View Full Version : Gun Raids - Big Brother is here
Lias
21st December 2006, 13:25
I've never been much of a conspiracy theorist but is anyone else here feeling like all those NWO Police state big brother conspiracies are starting to come true with all these gun raids?
This isnt the police targeting gangs or criminals, this is the police targeting licensed dealers and collectors who may have been in the posession of a few unregistered firearms. Everyone should have the right to posess firearms without them being registered with the police, anything less is a police state.
It truly scares me that one day the only people who will have guns will be the gangs and the government, and then we'll all be fucked.
PS: If your pro gun control don't even bother posting here, this thread is for people who believe in the right to bear arms.
Dooly
21st December 2006, 13:32
You just reminded me.
All my rifles are lying in the bottom of the wardrobe. Have'nt put them away after our move and sort out yet.
Only 2 of my guns are on record with the police I guess after buying from a shop.
The Police said not to worry about it when you buy private, (notifying them).
bistard
21st December 2006, 13:37
I have heard on the radio,that the Police were looking at destroying some
of the impounded guns,now reading between the lines,some of the guns are quite rare or collectable,whats up with that??
Dont get me wrong I dont actually own a gun,but shit if I wanted to I should be allowed!!
SpankMe
21st December 2006, 13:41
Remember they were also all licenced firearm owners. Not crims/gang members. The police never seem to get their priorities right. Like when they raided brothels and used the fact that the girls had condoms on them as proof that they were working there. :pinch:
Laava
21st December 2006, 13:42
Isn't that crazy? I have guns the police don't know about, and I have them legally! They missed their chance to start a register when they brought out the new license system. Still, it would only apply to the honest among us. I had the 3rd degree re-license recently,"would you use your guns in self defense" I didn't know what the right answer was! The guy was very understanding as I couldn't answer it. I like the police taking unlicensed guns off gangs tho.
placidfemme
21st December 2006, 13:53
I don't own any guns... but wouldn't mind learning to use them and the such... I totally agree 100% with Lias... this NWO big brother crap is becoming a pain in the ass...
NighthawkNZ
21st December 2006, 13:58
Remember they were also all licenced firearm owners.
they say getting get the guns off the streets...??? err they were on the streets, I agree why not target the gangs and true crims... yet again the innocent pay
NighthawkNZ
21st December 2006, 13:58
I only have a high powered crossbow, & a medium powered one, and you don't need a licence for these... makes you wounder???
marty
21st December 2006, 14:14
i went to a burg many years ago of a gun collectors house. 6 uzi's, 3 other full machine guns, a couple of Ak47's and a nice wee collection of semi auto pistols were amongst the haul.
some have been recovered, but there are some scary guns out there in bad guys hands as a result of this burglary, and if the collector had been more scrupulous about his security they probably wouldn't have been taken in the 1st place. there are 'collectors' out there that are not quite as committed to the security of their weapons as perhaps they should be, not to mention they appear to be simply breaking the law, both criminal and importing law. i have no sympathy for them.
and don't think for a minute that the police are not going after the gangs and their firearms - i don't see anyone on here saying how great it is when cops do a warrant and find 5 guns at a p-lab/gang house, which happens on a daily basis. oh, and where did the bad guys get the guns in the first place?
Beemer
21st December 2006, 14:46
I have to agree with Marty - the guns were not licensed and had not been bought legally from what I could understand. They were assault rifles and the like, things that if a genuine collector wanted to own, could be bought and licensed legally.
How do most of the criminals get their guns? From burgling collectors and gun shops, etc. So do you think these people would be likely to tell the police that someone broke in and stole five unlicensed weapons? No way! So the guns get circulated without the police even knowing of their existence.
I have very little sympathy for people who deal in these kinds of weapons and who aren't prepared to play by the rules.
Finn
21st December 2006, 14:54
Okay, so how may people die a year in NZ as a result of these auotmatic weapons? What ever the number is, deduct the gang on gang murders. That's a blessing, not a problem. I can't think of one.
Meanwhile, our Prime Minister is giving herself payrises while 1000's of people die on waiting lists for medical treatment.
Arm yourselves.
Lias
21st December 2006, 15:02
Completely hypothetically I may have had in my posession over the years various unlawful firearms, as well as knowing that many of the guys I grew up with also had "illegal" guns. None of them to my knowledge have ever killed anyone, or used them in an antisocial way, most of them are hard working family men, who believe vehemently in the right to defend their families and property with lethal force. None of those hypothetical firearms were ever from burglaries or brought off dodgy dealers. They were all brought by licensed gun owners off farmers who never bother with shit like paperwork, and had the serial numbers erased, and then passed onto their mates who paid for them in the first place.
I'm not a huge fan of America, but one thing America definitely does have its shit together with is the right to bear arms.
It SHOULD be legal in NZ for anyone whos not a serious criminal to posess whatever firearms they feel are necessary to defend their home and property, and lets face it assault rifles are made to kill people, and when your defending your family killing the intruders is what its all about. Not to mention its just plain FUN to fire fully auto weapons.
