I think you guys maybe a little way off thread.
Printable View
I think you guys maybe a little way off thread.
Attachment 42285Quote:
Originally Posted by Sideshow
(Been dying to use this again).
"No politics or religion" - gosh I wonder why that rule came about
Getting back to the original idea of the thread - I'm curious as to whether this series of media releases will be sustained or will die out - I think that what works is to just smile and wave, provide facts where possible and not engage with the wingnuts - all of this will be forgotten in a few weeks
You are right of course 308 but it will keep coming around like an orbiting comet.Quote:
Originally Posted by 308
Indeed Rushy it will come around in the media again, so the thing is to be ready for it.
One thing I have learned is many ppl have an opinion that is not based on data, experimentation, maths, science etc but they just know they are right. The anti-gunners are not an exception (in fact amongst the worst), its purely emotional. So when ever I enter such a discussion of areas that interest me (peak oil, climate change, economics, oh and yes, guns) I try to ensure I have my facts right and know what their arguments are likely to be and have counters to them and provide evidence. So an example when they say NZ's gun laws are too lax and we should be like OZ, I point out that NZ has less homicides per 100,000 than OZ and that stat been declining faster than OZ. Same applies when they say our gun laws should match OZ, my answer is so you want more deaths? When they say the better OZ laws in 1996 dropped the suicide rate by gun, yes it did, but it was dropping anyway and the faster drop it caused lasted 3 years then reverted to the same trend as pre-1996. Did overall suicide rates decline? didnt make a difference ppl just top themselves by other means. Why are our stats better than OZ? probably because the police have a better relationship with the community where there can be problems though I am still trying to get info on that. ie a law change wouldnt have any success.
The last thing we want is nutjobs posting in public saying "you cant take my guns". "you cant make it harder for me to get gun stuff, I am a legit owner" etc. Fess up to our / any weaknesses and fix them, it makes us look good IMHO. While it wont make the emotional insecure feel any better the more rational joe bloggs voter on the street will hopefully look at both sides and decide who looks the bigger wanker, and in our favour. The recent guncity fiasco was a case in point IMHO, I think we could have been way more positive and constructive.
Now I am pretty sure some journalist will try to do something similar again, possibly via TM.
Yes, I do think it will just die out and something will replace it(it seems that plane crashes and lack of security in international airports is the topic at the moment), or the national flag will be back in the lime light soon.
Although there has been the small change in the mail order process as a result of a long run of firearm news, ending with the stunt by TV3.
Will we go down the same road as Aus? Well I think not, but fear of moving to a similar system as Aus will hopefully keep us on our toes and hopefully increase overall vigilance.
I would like to know who that dealer is. What a clown!
A fair amount of conflict of interest bias in the quoted comments in that article I suspect.
I expect to see his revenue plummet. He's basically saying "private sales hurt my business. All sales should go through me so I can clip the ticket".
Pretty much.But it would be interesting to see some statistical analysis of this.Quote:
''Over the internet, or a mate talking to a mate down at the pub, nine times out of 10 they won't ask to see a gun licence. And when someone messes up we all cop the flak."
no doubt the reporter /s also rearrange off the cuff comments to asuit the spin they put on their articles too.never let facts get in the way of a good story -Prof Kevin Clements -everytime i see this peacenik quoted I feel the urgent need to go squat on the dunny!conspiracy peddler he is.
Duh -doesnt the bloody gunshop owner know we had firearms rego systyem that the cops decided didnt work &dismantled!
ive still got some of those docs around here somewhere.
lets face it ,a lot of these MSM pricks should have been shot onto a hot tin fence and left to marinate in the sun-we'd frankly be better off without them!
*"He thought a month-long test should be introduced to ensure gun owners could safely operate a gun, store it securely and hit a target"
Month long test? Wow, gun owners/dealers are their own worst enemy.
Sent from my Nexus 5 using Tapatalk
''Private gun sales are a huge problem,'' he said.Quote:
Originally Posted by Beavis
What an ass we should encourage people to boycott his store. Pure self interest.
That guy is such a fuckwit
I doubt the anonymous dealer will remain anonymous for long.
Cui Bono
Firearms retailers are getting undercut by online-only stores which have been proliferating of late and suddenly Hey Presto! Look over here folks! These people are dangerous! Don't let people import their own parts and save money!
There's a dollar or two at the bottom of this dungpile someplace..
