@Savage1 " large bolty screw thingys " do i get these at bunnings?
:XD:
Printable View
@Savage1 " large bolty screw thingys " do i get these at bunnings?
:XD:
I would post a picture, but screw you. :thumbsup:Quote:
Originally Posted by stumpy
I know where your coming from having had mates and family take the cheapest option that might keep their kids from accessing, but that's all. But where does it end with firearm security when there is little if any deterrent from the courts when the few thieves and unlicensed that are caught ( probably pulled up in the first place for exceeding the speed limit). In smaller communities it doesn't take a genius to know who owns firearms.Quote:
Originally Posted by Savage1
Such data is confidential. Nothing to do with the person you're referring to or the bull that the media churns out either. They have their agendas for sure.Quote:
Originally Posted by GravelBen
Do you really think that firearms related crime has fallen or stayed static in NZ? Might have something to do with methamphetamine, although that's just my opinion.
meth is huge, my ex boss was doing 40k$ a year, when he finally quit he was telling me its lawyers, doctors and even surgeons using the stuff. if the cops can intercept 1/2 a billion bucks worth in one swoop gives you an idea of demand
d
We'll ignore the fact that the army do use a bolt action rifle and that the Steyr is select fire shall we?Quote:
Originally Posted by Savage1
Sounds good.
How's this for an opinion?Quote:
Originally Posted by 10-Ring
My opinion is the fact that the annual rate of firearm homicide per 100,000 population has remained much the same since 1995 that gun crime is not increasing and has fallen dramatically from what it was pre 1995.
We've even had record low rates during 2011 and 2012.
The annual rate of firearm homicide per 100,000 population is:
Attachment 52298
Quote:
Originally Posted by 10-Ring
I looked it up in a dictionary
"bulky in figure; heavily built; corpulent; thickset; fat:"
Stout = Short and fat........(or its a beer...)
Whilst this set of figures is one perspective and represents sadly actual deaths it may be misleading on the actual extent of firearms crime. In 1990 for example David Grey was probably the total contributor to that year's statistic.Quote:
Originally Posted by Jexla
The news in our neck of the woods pertaining to E-cat safes is that the inspectors will need to sight a manufacturer's guarantee that an e-cat safe is 6mm thick and/or an engineer's guarantee that a home-made safe is minimum 6mm thick with the appropriate locks.
The rule is not retrospective so if you are good now you are good in the future.
I gather that the idea is that the inspectors do not have the technical know-how to say if an e-cat safe is good or not. Obviously a set of calipers would do the trick but apparently that is not to be.
All that aside, I agree that A-cat safes in general should be stronger than they are - a personnel locker with a hasp and staple on it is as much good as a one-legged man in an arse kicking party
There a times when a beer safe could be handy! :PQuote:
Originally Posted by timattalon
Thats always been the rule for e/b/cQuote:
Originally Posted by 308
Quote:
Originally Posted by 308
Because we all know how tricky using those callipers can be.....Almost need a degree:ORLY:
hey , wait a min ..... i might be effing great in an ass kicking party .......
It took you longer to bite than I expected, do you really think c-cat is more deadly than a-cat?Quote:
Originally Posted by Jexla
What a great example of using very selective statistics to back an argument.Quote:
Originally Posted by Jexla
Come on jexla, I'm sure you can see the blatantly obvious holes in that argument.
Depends what the firearm is that is on C cat. If it's select fire then yes Mr policeman, I do think it is more deadly, don't you?Quote:
Originally Posted by Savage1
Sure, we don't have statistics on actual gun crime because your lot don't record it. What we do have however is statistics on gun murders and it's the best we have to go off, unless you know some better stats to use, cough 'em up....Quote:
Originally Posted by Savage1
So you think E cat is no deadlier than A but C is more deadly than A if it is select fire? I fail to follow your logic.Quote:
Originally Posted by Jexla
If you only have a narrow amount of information then avoid coming to broad conclusions, homicides are far from being the only crimes that involve firearms, a lot aren't reported, often some of the worst of them. Going off of your logic then there wouldn't have been a single firearms offence in Northland so far this year, which is funny because I've personally lost count of the number of crims I've confronted this year that who have been carrying firearms at the time and/or very recently used one in the commission of a crime. But hey, what would I know compared to someone who sits at a desk most days.
The problem I see is that there doesn't appear to be any clear direction or game plan to tackle organised crime and the drug trade. Everybody wants an end to gangs, P etc but the approach we are taking is a broken record and doesn't appear to be making an impact.
With regards to firearms, the police association is taking a disjointed and rambling crusade against legal gun owners who they dont differentiate from criminals. They cry for gun registration, restrictions on .50 BMG's, further restrictions on MSSA's. None of those things will serve to enhance officer safety. Most illegal guns are obtained through theft, so registration won't do shit. .50BMG's are pretty much never used in crime. Restricting them is pointless. MSSA's are already among the most tightly controlled guns. They are already registered anf required to be kept in more substantial security. What more could they want to increase officer safety? There is something to be said for A category security being to relaxed, most A cat safes are shite. But as has been pointed out, why should we have to saddle a burden caused by organised crime?
Perhaps we need take a drastic new direction. Maybe we need to legalise all drugs. That would basically destroy the economy of the gangs. If meth addicts could get a cheap hit without having to commit crimes to feed their habits we might see a steep decline in burglary, which may result in less guns being stolen. We should introduce warrentless searches for anybody known to be associated with organised criminal gangs. MSSA owners are burdened with this so why the fuck can't we do it to gang members. Imagine how impossible it would be to operate a crime ring if the cops could pay a daily visit to the gang pad or the associates houses.
omg .... im one legged , and i sit at a desk ....... this is becoming all about me :D
Quote:
Originally Posted by Savage1
You're thick, I have finally found my signature. I won't bother arguing with you.
