Log in

Register



Topic-icon Trade me assault rifle sales

  • Posts: 1614
  • Thank you received: 20
1 month 2 days ago #545709 by Blueberry

Mudlerk wrote: We've just had a British couple, who had spent 30 of their ADULT years in South Africa, decide against buying our place, on the grounds that they felt it "too dangerous living this far out of town" [15 minutes from Palmerston North].

If we heard the expression "Christianic terrorists" on the news three times a day, we'd probably have people burning crosses!


Re your prospective buyers; i'm guessing their previous experiences are exactly the reason they want to be closer to town services, e.g. police, firefighters and hospitals

And, honestly, Mudlerk, whether they be 'christianic' islamic or supremaci-diotic, any form of extremism is to be rejected.(where is the 'aversion therapy' when you need it?) .

What kind of person fires a gun - any gun - into an assembly of unarmed people?


[;)] Blueberry
treading lightly on mother earth
The following user(s) said Thank You: max2

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

  • Posts: 180
  • Thank you received: 19
1 month 1 day ago #545724 by sandgrubber

I'm confused. The news I've read says "military style semi-automatic weapons" are to be banned, not all semi-automatics. Doesn't that mean that low caliber semi-automatics are to remain legal?

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

  • Posts: 542
  • Thank you received: 49
1 month 1 day ago #545725 by spark

sandgrubber wrote: I'm confused. The news I've read says "military style semi-automatic weapons" are to be banned, not all semi-automatics. Doesn't that mean that low caliber semi-automatics are to remain legal?

The changes to the law that have just been rushed through (see below) don't appear to ban anything - all they do is reclassify a broad range of semi-automatic firearms as "Military Style Semi-Automatic":
http://legislation.govt.nz/regulation/public/2019/0055/latest/whole.html#LMS173647
and
http://legislation.govt.nz/regulation/public/2019/0056/latest/whole.html#LMS173697

This doesn't match up with what is being said in the press that the government will "ban all MSSAs and assault rifles"...
BTW what is an "assault rifle"? the Arms Act does not define "assault rifle"!
http://legislation.govt.nz/act/public/1983/0044/latest/whole.html#DLM72622

The following user(s) said Thank You: max2

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

  • Posts: 566
  • Thank you received: 79
1 month 1 day ago #545728 by Mudlerk

Thanks, Blueberry, for reinforcing my central point. I was trying to say that, for adults as well as children, what we read, see on tv and computer screens, etc. can override our ability think clearly in the present. In terms of theft, violence and other types of harm caused by our fellow humans, it is patently safer to live in rural than in urban New Zealand.
As for the kinds of persons who shoot unarmed people, there is one group I used to belong to: my military training said nothing about making sure the 'enemy' was armed before I fired.
I'm afraid we need some really basic attitude changes, much of it about stuff we presently see as proper behaviour.

Last Edit: 1 month 1 day ago by Mudlerk.

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

  • Posts: 77
  • Thank you received: 23
1 month 21 hours ago #545738 by stentor

All E-cats are registered so they have them in the fold

Making all A-cat AR15 style rifles into E-cats is a legal means to make them now untradeable and an effort to get a handle on where they all are - in hand with this they have stopped any movement of E-cats

the next step is to buy back all of the now E-cats

They have left out rimfires (Ruger 10/22s) and semi shotguns ( below a certain capacity) because the buyback would be too expensive - they learned this from the Australian experience

What they are after is the black scary guns with detachable magazines

If you think this sounds confusing then that is because it is

I honestly think that there is a part of our govt that is trying to "beat" Australia by banning semis faster than they did

The following user(s) said Thank You: max2, Mudlerk, sandgrubber

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

  • Posts: 566
  • Thank you received: 79
1 month 9 hours ago #545740 by Mudlerk

Stentor, I think the race with the Aussies was finished before we left the starting blocks! :)

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

  • Posts: 77
  • Thank you received: 23
4 weeks 1 day ago #545784 by stentor

There has been a really ugly side to this whole government screwup that has led me to not like my country much at the moment

The following user(s) said Thank You: max2

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

  • Posts: 566
  • Thank you received: 79
4 weeks 8 hours ago #545796 by Mudlerk

It's been really beautiful from my viewpoint...proof, I guess, that one man's soup is another man's poison.

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

  • Posts: 77
  • Thank you received: 23
4 weeks 28 minutes ago #545806 by stentor

Kate

Could you delete my profile please?

Thank you

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

  • Posts: 11337
  • Thank you received: 208
3 weeks 6 days ago #545807 by kate

stentor, I've sent you a pm...


Web Goddess

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

  • Posts: 160
  • Thank you received: 0
2 weeks 3 days ago #546014 by smudge

Stentor there are always going to be those with opposing views - in all walks of life. I don't own a semi auto but I would have liked to. I know many people with semi autos that are worth a lot of money, they are responsible and those with E-Cats have good security. I also know a few pistol shooters. They won't be terribly happy losing their firearms I'm sure.

There is even talk of banning 'silencers' which is really silly. I have two suppressed rifles. The general public probably don't realise they aren't silencers. A suppressor simply takes the bite (and a bit of the bark) out of a rifle making it more pleasant to shoot and creates less alarm with the animals nearby - they don't know where the sound has come from. But that stuff is lost on non shooters. As for this being a democratic process, I don't recall having any input whatsoever.

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

  • Posts: 542
  • Thank you received: 49
2 weeks 2 days ago #546016 by spark

smudge wrote: [SNIP] As for this being a democratic process, I don't recall having any input whatsoever.

The general public were granted just over 48 hours to research and write their submissions on the Bill.
Oral submissions were only heard for one day, and the orators were by invitation only.
This is highly irregular, not the normal process that we follow when making laws - think back to the 1992 Arms Ammendment Act following the 1990 Aramoana massacre...

I'll argue that once the perp was arrested, and the Police came out and said that they were not looking for anyone else in connection with the murders, that there was no longer an emergency, just an ongoing heightened alertness level to maintain. ie let's take the time to do a proper review of the Arms Act, and not make mistakes as a consequence of rushing when we do not need too.

The following user(s) said Thank You: max2

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

  • Posts: 180
  • Thank you received: 19
2 weeks 2 days ago #546021 by sandgrubber

When something awful happens there is normally an urge to DO SOMETHING. In politics, it often results in hastily written legislation that later needs to be amended. I'm not into guns, and can't say if this has happened here. If it has, I sure hope all parties can handle it in a civil way, work up amendments and get on with it, rather than getting all enraged hateful about it in the US fashion.

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

  • Posts: 2596
  • Thank you received: 39
2 weeks 2 days ago #546023 by jeannielea

My understanding is that the legislation now under consideration is almost the same as in the 2017 one which did not get a majority and so did not pass into law.

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

  • Posts: 542
  • Thank you received: 49
2 weeks 2 days ago #546024 by spark

jeannielea wrote: My understanding is that the legislation now under consideration is almost the same as in the 2017 one which did not get a majority and so did not pass into law.

Would that be the Arms (Firearms Prohibition Orders) Amendment Bill 2018?
http://legislation.govt.nz/bill/member/2018/0058/latest/whole.html

It is/was substantially different compared to the current Arms (Prohibited Firearms, Magazines, and Parts) Amendment Bill:
http://legislation.govt.nz/bill/government/2019/0125/latest/whole.html

Attachments:

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

Time to create page: 0.105 seconds
Go to top

Sign up for my monthly newsletter!

Get all the latest news along with practical tips and expert advice.