not Coster,Not Kerry Allen..she wont be saying much after last night YOU said it....Quote:
Originally Posted by HG Man
so it must be true
its cheap as chips so we wont need to pay anything else....awesome thankyou.
So you have nothing to back up your $1.5M other than a good reckon?Quote:
Originally Posted by No.3
3.85M is the number that the IRD has. They would know after all.
I did say that. Because its pretty simple maths. I showed my working, feel free to do the sums yourself, would you like a calculator?Quote:
Originally Posted by Micky Duck
You are the one making things up, where did I bring up user pays or not needing to pay for anything else, just fucking nonsense.
Im glad you liked it -feel free to use it if you meet one of theses so called experts who abound in our upper echelons of governmental and public service.even better add pereserverative before the echolalic -whilst theyre pondering that you may then utter the following"ihave in our brief interact ion ascertained you are a very expansive example of the shortcomings of the human DNA.Furthermore I have reason to beleive you only gained your present position due to bein g declined for the role of condom washer and recycler in your local saloon of iniquity .Quote:
Originally Posted by No.3
oh yes before i forget ..Its your bloody shout gorse in the pocket!
If he hasn't said it already, Cahill will chime in and say the gun used in the shootings was stolen and that's how registry would of stopped the violence.Quote:
Originally Posted by stumpys
Because the thief would get a bad conscience and regret stealing it and hand it in to the Police? I am just trying to connect the dots but Cahill only drops crumbs and there are a lot of hungry birds hanging around.Quote:
Originally Posted by Three O'Three
touchy much??????Quote:
Originally Posted by HG Man
I didnt say you brought up user pays..... but if its THAT cheap...there is indeed no need for user pays.
open carry.
watch everyones manners improve overnight
Look at what you are writing, I'm not touchy, you are just being a bit of a cock. If you don't like my tone, don't be a cock.Quote:
Originally Posted by Micky Duck
nah I shall just poke you BACK on ignore list......I dont come here to be sworn at.
Newspaper article... 3.85 is interesting, that's higher than Stats's pop figure (5199100-Mar23). I wonder if that's taxpaying entities rather than population? But even that seems light considering the number of one person outfits, but then if they are sole-trader and not individually registered I guess they aren't a separate entity. So that might be the right figure for 'entities'.Quote:
Originally Posted by HG Man
Acts like a dick, throws toys when called out for being a dick. Good on ya champ.Quote:
Originally Posted by Micky Duck
Now kiddies - play nice.
Yeah, you have to remember that children and the retired also pay tax, 75% of the population.Quote:
Originally Posted by No.3
Just returning fire.Quote:
Originally Posted by winchesterM69A
Quote:
Originally Posted by Three O'Three
And he’d be wrong - again.
Yep. But Stats NZ total population figure in NZ is 5199100 (estimated) at March of this year - so the difference between 5.85m and 5.2mill isn't made up by humans. So taxpaying entities - trusts, business, other vehicles with their own IRD numbers... Doesn't make a hua of a difference to the per-person figure but in keeping with the overall tax burden per person per year - it's a lot.Quote:
Originally Posted by HG Man