It's not often that I get called thick, when I do it is normally by people with notably less intellect than me or my wife, however I'm not suggesting that you fall into either of those categories.
If you're unable to explain your logic then that doesn't make me stupid.
Damn straight - people wanna get high - why not legalise ecstasy? We already know it is safer than alcohol, or horse-riding for that matterQuote:
Originally Posted by Beavis
If it were up to me I'd have warrentless searches on gang pads, gangs having to prove clean legal ownership of assets to avoid forfeiture, decriminalise drugs that do sod-all harm but keep the crime of dealing drugs as illegal and ban fucking pokie machines - problem gambling does no good whatsoever to anyone
Sorry - pissed rant over
C-mon guys... The whole E-cat firearms are more "deadlier" then A-cat is pointless. If you subscribe to this view then you are no better then the goofballs that thought up the legislation that a 'free standing' pistol grip makes a semi more... More what? Deadlier!? No way.
That whole outcome was an absolute monstrosity to law abiding FAL owners.
How can an Ecat AR be more deadlier then an Acat? They both fire .223/5.56 except one can legally own standard capacity mags, the other can't. Mag change takes 2 seconds who cares. It's a pointless argument.
Hey that's me.Quote:
Originally Posted by timattalon
Sent from the swamp
Dont worry, I was not having a dig. I am the definition of stout myself....Quote:
Originally Posted by chrome
When one stoops to ad hominem attacks the argument's already lost.Quote:
Originally Posted by Jexla
:thumbsup:
I think what the police where trying to do its make all ar15 ak types e catQuote:
Originally Posted by Sasquatch
weather you agree or not doesn't matter imagine someone having a few ar15's in a locked wooden cupboard or with a bike chain to the hot water cylinder how easy it would be for them to be stolen.
As a firearm owner I don't want that type of problem to be there in the 1st place.
I would rather see E-cat security being the minimum standard across the board,
Way better then what they trying to achieve having every semi auto firearm regarded as E-cat.
Sometimes people have to step back and see the bigger picture
I think they would need to water down the requirements a little. All good having a 6mm safe as a standard, but it isn't realistic for a lot of people to meet the standards required to fix them to the premise.
And lets not forget that a determined gun theif will get in with tools and time.
no no fuck noQuote:
Originally Posted by Beavis
I agree, who determines what is association?Quote:
Originally Posted by gimp
Thanks for the responses guy - As entering the scene from a background with little to no firearms exposure simply chucking a cable around a post never came into the picture. I agree that A-cat minimum requirements should be raised to align a legal requirement with what I percieve as a moral obligation. While I also agree that they will not stop a determined theif, if it stops an oppertunistic one then everyone wins.
i have a my A cat safe made of 1.5mm folded steel. recessed door, full length internal hinge, electronic combo lock with 2 20mm sliding bolts. bolted down to wall and floor.
its in an alarmed house with a dogo cross brit bully in the back yard. i consider this beyond what should be required for any A cat firearm including ar15's
remember that if we give the cops an inch they will take a mile, ar15's today and it will be 10/22's tomorrow
They can do a buy back on my 10/22 for the right price, over priced pieces of crap that they areQuote:
Originally Posted by gonetropo
some are crap shooters, other are great. i use one on rabbits all the time.Quote:
Originally Posted by Steve123
i once spent near on $1800 (inc scope) building one up and it was a pure tack driver!!
unfortunately had to sell all the guns when we split up as i needed the cash. all on target for a full safe now though
So,Quote:
Originally Posted by Jexla
I'll assume your logic is that a C cat can put down a higher rate of fire.
A cat rifles, can only hold 7 rounds unless .22lr. An E is unlimited. Sure you can change magazines in under 5 seconds but that is still a lot of mag changes, four to get 30 rounds out so at least 10 seconds, especially fumbling small 7 round magazines. So the rate of fire is far far higher out of an E cat than an A cat rifle and would take less skill to lay that fire down accurately.
Full auto is very hard to control, so only when you have a crush of people within 25m will it actually be any more deadly, even then it'd be questionable. I'd rather take on an idiot with a full auto than an idiot with an E cat.
E cats are also easier to conceal as you can get folding and telescopic stocks which reduce the length to below 762mm. They can also chuck a bayonet on the front. You can even get an E cat MP5 with only a slightly longer barrel than standard.
There's a reason why most Police and Army rifles have almost all the same features as an E-cat rifle.
To say an E-cat is no more deadly than an A cat is wrong in my opinion, sure it's easy enough to buy large capacity magazines and clip onto an A cat but that's another matter, and it also makes them E cat.
So keep your signature up as long as you want, it just shows a level of arrogance and immaturity.
I'm actually disappointed in myself that I bothered to reply.
i think you mean rimfire not just 22lr.Quote:
Originally Posted by Savage1
17hmr, 22 mag etc are still allowed 15 in the mag
A mate had a good fully suppressed one years back but my JW bolt out shoots my standard one. I can't see the point spending heaps on a 22. It's average but nothing spectacularQuote:
Originally Posted by gonetropo
Sent from my SM-G388F using Tapatalk
depends on what your passion is, i like 100m head shots with a 22lr. guess its my thing and i like doing it.Quote:
Originally Posted by Steve123