Lias
21st December 2006, 15:09
Its also worth mentioning that most of the news coverage has glossed over the fact that most if not all of the automatic rifles etc that were siezed were NOT possessed unlawfully. Where they suspected someone had been involved with any dealing in unlicensed guns , even a single shot .22, they siezed the entire collection /stock of weapons.. Given that we are talking about dealers and collectors I'm actually surprised how FEW fully automatic weapons they siezed.
Squeak the Rat
21st December 2006, 15:20
and lets face it assault rifles are made to kill people, and when your defending your family killing the intruders is what its all about.
From a distance. I'll take a shotgun any day for home defence and they are perfectly legal.....
sAsLEX
21st December 2006, 15:24
I have very little sympathy for people who deal in these kinds of weapons and who aren't prepared to play by the rules.
Do you know the difference between a say Legal Bolt Action hunting rifle and a military styled semi/full auto? Or would you in a robbery/criminal event?
A big arse shot gun looks far more sinister and are involved in alot more crimes than these guns that were collected in the raid
It SHOULD be legal in NZ for anyone whos not a serious criminal to posess whatever firearms they feel are necessary to defend their home and property, and lets face it assault rifles are made to kill people, and when your defending your family killing the intruders is what its all about. Not to mention its just plain FUN to fire fully auto weapons.
Pump Action Shot gun with pellets is the best home defence. Not many people walk after a taste of lead from them and the rounds have less chance to cause collateral damage than a slug or rifle round.
Wanna fire FULL auto? Join the defence we got a few!
ManDownUnder
21st December 2006, 15:25
From a distance. I'll take a shotgun any day for home defence and they are perfectly legal.....
The gun yes... it's use against an invader... legal... in New Zealand??? ARE YOU MAD???
sAsLEX
21st December 2006, 15:28
The gun yes... it's use against an invader... legal... in New Zealand??? ARE YOU MAD???
two shots
1 warning shot through the roof immediately proceeded by one through the chest.
Squeak the Rat
21st December 2006, 15:29
The gun yes... it's use against an invader... legal... in New Zealand??? ARE YOU MAD???
Is that a rhetorical question?
I was subtely trying to nullify the argument of home defence to justify possession of automatic weapons without appearing to be a "pro-gun control" nut. :D
ManDownUnder
21st December 2006, 15:38
two shots
1 warning shot through the roof immediately proceeded by one through the chest.
Yeah - lets paint a picture... let's say I do that. Bang Bang ha ha - got the fucker - he won't do that again... then another guy breaks into your place...
First person he sees is considered likely to be a lethal threat. He has the element of surprise and bang bang - you lose your life.
First rule of an arms race, the aggressor always has the advantage over a defender. I'd prefer to avoid that arms race thanks. Refer the US of A arming bears...
Drum
21st December 2006, 15:38
.......I'm not a huge fan of America, but one thing America definitely does have its shit together with is the right to bear arms..............
Please tell me you're joking.
ManDownUnder
21st December 2006, 15:39
Is that a rhetorical question?
I was subtely trying to nullify the argument of home defence to justify possession of automatic weapons without appearing to be a "pro-gun control" nut. :D
oopsie - I see your point and well done...
Swoop
21st December 2006, 15:40
Interesting to read that "approx 500 guns seized" BUT "up to 20% may be illegal".
SO... how many were "dodgy"?
Then there is the comment on destroying all of the seized firearms.
IF an item of property is stolen, it has to be returned to the rightful owner before some public servant gets carried away.
THEN we have the fact that these raids have been executed "just prior" to a select committee hearing which is looking into arms laws??? Coincidence... (Tui time.)
It's the old story of the criminals being harder to prosecute, so the police go after the law abiding citizen as the easy target.
MSTRS
21st December 2006, 15:57
I'm all for keeping a watchful eye on gun possession - lawful purpose an'all that...but...
Gun control ?? That's more to do with being able to hit what you are aimimg at!!
Skyryder
21st December 2006, 17:06
I've never been much of a conspiracy theorist but is anyone else here feeling like all those NWO Police state big brother conspiracies are starting to come true with all these gun raids?
This isnt the police targeting gangs or criminals, this is the police targeting licensed dealers and collectors who may have been in the posession of a few unregistered firearms. Everyone should have the right to posess firearms without them being registered with the police, anything less is a police state.
It truly scares me that one day the only people who will have guns will be the gangs and the government, and then we'll all be fucked.
PS: If your pro gun control don't even bother posting here, this thread is for people who believe in the right to bear arms.
This scares me 'more' than the Police doing nothing as your post seems to suggest.
(quote) Mr Whitehead said most of the firearms police seized were held legitimately but when police found evidence of unlawful activity or trading, all the weapons in the person's possession were seized.
"Once we found evidence of illegal activity and commenced the revocation process, that obligates us to seize every firearm in their possession." from
http://www.stuff.co.nz/thepress/3906688a11.html
Fucking good thing too. Just who do you think these bozo's were selling their guns to Lias. But hey don't answer that. Can't have you getting all 'fired' up and slinging redeye's at me.
No one should have the right to 'bear' arms in this country. The right to bear arms is from the second ammendment from the American Consitution and refers exactly to that, 'bear arms'' meaning to carry them out in the streets and in society.
