Thread: TV3 & Guncity mistake

Originally Posted by Tahr

So, what would a prosecution have actually achieved for gun owners? Someone please explain?

Nothing. But there's a saying:

No man is above the law and no man is below it.

The law should be applied equally and fairly. Prosecute the journalist or it sets a bad precedence.

Originally Posted by Hayden C

Nothing. But there's a saying:

No man is above the law and no man is below it.

The law should be applied equally and fairly. Prosecute the journalist or it sets a bad precedence.

Pasted from another site: (which I won't name due to the NO POLITICS rule that some seem to miss)

How many times do we see the Police proceed with prosecutions with the public statement that they must let the Courts decide and pass judgement as it is not their place to do so? The Police are normally very unwilling to make a judgment like this from what I have seen and experienced. It makes my especially grumpy as a Firearms License holder knowing what the responsibilities and rules are regarding ownership, storage and handling. The Police have made a mistake on this one.

and

so if i have this correct, the police have discretion over wether to prosecute. this stunt by HDPA was done for ratings, not the noble sentiment such as "civic duty to expose a loophole" despite what media works say, and she gets a pass. greg carvelle, the auckland gunshop owner who made the headlines years ago when he defended himself and others in his gun shop against a machete wielding intruder, was prosecuted though. someone wake me up, puuuuulease. i feel sorry for the frontline police who go into every situation unarmed, not knowing if someone in the situation is armed, but they do themselves no favours with a decision like this.

Originally Posted by Tommy

Pasted from another site: (which I won't name due to the NO POLITICS rule that some


and

Whoa that shit is way to civilised and well thought out.

Originally Posted by Tommy

You can only possess a full auto on a C endorsement, and you can never fire it. However, if there's no "sinister intent", well gee whizz you're off scot-free now if you do, the police now don't prosecute that sort of thing. Now THERE'S a loophole eh?

Well I believe there is a loophole and you want to fire your auto, become a dealer as you have to know it is in good working order to sell it and therefore you must know it works, consumer guarantees act, you don't want no comebacks!

Tommy. What you posted from that other site.
I was about to say the same..thanks you saved me having to type that out.
Really though so now the NZ Police are Judgers as well

Who's keen to donate tipple some money to get this cleaned up I'd consider it

the bizzare bloody thing is when Richard Grant took them on over the mssa freestanding pistolgrip issue in the palmy north court ,( i believe gundoc was the expert witness/)Hon Justice Jillian Mallons judgement specifically ripped the police(akacrown)a new arsehole over acting as judge jury and executioner. she spoke at length and very specifically lays out the roles of govt ,judges,and police.for the bloody life of me i simply cannot see why a certain element of Police HQ staff seemingly ignore such things.

Originally Posted by kotuku

the bizzare bloody thing is when Richard Grant took them on over the mssa freestanding pistolgrip issue in the palmy north court ,( i believe gundoc was the expert witness/)Hon Justice Jillian Mallons judgement specifically ripped the police(akacrown)a new arsehole over acting as judge jury and executioner. she spoke at length and very specifically lays out the roles of govt ,judges,and police.for the bloody life of me i simply cannot see why a certain element of Police HQ staff seemingly ignore such things.

Shit mate sometimes you make startling amounts of sense. One day we're going to have to have a beer and not try to punch each other

Originally Posted by Tommy

Being paranoid doesn't necessarily mean that someone isn't out to get you

Just because you are being paranoid, does not make you wrong......

You could sell ticket to that fight Tommy

Unfortunately no surprises here....Soper went crying into his handkerchief to Key, Mediaworks TV 3 also pleading they won't give the Nats too much shit in the next election if let Heather off their silly escapade. Police instructed to lay off.
Along with TV 1 being state owned should be nice smooth election media wise for govt
Welcome to democracy in action

Originally Posted by kotuku

the bizzare bloody thing is when Richard Grant took them on over the mssa freestanding pistolgrip issue in the palmy north court ,( i believe gundoc was the expert witness/)Hon Justice Jillian Mallons judgement specifically ripped the police(akacrown)a new arsehole over acting as judge jury and executioner. she spoke at length and very specifically lays out the roles of govt ,judges,and police.for the bloody life of me i simply cannot see why a certain element of Police HQ staff seemingly ignore such things.

Richard Lincoln, not Grant. Yes, I appeared at that case and threw in my two cents worth, but Richard deserves all the credit for a superbly prepared and presented case. Even the Crown Solicitor came and congratulated him for it after the hearing finished.

Did anyone also notice that there is to be no prosecution of one of their own shooting dead an unarmed man last year? A bit like the fiasco that left an innocent van driver dead in Auckland. I have no problem with armed idiots being tipped over when they present a clear and present danger, but at least see something that looks like a weapon before firing!

thank you gundoc .For some peculiar reason I always get his(RL) name wrong. ive actually got a paper copy of her judgement in my files at home.A very bloody interesting read .

Originally Posted by gundoc

Richard Lincoln, not Grant. Yes, I appeared at that case and threw in my two cents worth, but Richard deserves all the credit for a superbly prepared and presented case. Even the Crown Solicitor came and congratulated him for it after the hearing finished.

Did anyone also notice that there is to be no prosecution of one of their own shooting dead an unarmed man last year? A bit like the fiasco that left an innocent van driver dead in Auckland. I have no problem with armed idiots being tipped over when they present a clear and present danger, but at least see something that looks like a weapon before firing!

You forgot to mention the rest of the story regarding the unarmed man, such as what he said to the officers and what his physical actions were. Pretty easy way to influence people with your possibly bias opinion.

As for the rest of it, Im very disappointed and know a lot of others that feel the same. Police have always got, and have always had, discretion over charging someone or not, which is a good thing.

OK, just another tough from me.
Questions:
1- Are we law abiding citizens really united?
2- Are the majority of us law abiding citizens against these people lobbing against lawful firearms possession?
3- Are we keen to make a difference and put ourselves together against this discrimination regards "people above the law"

I acknowledge the cost of a "civil" action agains the "machine" but would we be interested in a "fair" and a possible final decision in who is who to make rules and decisions about what is right or wrong? I am in this forum for just a little while and i meet and dealt with few great people in here and i meet and know a lot of great passionate people who own and love firearms and are very responsible for it. So i think why we don't ask the "above the law" people to go and take the "dodgy" guns from the hands of those who don't possess a F.A.L. or a "registered" legally purchased F.A.?

I am sorry if i am been a little bit over the top but where i came from is very difficult to prove you are responsible for a firearm and or process one, however own an illegal F.A. is easily achieved, but where i came from sometimes the police may shoot the person with a firearm first and them ask what is happening.

Cheers.

Mac