Why do I get the feeling that someone is pissing in my pocket and telling me it's raining?
I work at McCarthys and overheard that interview. In the interest of keeping my job I won't talk about my own opinions here, but bear in mind how the media like to spin things. After the online threat regarding the Otago University a journalist from the ODT came and asked me some questions at work about obtaining a pistol and here is the article that resulted 'Good chance' of tracing threat | Otago Daily Times Online News : Otago, South Island, New Zealand & International News
What I tried to explain was that pistols can be owned in NZ, but will be held under a C or B license. That anyone with a firearms license could buy ammunition that a handgun might be chambered for, which makes sense as many pistols are chambered in calibres that rifles also take, e.g. .22lr. I said each handgun is registered under the name of the owner, and (In theory) the police know exactly which handgun is owned by which licensed owner, however they obviously couldn't keep track of ones that were already owned illegally or ones smuggled into the country e.g. in a boat.
This is how she interpreted it:
"A Dunedin hunting and fishing store employee, who asked to remain anonymous, said the handgun posted with the threat online could be bought in New Zealand by a category C licence holder.
Bullets for the gun could be used for most category A (sporting) guns, so it would not be clear what the bullets were being bought for, the employee said.
Police kept a close eye on who owned handguns and obtaining one was a lengthy process.
However, they could not track stolen or imported guns, he said."
Lesson learnt?
Lesson being nobody in the shooting community should give any MSM outlet the opportunity to twist their words, as in tell them to get bent.
''Over the internet, or a mate talking to a mate down at the pub, nine times out of 10 they won't ask to see a gun licence."
I call bollocks on that one. Nearly every private firearm ad I've seen on the net says something like 'no licence no sale', and most sellers are well aware that if they get caught selling to someone without a licence they'd probably lose theirs.
As for private sales being 'a huge problem', they might be a problem to his profit margin but thats about all.
Yeah, I don't think I'll be speaking to them again.
Yep, say nothing and nothing gets said.Quote:
Originally Posted by marky123
B
thanks tommygun -you've just confirmed what I thought &wrote.Quote:
Originally Posted by tommygun
5 kids a year are run over while backing out the driveway.
Vs 28 hunters killed in 20 years.
For those that want to save the world.... go jump on that band wagon!
The reporters email if anyone wishes to point out that our anonymous friends ommited some facts in their interview.
e.aingeroy@gmail.com
I wouldnt waste my time.if she cant get it right first time or was after the ratings primarily.an email from us aint gonna make an iota of difference IMO.Quote:
Originally Posted by Krameranzac
I'd talk to any journalist, but I'd be asking to read the article before it goes to print to make sure that I have not been quoted out of context!Quote:
Originally Posted by tommygun
My wife is a racing journalist. When talking to horse owners, trainers she quite often has to do this.
What your seeing there is a very poor form of journalism.
The other thing I'd do is make an appointment with the journalist who wants to talk to you. Also record what is being said.
As I'm sure that you where recorded.
It's also down to what the editor wants in the paper.
Over here you generally get paid by the word. But this need to fill a limited space.
So if the interviewed gave a long winded answer then there going to cut it short.
A lot of journalist won't agree to letting you read the article but then you don't have to agree to talking to them!!
here's another question WTF is this titleQuote:
Originally Posted by Beavis
"The National Centre for Peace and Conflict Studies chairman and director "
Sounds like a jumped up self important ego trip. Last time I heard of a director also being chairman and there being both positions it was a business with one employee- The director , chairman was also the lackey, coffee maker and shipping clerk too. I am in a business here too, I am the director of internet sales and advertising, and Chief financial officer of the entire online division. I am also the shipping manager, packaging supervisor, and head of the communications dept and payroll officer. So does that mean I have a bigger _ _ _ _ than he does. (Wage for all you rude minded individuals....:))
No. It means everything is my responsibility and there is no one else to blame.
As for Peace and conflict centre chairman , sounds like a PC jargon for anger management therapy person who takes bookings for the next session......
"because of the rural make-up of the community,"Quote:
Originally Posted by Beavis
So you country folk are dis-honest bastards, there I knew it all along.
absolute bull cr*p.
and then this,
"Over the internet, or a mate talking to a mate down at the pub, nine times out of 10 they won't ask to see a gun licence"
So a vested interest, selling an un-supportable point of view.