The constitution does not refer to ownership. Most gunners do not understand the difference and your post suggests that you are one of them. Look into the orogins of the second ammendment. It's not as the NRA or the now discreddited KKK seem to believe; that all citizens have the right to bear arms in society whilst going about thier buisness.
There is considerable debate about not only the exact meaning of the second ammenment but also to its intent. A 'well regulated militia'...........is the foundation of the second ammendment and the right to bear arms is in conjuction that intent. It is 'not' as may 'gunners now claim in a completly different society than when the constitution was written, to bear (carry) arms for their own purposes.
Gunners believe that they, and they alone are the only ones to have rights in this. They conventialy forget or have no thoughts to others in this matter. This is hightlighted in the retarded philosphy that guns do not kill, people do.
The 'right' to ownership is enshrined in our firearms law in as much that they are a fit and proper person, and so are the rights of others in relation to this law' their partners. As in most things there needs to be a 'fit and proper' balance in this respect. New Zealand takes this into account and rightly so. If the applicant's partner refuses to have firearms on the property then the applicant will not be granted a licence. Period. That's it.
I've owned firearms all my life. Dumped the last in the Police station few months ago when my licence ran out. I could have renewed it but decided not to do so. Bottomline if you are a responable collector you obey the law, same as any law. If you get caught youv'e got no one other than yourself to blame.
Skyryder
Finn
21st December 2006, 17:08
two shots
1 warning shot through the roof immediately proceeded by one through the chest.
Shit. I thought it was 6 warning shots in the head and kick em in the balls.
James Deuce
21st December 2006, 17:14
"They" do not have the right to bear arms in the US. The First part of that amendment is always conveniently ignored by the NRA.
"2nd Amendment A well-regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed."
US citizens (in the context that it was written that means Men - no Women, criminals, Native Americans - O alright Indians) have the right to bear arms if they are a member of a State organised Militia and they have been mobilised for the defence of that State.
Skyryder
21st December 2006, 17:14
Okay, so how may people die a year in NZ as a result of these auotmatic weapons? What ever the number is, deduct the gang on gang murders. That's a blessing, not a problem. I can't think of one.
Meanwhile, our Prime Minister is giving herself payrises while 1000's of people die on waiting lists for medical treatment.
Arm yourselves.
So you expect the Police to turn a blind eye simply on the basis that there are not many deaths from firearms. Have you done any research into threats with firearms. I doubt it.
It'a all getting boring Finn qabout the PM. Try a new approach.
Skyryder
scumdog
21st December 2006, 17:17
I've owned firearms all my life. Dumped the last in the Police station few months ago when my licence ran out. I could have renewed it but decided not to do so. Bottomline if you are a responable collector you obey the law, same as any law. If you get caught youv'e got no one other than yourself to blame.
Skyryder
Next thing they'll be raiding us to see how many 'illegal' motorbikes we have - too noisy, warrant run out, tyres worn below the minimum etc....
Then they'll take ALL your bikes off you.
Seems fair eh?
Finn
21st December 2006, 17:20
Have you done any research into threats with firearms. I doubt it.
It'a all getting boring Finn qabout the PM. Try a new approach.
Skyryder
No, but speed enforcement doesn't reduce the road toll either, just like tighter gun control won't stop firearms incidents. I would expect an academic like you to understand this though.
Speaking of the PM, does your boyfriend know about your Helen Clark masturbation fantasies?
James Deuce
21st December 2006, 17:25
Next thing they'll be raiding us to see how many 'illegal' motorbikes we have - too noisy, warrant run out, tyres worn below the minimum etc....
Then they'll take ALL your bikes of you.
Seems fair eh?
1st Amendment to scumdog's law. Only Sprotsbikes ridden by gun-toting squids shall be confiscated and crushed, so as not to deny the duly appointed upholders of the a law a jolly good laugh from time to time.
Skyryder
21st December 2006, 17:29
Next thing they'll be raiding us to see how many 'illegal' motorbikes we have - too noisy, warrant run out, tyres worn below the minimum etc....
Then they'll take ALL your bikes of you.
Seems fair eh?
That's just plain silly as an analogy. That is unless you know something we don't.
Skyryder
Ixion
21st December 2006, 17:33
May one tactfully point out that making a smoothbore auto or semi auto gun is not that hard. Quite a few Kbers would ahve access to machine shops up to the task.
Rifling is another matter, but if I have the muzzle stuck up your left nostril, I don't NEED no stenking rifling.
So preventing crims getting hold of fire power may not be quite taht easy.
Skyryder
21st December 2006, 18:11
"They" do not have the right to bear arms in the US. The First part of that amendment is always conveniently ignored by the NRA.
"2nd Amendment A well-regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed."
US citizens (in the context that it was written that means Men - no Women, criminals, Native Americans - O alright Indians) have the right to bear arms if they are a member of a State organised Militia and they have been mobilised for the defence of that State.
