Thread: Wtf

'this is very interesting as i have first hand knowledge from a farmer that caught him poaching a week before it happened and found him very arrogant and very agressive when confronted.'

Same subject in another forum. The person caught and confronted was Mr Drummer.

Hope you guys don't mind me adding my 2 cents worth, me being an aussie. Many years ago I was almost shot in NZ so this sort of thing hits a raw spot with me. There is just no excuse whatsoever for not identifying your target or being complacent or just down right stupid with a firearm

This person should never have the privilege to have a FAL again.

If this had happened here he would have automatically had his FAL cancelled and his firearms confiscated on the assault charge with a blunt weapon. He would be deemed 'a prohibited person' for 5 years and then would have to reapply for permission to obtain a FAL through the court he was convicted in. As part of the process ALL parties affected would be interviewed by the DFO (district firearms officer) as to the suitability of the applicant to be able to apply for a FAL. The DFO would then notify the police public prosecutor who in turn would present to the court the police recommendation. The police are known to err on the side of precaution. Hiring a Barrister to represent you in court is rather expensive!

BTW, just being put on a good behaviour bond deems you to be 'a prohibited person'.

Rant over

Pete

If he does get his F A L back he won't be the first bloke who shot someone to be back out there.

Originally Posted by ExPoh75

'this is very interesting as i have first hand knowledge from a farmer that caught him poaching a week before it happened and found him very arrogant and very agressive when confronted.'

Same subject in another forum. The person caught and confronted was Mr Drummer.

Hope you guys don't mind me adding my 2 cents worth, me being an aussie. Many years ago I was almost shot in NZ so this sort of thing hits a raw spot with me. There is just no excuse whatsoever for not identifying your target or being complacent or just down right stupid with a firearm

This person should never have the privilege to have a FAL again.

If this had happened here he would have automatically had his FAL cancelled and his firearms confiscated on the assault charge with a blunt weapon. He would be deemed 'a prohibited person' for 5 years and then would have to reapply for permission to obtain a FAL through the court he was convicted in. As part of the process ALL parties affected would be interviewed by the DFO (district firearms officer) as to the suitability of the applicant to be able to apply for a FAL. The DFO would then notify the police public prosecutor who in turn would present to the court the police recommendation. The police are known to err on the side of precaution. Hiring a Barrister to represent you in court is rather expensive!

BTW, just being put on a good behaviour bond deems you to be 'a prohibited person'.

Rant over

Pete

Welcome to the forum Pete. Of course we don't mind you having your two cents worth, in fact help yourself and take a dollar's worth.