His business should be boycotted IMHO, if he thinks gun owners are this bad, dont give him business.
Yes but write to the paper.Quote:
Originally Posted by kotuku
Yes this academic has had an agenda as an anti-gunner for years. In his case no matter the evidence the answer is get rid of guns. The good thing is he has a tendency to say things that cannot be substantiated.Quote:
Originally Posted by timattalon
What I am going to do is collect articles from when he says something and keep it as evidence with replies based on data and research.
ie in a court of law a good lawyer would rip him apart. ie when he says "could" he cant prove it so its not a fact/evidence.
As long as this is what he said. Dont forget the Media never lets the truth get in the way of a story.Quote:
Originally Posted by steven
Remember Heather D P A was told it there was a chance that an error could slip though and not be spotted and then Duncan went on to say later that the person said it was very likely never going to be picked up. These are not quotes and one is definitely not a quote of the other.
So it is possible the shop owner could have said something along the lines of "if anyone wanted to buy an illegal firearm, they are more likely to do this down at a pub face to face where there is no ability to track the transaction" and a reporter would repeat this as "all trades down at the pub are not tracked and are illegal" to make it sound more dramatic. (and wrong of course)
Is anyone on here working at or involved with that gun shop? Perhaps get him to answer in person on this thread and see what he actually said. I dont trust the media to get it right as I have not seen that happen much for a very long time.
Well by that definition I must be a very rare person.Quote:
Originally Posted by Dan88
My - then - 14 year old took up fullbore target shooting as his sporting hobby.
In order for him to have a rifle to use exclusively I had to get a Firearms License which I did.
I had no previous firearms experience and no particular interest in shooting myself.
To own a firearm and ammunition I obtained my FAL, then a rifle, then began reloading for my son.
We're onto our third rifle now for fullbore target shooting - this time a specialised target rifle built up from components.
Also bear in mind emotive "they should be shot" posts, on a public forum that is read by anyone isn't helping either.Quote:
Originally Posted by Beavis
It re-enforces the stereotype that shooters are crazy people.
perhaps our friend Professor Clements may also share his opinion on the fact that his employers Otago university have twice featured in crime stats with academics being found guilty of murder -to wit psychiatrist Dr Colin Bouwer (whose son is banged up in Sth africa for the identical crime)and last but not least the hideous reptile Clayton "chucky"Weatherston.
This peace studies crap flourished under Jim Andertons mob ,the onerous highlight being when dopey Matt Robson minister. disarmament sent that ginga "anti "wally Professor Philip Alpers to a UN disarmament conference,which in itself was a bloody shambles
.two week talk fest -two line statement saying nothing could be agreed on .half the parties knew nowt about the agenda ,the other half didnt even know where the dunnies where !
Alpers incidentally is resident in a sydney varsity!
Alpers-former "fairgo "reporter had also authored some research along with his aussie mate .This however was peer reviewed by Prof Gary Mauser of simon Fraser university in Canada(who does know what hes talking about)and found to be defective in virtually every aspect. So bloody much for legislators relying on this info to draw up sound reasonable laws!
Any wee MSM reporter who comes near me will be met with 'whose shaggin ya now luv and canI quote you on that"-see how they like getting crap printed about em!!
http://images.tapatalk-cdn.com/15/11...7d36b370ec.jpg
Sent from my SM-T800 using Tapatalk
I do, but I doubt Selwyn would remember the phrasing he used and if it differed from how it was reported. From what I heard, the reporter probably just repeated some of the more negative things he said and left out the rest. When she was about to leave she asked if there was anyone else in the Dunedin firearms scene who she could talk to for another opinion. I gave her the number of a very talkative local advocate, who has written books on the statistics behind firearms in NZ. If she did bother to interview him too, she certainly doesn't seem to have included any of it. Maybe he used words with more than three syllables. Maybe his point of view didn't fit in with what she was trying say.Quote:
Originally Posted by timattalon
Might be in your bosses' best interest to clarify either here or somewhere else in public - taking what's out there at the moment I will be giving McCarthy's a wide berth in future, and likely not the only one. Usually made a point of dropping in there when in Dunedin...Quote:
Originally Posted by tommygun
OI enjoy writing to Otago uni and asking why they continue to let Kevin embarrass them with his drivel. I know a few other people do too.Quote:
Originally Posted by kotuku