That's it exactly J2. The gunners and their apologists conveniantly miss the focal point of the second ammendment that is the citizens rights to keep and bear arms in a 'well regulated militia.' The sticky bit is the 'well regulated militia.' The the right to bear etc by its by its very placing in the constitution is an indication of the importance that the signatories to it placed on the preservation of 'freedom.' If by any chance the Federal Govt began opereating 'outside' of the constitution then the militia could 'lawfully' take up arms agaist it. That's was it's purpose. It was not as an aid to Govt Troops. The concept of the civilian militia developed prior to the American War of Independance where the Kings Army was the 'lawfull' army of the colony. Opponents to the second ammendment claim that the National Guard is the 'Well and regulated militia that the second ammendment applies to. It does not. The National Guard is virtually the States Army and can only be 'activated' by the Govenor, whose powers are vested in the US Constitution and the States Constitution. There is always the chance that the Govenor may use the National Guard against US military (treason) in times of a civil war for exmple. I'm not too sure but I believe that the Guard can only come under the US military with the Governors approval.
The problem today is that many of the called 'well and regulated militias' believe that they have this right (to engage the Govt) based on their 'belief and opinion' that the Fed Govt has acted outside the constition and law. Their main argument and they have some legal support for this is the action of the Feds at Waco.
http://www.serendipity.li/waco.html
Waco was madness and is an example of what happens in a gun ridden society regardles of whether it (the actions of the Govt) is lawfull or not.
Skyryder
doc
21st December 2006, 18:17
two shots
1 warning shot through the roof immediately proceeded by one through the chest.
I think you have the sequence around the wrong way.
Anyway I agree with Finn, how many murders, gang violence etc, actually involve these type of weapons I think there is something fishy here let's wait for the court case to come up and get a clearer picture. Sort of like the speculation that rapists get dealt to in prison, from what I've been told somethimes they're considered "role models"
Skyryder
21st December 2006, 18:28
Speaking of the PM, does your boyfriend know about your Helen Clark masturbation fantasies?
Sounds like you have Winj helping you to come up with that line. Mind you from what I hear you have not 'come up with anything of late.' There's medication for that sort of thing. :love:
Skyryder
sAsLEX
21st December 2006, 19:15
First rule of an arms race, the aggressor always has the advantage over a defender. I'd prefer to avoid that arms race thanks. Refer the US of A arming bears...
Who said to go on the defensive?
I think you have the sequence around the wrong way.
Anyway I agree with Finn, how many murders, gang violence etc, actually involve these type of weapons I think there is something fishy here let's wait for the court case to come up and get a clearer picture. Sort of like the speculation that rapists get dealt to in prison, from what I've been told somethimes they're considered "role models"
Read that carefully.
Its Kiddy Fiddlers that get the rough treatment in jail according to all the media.
Dai
21st December 2006, 19:24
T.... The right to bear arms is from the second ammendment from the American Consitution and refers exactly to that, 'bear arms'' meaning to carry them out in the streets and in society.
..
Skyryder
Actually it was lifted almost verbatum fromn the "Bill of Rights" ensconsed in the British parliamentary system. The only part to actually be written down and from which our laws in New Zealand unltimately descend from.
This bill was written in the time of Oliver Cromwell and pre dates the US Constitution by almost 200 years.
Also while you are using the US as an example of the free and unrestricted ownership of firearms then please note that this country has the most number of firearms laws of any in the world. Figures of up to 20,000 different laws in all of the various states as well as the federal ones have been quoted at various meetings and books I have ratended and read.
If you look at countries such as those in Eurpoe where they allow thier citizens to keep and carry firearms with little or very unretrictive controls you will find that there is a a level of maturity and control amongst those who choose to exercise these rights that should be envied by this country.
I am amazed by the simiularities by the arguments in all the various countries of those persons who oppose firearms and there posession by their citizens. It is all based upon emotional and hypothetical premises and when confronted by logical argument just resorts to name calling and scare mongering.
It is a persons BASIC right to protect themselves and their family by whatever means from all that may harm them. This includes individuals and governmental threats. Look at Germany in the 1930's where private ownership of firearms was banned by the ruling political party except for those members of said party.
Countries like Rwanda where an unarmed populace was butchered by another armed one with no respect for their right to existance .
I respect the personal choice to avail ones self not to have firearms. That is a personal choice but please do not impose your views upon another.
One argument I have heard is that the police are there to protect us. To this I can only aswer with the phrase "BOLLOCKS"
By the very nature of the police force they can only be utilised in a reactive manner. To do otherwise would border upon fasism.
There is no way that all threats to a persons well being can be legislated away. Even in the US those so called anti gun figure heads have armed guards to protect their persons. Hypocritical at the least.
Once again I make my stance known.
Gun control is not about firearms.
Gun Control is another way of saying people control.
Rant over
doc
21st December 2006, 19:29
Who said to go on the defensive?
Read that carefully.
Its Kiddy Fiddlers that get the rough treatment in jail according to all the media.
Don't get pc on me boy you mean "KID FUCKERS" don't you
How many have been "done in" inside? We pay extra for them to be protected from the rank and file, so they can be rehabilitated quietly in our communities without our knowledge. Which is why we need all these guns, because people can't do it with their bare hands anymore. They feel braver when they don't have to get close and personel .
scumdog
21st December 2006, 19:34
There is no way that all threats to a persons well being can be legislated away. Even in the US those so called anti gun figure heads have armed guards to protect their persons. Hypocritical at the least.
Once again I make my stance known.
Gun control is not about firearms.
Gun Control is another way of saying people control.
