Thread: Geuss Who? Phillip Alpers Chimes In

Another Firearms incident involving NZ Police and some bucket of ^&%$ so time to get back up on that soap box.

But its not who you'd expect to step up to grandstand upon said box, no its a gohst from firearms past the one and only Phillip Alpers.

It may be some time since we in NZ have heard from him but he is still playing the same old tune.
Yes that tune is the single from his one and only album "Gun Registration".
That album bombed in NZ so he went to sell it to the Aussies, They brought it up large. Poor bastards.

Back to the point, Alpers on radio this morning bleating on about "its about time we started registering firearms and not the owners because the firearms out there started off as legitimate arms which the criminals now have possession of".

Now I dont need to tell anyone here that it wont work but hey it will sell a few more papers and get some rhetoric on TV which will be baseless.
I also sure it we will be hearing from Mr Chaill soon too.

Because the criminals, that already possess firearms, are going to willingly come forward and add them to a registar.
Obvious when you think about it, I wonder if he believes in unicorns too ?

Originally Posted by Frogfeatures

Because the criminals, that already possess firearms, are going to willingly come forward and add them to a registar.
Obvious when you think about it, I wonder if he believes in unicorns too ?

and rocking horse shit

i met the guy back in the days when i was in broadcast electronics. a total attention seeking prima dona who was not well respected by most of his co-workers

What is the point of a military-style weapon in the hands of a civilian?

wait till his anal dildo bursts when set to full-auto..........

Alpers is a sad sorry arse "NOBODY" from Nobodiesville.

As soon as the spotlight is focused on him he'll slither back under his slimy rock again.


Cheers
Pete

Originally Posted by P38

Alpers is a sad sorry arse "NOBODY" from Nobodiesville.

As soon as the spotlight is focused on him he'll slither back under his slimy rock again.


Cheers
Pete

Not a hundy on this but isint he a convicted crim? That's why he left NZ?

Sent from my SM-G935F using Tapatalk

Originally Posted by R93

Not a hundy on this but isint he a convicted crim? That's why he left NZ?

Sent from my SM-G935F using Tapatalk

I think he fucked off to Oz because in his words it pays better on that side of the Tasman.
Anti-Gun Lobby Pays Better in Australia

I believe his funding comes from the United Nations

Cheers
Pete

And all the while it looks like Cahill's predecessor Greg O'Connor will steal a march and they will have a man on the inside of the hallowed beehive halls. Numpties the lot of them. If the GG is reading this then I think that a new honour should be struck and awarded to these three. Like a knighthood it should be given a posh name. I suggest Wankers of the first order of Numptie but I am quite relaxed about it and would equally support them being awarded Fuckwit emeritus or plain old garden variety Dickhead.

Didn't he have gun license that was revoked?

Originally Posted by Frogfeatures

Because the criminals, that already possess firearms, are going to willingly come forward and add them to a registar.
Obvious when you think about it, I wonder if he believes in unicorns too ?

This is a weak and easily defeated argument, registration isn't about getting back the firearms that're already in criminal hands, it's about deterring the flow of firearms from a LFAO to unlicenced people by being able to trace them and to be able to trace stolen firearms back to a crime and possibly lead to charges in the justice system.

I'm not for or against registration, but trying these strawman arguments doesn't help your cause.

Originally Posted by Beavis

Didn't he have gun license that was revoked?

It must be 20 years ago now but IIRC he turned up at an Auckland pistol club and fired 2 Accidental Discharges before they took the pistol off him.

After Aramoana he was the media's darling "Firearm expert Philip Alpers said..."

It was a good day when he left us and moved to Australia.

Originally Posted by Savage1

This is a weak and easily defeated argument, registration isn't about getting back the firearms that're already in criminal hands, it's about deterring the flow of firearms from a LFAO to unlicenced people by being able to trace them and to be able to trace stolen firearms back to a crime and possibly lead to charges in the justice system.

I'm not for or against registration, but trying these strawman arguments doesn't help your cause.

Actually its a legitimate argument. The reality is that people who already don't comply with the law are not going to comply with new ones.

We can assume that whatever the supply chain might be presently, criminals will simply modify the means they need to obtain what they require if they need to. And it is not established that legitimate owners are that supply chain in the first place, in any more that in isloated situations. The recent enquiry failed to even attempt to establish that, concentrating on what they saw as solutions for an issue not even established... like this one, that only has a material effect on the legal firearms community.

The argument for registration on the other hand is a ludicous argument that somehow the start of a registration system will somehow encapsulate all the existing firearms in the system along with all new firearms, thus having a material deterent effect on the possibility that legitimate legal owners will then be detered from passing ownership to illegitimate criminals.

I consider this generational stupidity, the previous manual sustem was abandoned for inaccuracy, cost and a lack of trust by those attempting to enforce the process for benefit. When that occurs these create more harm than benefit, which was why it was given away in the first place. This knowledge appears lost on the terminally stupid advocates who somehow cannot grasp that they will not be even statistically likely to provide any registration system with more than about a 50% accuracy level if they attempted, at huge cost and for no actual benefit.

Do you think the criminals worry about a gun registration system... ? The are the ones the advocates are actually tying to effect aren't they..?

Pardon my cynicism... but the fools in this discussion are those that think that is the aim. The anti gun lobby see registration as a means of control of the legitimate gun owners, which is where much of this comes from. The police policy people are either fooling themselves are are taking a very long term view for the same reasons.

In so far as illegitimate firearms are concerned, the worst thing that the police could do is to initiate registration or to promote it. They don't actually appear very capable of working that out yet do they?

Originally Posted by Savage1

This is a weak and easily defeated argument, registration isn't about getting back the firearms that're already in criminal hands, it's about deterring the flow of firearms from a LFAO to unlicenced people by being able to trace them and to be able to trace stolen firearms back to a crime and possibly lead to charges in the justice system.

I'm not for or against registration, but trying these strawman arguments doesn't help your cause.

I think that about the only cases where this has happened here in the past is where someone on the inside in the Police system supplied shopping list information.