Rant over
Bloody good call my man!!
NZ seems too firearm friendly for some??
Go to Britain, Aussie or Singapore, you'll feel SO much safer there.:yes:
Lias
21st December 2006, 19:44
Bloody good call my man!!
NZ seems too firearm friendly for some??
Go to Britain, Aussie or Singapore, you'll feel SO much safer there.:yes:
Aussie and Britain have some truly draconian gun laws these days.
Ironic that both have more gun related crime than we do.
sAsLEX
21st December 2006, 19:46
Don't get pc on me boy you mean "KID FUCKERS" don't you
yes
and good points
wendigo
21st December 2006, 21:11
No, but speed enforcement doesn't reduce the road toll either, just like tighter gun control won't stop firearms incidents.
You forgot to mention that banning smoking in bars did fuck all to reduce the number of people smoking in the end. Big surprise there then.
I don't have a gun, never had a gun, probably never will have a gun. However I do object to some useless prick of a politician dictating what type of gun I can buy. Especially when it's from the Green Party (fools one and all)
However, I can't say I'm remotely surprised. It is all part of the 'denial of responsibility' culture we are developing in this country*.
"It wasn't me", "It's not my fault", "It's not my responsibility", "the Government should deal with that"...
Shit, even the speed limit on city streets have been reduced to ridiculously slow speeds to stop stupid turkey pedestrians walking in front buses.
Come of it. If the populace is deemed to stupid to cross a road safely, or to stupid to decide for themselves whether they want to go into a smoky bar or not, the populace sure as hell isn't responsible enough to bear arms.
*Closely allied to the 'perception of safety' culture.
Finn
21st December 2006, 21:32
Sounds like you have Winj helping you to come up with that line. Mind you from what I hear you have not 'come up with anything of late.' There's medication for that sort of thing. :love:
Skyryder
Viagra stops me from falling out of bed at night.
Finn
21st December 2006, 21:38
Don't get pc on me boy you mean "KID FUCKERS" don't you
How many have been "done in" inside? We pay extra for them to be protected from the rank and file, so they can be rehabilitated quietly in our communities without our knowledge. Which is why we need all these guns, because people can't do it with their bare hands anymore. They feel braver when they don't have to get close and personel .
Even with all my training in the SAS, I would break out in a sweat trying to drop a coconut on P. A 9mm is much more gentlemanlike.
scracha
21st December 2006, 21:51
PS: If your pro gun control don't even bother posting here, this thread is for people who believe in the right to bear arms.
Public thread mate. You post $hit and I'll reply to it.
I remember listening on the radio a report about a village 25Km up the road from me and feeling physically sick.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/onthisday/hi/dates/stories/march/13/newsid_2543000/2543277.stm
Lets turn this country into a sort of little America where every second fucktard carries a gun.
Idiot.
Clivoris
21st December 2006, 21:52
Wanna fire FULL auto? Join the defence we got a few!
You guys get some cool toys alright, but I'm not sure if they are worth getting a haircut for. Would they give me time off for the National Taxidermy Championship?
NighthawkNZ
21st December 2006, 21:53
Viagra stops me from falling out of bed at night.
it also helps me to go to bed too :D
scracha
21st December 2006, 22:13
Aussie and Britain have some truly draconian gun laws these days.
Ironic that both have more gun related crime than we do.
Draconian? What, the fact they make legal gun owners take responsibility for their weapons? The fact they don't let every second fuckwit own one?
Aussie and British gun controls and ownership are completely different. Aussie gun ownership and attitudes are more akin to New Zealand. Aussie (legal) gun ownership rates are about 5 times the level of the UK. I don't know anyone in the UK who owns a gun and with the exception of a couple of clay pigeon shoots, I never fired a gun.
http://www.guncontrol.ca/Content/international.html#access
I'm maybe reading the above incorrectly but it seems to indicate the NZ murder rate by guns being over 3 times the UK rate (per head of population)? And let's not even mention the appalling gun suicide rate in this country.
Regardless of laws, there's also a clear correlation between gun ownership levels and murder rates. Put simply, you make it illegal to own any type of gun and the gun murder rate drops dramatically.
I don't call the UK's 5 year MINIMUM sentence for illegally owning a gun draconian. I call it common sense.
Dai
21st December 2006, 22:38
Placid Britian my arse.
The country where the police are all armed, especially in London. Why, because there are too many criminals with guns for the police to feel safe doing their duty.
5 women murdered in one small town.
The doctor who has murdered on estimate over 200 people.
Nottingham, the murder capital ot the UK, where a young girl is killed by machine gun fire between rival gangs.
An execution of a rival gang member 100 yards away from New Scotland Yard, why, because of a stolen car.
Glasgow where knifings are so common in the weekend that the hospitals are unable to cope.
1/2 million shotguns that went "missing" when the law was changed requiring individual serial numbers to be recorded.
Yardie gangs shooting at each other over the bonnets of their cars in the docks of Cardiff.
A man arrested in Liverpool 6 months after the pistol ban for walking the streets with a RPG7 rocket grenade launcher.
The governments own figures showing that firearms related crimes have gone up 30% per year since the ban on pistols to a level unprecedented in the country's history.
The opposition parties who now are saying that the ban was wrong and they would reverse it.
Parliaments own written records showing the birth of firearms control showing that it wasnt about firearms but rather about keeping the lower classes in order.
Moss side in Manchester where the norm now is to own a pistol or if you are really lucky a machine gun. Uzi's and MAC 10's are fashion statements now.
Dont give me this rubbish about unarmed and unviolent Britian. Its worse than its ever been.
Rose coloured glasses are a wonderful thing.
You may disagree with firearms. You may choose not to touch them But please do not preach the case of the UK to me. I've been there, lived there and seen the hypocracy that pervades the society there.
scracha
21st December 2006, 23:58
Placid Britian my arse.
I never said or even implied placid?
The country where the police are all armed, especially in London.
A small fraction of them. Mainly around airports and terrorist targets. Nottingham is a $hithole but it isn't the murder capital of the UK.
5 women murdered in one small town.
Ipswich isn't a small town, I lived there. What has that to do with gun control though? Should the prozzies have carried guns?
<----snip---->
Dont give me this rubbish about unarmed and unviolent Britian. Its worse than its ever been.
I didn't. My girlfriend wouldn't go out herself at night in Ipswich town centre and that was before the murder thing. Was pretty shocked myself when I went to visit my mother in Falkirk and noticed the local cops wearing stab vests. I'm not sure if it's worse than ever though. I think it's a lot more televised with the advent of CCTV. As a side note, I still don't understand why all the pubs/clubs chuck everyone onto the street at the same time and then restrict the number of buses and taxis to take the drunk people home.
Rose coloured glasses are a wonderful thing.
I don't usually have much positive things to say about the UK, that's why I chose to emigrate here just over a year ago. I left Scotland many years prior to that if that helps gives an indication of my love for my own country.
You may disagree with firearms. You may choose not to touch them But please do not preach the case of the UK to me. I've been there, lived there and seen the hypocracy that pervades the society there.
Wasn't preaching to anyone. Merely stating facts that when guns are available (legally or otherwise), gun murders increase. Very angry people tend to grab the first thing that comes to hand, be it a baseball bat, beer glass, knife or gun.
Put it this way, if half the population of South Auckland decided to buy a handgun to defend their home I could only imagine the chaos that would ensue.
spudchucka
22nd December 2006, 05:47
Lets turn this country into a sort of little America where every second fucktard carries a gun.
Its bad enough that we already have to put up with the hip-hop promoted wannabe USA gangsta crap we see everywhere now. The little street urchin gangsta boys are so thick that they can't even come up with original names for their boy gangs, I mean "The Crips" vs "The Bloods", pathetic!
Lou Girardin
22nd December 2006, 05:50
If licenced gun dealers are in favour of these raids there must be something right about it. I'm damn sure I wouldn't want our moronic crims to have access to Saiga 12 gauges or MP5's and Uzi's.
It's the old story of a few cowboys fucking it up for others. Do they want a total ban on ownership of interesting weapons?
TLDV8
22nd December 2006, 14:12
...oh, and where did the bad guys get the guns in the first place?
You just import them.
Apply for a restricted firearm permit to import the weapon of choice .....Even better get 10 people to do so,give all the permits to a licensed dealer who brings the lot in as one shipment.Customs look at the permits. (There is no liason between Customs and the Police on this matter at the time of import,correct me if wrong) ..... If all is in order the firearms are released.It is then up to the permit holder to register that restricted weapon with the Police.There is no formal follow up on issued permits ?
Most problems start at the law maker who is normally in dream world making laws to suit honest people.
*
When did the law stop any person from applying for a firearms license and if successful,buying a firearm.
If the News last night was anything to go by (NZ supposedly being No 2 in the firearms to population ratio).....Not many are being knocked back or somefolk out there have a lot of weapons.
I remember when i got my firearms license in the early 1980's, more than a few failed, :gob: to do so you would have had to have been a total moron given near all the questions were based on common sense. (imho)
I never renewed my license but do not think i would have any problem in doing so if i was to get back in to clay shooting.
If i wanted to get an Uzi i would expect to jump though a few hoop's but would probably raise a few eyebrow's after shouting ..Pull. :laugh:
doc
22nd December 2006, 14:18
If licenced gun dealers are in favour of these raids there must be something right about it. I'm damn sure I wouldn't want our moronic crims to have access to Saiga 12 gauges or MP5's and Uzi's.
It's the old story of a few cowboys fucking it up for others. Do they want a total ban on ownership of interesting weapons?
What practical use is an MP5 or Uzi, if people want to play with them fine if they are "Drill Purpose only" Most members of the armed services only get an intro to auto weapons and never have much to do with them after that.
Great for a quick thrill but the novelity wears off. NZer's don't need military auto's or pistols.
Swoop
22nd December 2006, 14:45
Most members of the armed services only get an intro to auto weapons and never have much to do with them after that.
???!!! When they are issued a Steyr Aug, this would be an issue!
doc
22nd December 2006, 14:51
???!!! When they are issed a Steyr Aug, this would be an issue!
But how many of them could honestly say they have let off a full mag in one burst? Without getting their arse kicked until their nose bled.
NighthawkNZ
22nd December 2006, 14:54
But how many of them could honestly say they have let off a full mag in one burst? Without getting their arse kicked until their nose bled.
I was only allowed to do that once...
marty
22nd December 2006, 16:53
and don't think for a minute that the police are not going after the gangs and their firearms - i don't see anyone on here saying how great it is when cops do a warrant and find 5 guns at a p-lab/gang house, which happens on a daily basis. oh, and where did the bad guys get the guns in the first place?
here's your chance....http://www.stuff.co.nz/stuff/waikatotimes/3908309a11.html
doc
22nd December 2006, 17:19
two shots
1 warning shot through the roof immediately proceeded by one through the chest.
Good one only took me a day to comprehend it. I'm geting betta
Timber020
22nd December 2006, 19:21
Just a story, one of many of a simular theme from an american bike site
Some people just piss me off! In rush hour traffic coming back from a PGR ride, some idiot is going too fast and locks up the brakes on his PU and swerves to go around me, but not before taking out my rear left turn signal while I'm full tilt with the back tire smoking to get the hell out of the way!
Does he stop? NO!....he keeps going, but not far.. kinda hard to escape anywhere in rush hour traffic with no exit for a mile. I find the PU and motion the guy to pull over, which he doesn't. I ride on the shoulder ahead of the guy, get off the bike and walk to the truck as it approaches. I look in and the guy just looks at me and points his finger right at me and shakes his head no, then I see the gun!! I get the plate no. and call the cops....(last I checked, I'm not "bulletproof")
I don't really give a rat's a$$ about the turn signal, but the MF didn't even stop, and then has the f***ing gall to pull a gun on me over a stupid traffic accident! I ain't holdin' my breath for anything to happen to this guy either...
I'm glad it wasn't worse, but it still pisses me off!
Sorry, rant over...
Got LOTS more on US bike sites of a simular story.
scumdog
22nd December 2006, 22:44
What practical use is an MP5 or Uzi, if people want to play with them fine if they are "Drill Purpose only" Most members of the armed services only get an intro to auto weapons and never have much to do with them after that.
Great for a quick thrill but the novelity wears off. NZer's don't need military auto's or pistols.
Fuck off ya dick, going by your analogy we din't need 150+hp motorbikes -yet we still import them and temporary NZers ride them....
If I can have an Uzi and are deemed 'suitable' to own one then I'll continue to own one - and a M16 and a AK47 and a FAL etc etc....
Dai
23rd December 2006, 07:16
What practical use is an MP5 or Uzi, if people want to play with them fine if they are "Drill Purpose only" Most members of the armed services only get an intro to auto weapons and never have much to do with them after that.
Great for a quick thrill but the novelity wears off. NZer's don't need military auto's or pistols.
By this reasoning we only need low powered motor vehicles that can only just reach the speed limit.
I have a friend who is very much into the old muzzle loading black powder firearms.
He brought an old US Civil War musket back to this country, An original .58 front stuffer. Customs official he met at the airport wouldnt release it as he considered it to be a "MILITARY STYLE" firearm and the import form was for a sporting rifle. It was a military rifle in the 1860's but is now archaic.
Maybe thats the plan. The NZ forces are going back to muskets and we civilians cant have those firearms either.
After a few phone calls my mate got his rifle but this experience hasnt endeared him to the PC authorities here.
jrandom
23rd December 2006, 09:52
Great for a quick thrill but the novelity wears off. NZer's don't need military auto's or pistols.
If you find guns boring, well, good on ya. You'll probably tend to have a lot more spare cash than me.
But you can fuck off and die with that 'don't need' shit. What are you, my mother? I'm no criminal. Don't presume to dictate. You may take your Orwellian society where anything I don't 'need' is banned, and stick it up your arse.
Give me freedom or give me death. But if you can give me freedom while at the same time stopping gangsters from getting easy access to weapons, that's just fine and dandy in my books.
Anyone wishing to label the recent raids on dealers and collectors as some sort of fascist gun control should shut their pie hole and wait for the facts to come out in Court. Do you really think the cops would have been stupid enough to confiscate their guns without solid proof of dodgy dealings?
This has been one of the few discussion forum threads I've ever seen that triggered Godwin's Law on the first post.
T.W.R
23rd December 2006, 10:27
Anyone wishing to label the recent raids on dealers and collectors as some sort of fascist gun control should shut their pie hole and wait for the facts to come out in Court. Do you really think the cops would have been stupid enough to confiscate their guns without solid proof of dodgy dealings?
There was an article in the ChCh Press this morning stating that there were 1047 weapons seized of which one person was responsable for 562 of those weapons :gob: WTF is he/she starting their own militia :shutup:
plus there were also Handgrenades & home made Land mines siezed as well :shit:
having 562 weapons is dodgey in it's own right and who the fuck needs Handgrenades & home made land mines ?? :shutup:
BTW needing a good home for a while::innocent:
DIEHL Gmbh &Co Geschaftsberiech Munition ammunition division Product Catalogue
Fabrique Nationale Herstal S.A Defence & Security Division Ammunition Catalogue
Nico Pyrotechik Hanns-jurgen diederichs GMBH & Co.KG product catalogue
:done:
Pixie
23rd December 2006, 10:31
I only have a high powered crossbow, & a medium powered one, and you don't need a licence for these... makes you wounder???
I have an MSSAAR
Military Style Single Action Assault Rock
jrandom
23rd December 2006, 12:35
I have an MSSAAR
I have a pointy stick.
Clivoris
23rd December 2006, 13:49
I have a pointy stick.
I've got the upgraded multi-purpose model. Pointy at one end and shitty on the other. It's all the stick I ever need.
By the way..What's brown and sticky?
A stick.
Lou Girardin
23rd December 2006, 14:39
What practical use is an MP5 or Uzi, if people want to play with them fine if they are "Drill Purpose only" Most members of the armed services only get an intro to auto weapons and never have much to do with them after that.
Great for a quick thrill but the novelity wears off. NZer's don't need military auto's or pistols.
I'd like to buy one just as a toy. But I can easily forego that bit of fun in the interest of keeping them out of the hands of crims.
Skyryder
23rd December 2006, 16:32
If I can have an Uzi and are deemed 'suitable' to own one then I'll continue to own one - and a M16 and a AK47 and a FAL etc etc....
That's the key SD, 'deemed suitable.' I don't have a problem with those that are as you say 'deemed suitable.' It's the dipsticks that preach there should be gun ownereship 'as of right.' That's an imported idea from the American Constituition and is the crux of the NRA's philosphy. Any lelgislation that interfares with that right is 'deemed' unconstitutional.
Any collector who 'knowingly' breaks the law in relation to firearms legislation in my opinion I would deem unsuitable. And having a licence indicates that they have someknowledge of the legislation pertaining to it.
I need a fishing licence to fish for trout and salmon. If I do not have a licence and get caught fishing I lose my gear. If I fish in a manner that is prohibited I lose my gear and gbet prosecuted. The dealers broke the rules and lost their 'gear.' The question is "why did they break the rules?"
Skyryder
Swoop
23rd December 2006, 16:40
There was an article in the ChCh Press this morning stating that there were 1047 weapons seized of which one person was responsable for 562 of those weapons :gob: WTF is he/she starting their own militia
Perhaps the person is a firearms dealer?
They do have a certain amount of firearms on display in most gun shops.
crack
24th December 2006, 00:29
I can remember having to take any new fire arm into the police station and letting the local arms officer record it's serial No. and the like.
1994 I bought a rifle back from the USA, and on entry to Auckland, I only had to show it to the police, they did not record any serial No.
Now I have to pay $138: for the privillage to own a rifle for sporting purposes.
Have a look at the following, it makes for sober reading.
FACTS TO PONDER:
(A) The number of physicians in the U.S. is 700,000
(B) Accidental deaths caused by Physicians per year are 120,000
(C) Accidental deaths per physician is 0.171.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Statistics courtesy of U.S. Dept. of Health Human Services.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Now think about this:
Guns:
(A) The number of gun owners in the U.S. is 80,000,000.
(Yes, that's 80 million..)
(B) The number of accidental gun deaths per year, all age groups, is 1,500.
(C) The number of accidental deaths per gun owner is .000188
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Statistics courtesy of the FBI
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
So, statistically, doctors are approximately
9,000 times more dangerous than gun owners.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Remember, "Guns don't kill people, doctors do."
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
FACT: NOT EVERYONE HAS A GUN,
BUT
ALMOST EVERYONE HAS AT LEAST ONE DOCTOR.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Please alert your friends to this alarming threat. We must ban doctors before this gets completely out of hand!!!!!
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Out of concern for the public at large,
We have withheld the statistics on
lawyers
for fear the shock would cause people to panic and seek
medical attention
There is a serious flaw in this weird and funny argument, viz:
When a doctor picks up a scalpel or prescribes a medicine he does so in order to save lives and / or to enhance the quality of life of his patients.
When the owner of a gun picks it up 99% of the time it is to do just the opposite. He (or she), of course, may accidentally miss.
Work it out.
And for someone to think the police are not below going after the EASY LOOK good to the NO GUN LOBYISTS, I would say THINK AGAIN: just look at the type of politicians we have in power, and even more damming the type of 35- 40 yr old professional that believes in the PC system, and has never had to use, or understand, discretion:
:whocares: :whocares: :done: :scooter:
doc
24th December 2006, 05:03
Yep they have cocked it up you use to have to..
Sit test (Few dollars )
Select Gun
Get "Permit to procure" local cop
Get gun
Show policeman who checked safety and serial no and recorded it
All sweet.
Now it cost a fortune non police staff running it who probably have never fired a gun.
And some of the ones I've wound up with my anti-auto comments, bet they didn't have the same attitude when they did the interview.
They have lost track of all the weapons. I think they are trying to get the user pays system to sort it it you want a gun the cost is going to get that high eventually because we are paying for their changings to the system that didn't work.
Skyryder
24th December 2006, 06:50
FACTS TO PONDER:
(A) The number of physicians in the U.S. is 700,000
(B) Accidental deaths caused by Physicians per year are 120,000
(C) Accidental deaths per physician is 0.171.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Statistics courtesy of U.S. Dept. of Health Human Services.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Now think about this:
Guns:
(A) The number of gun owners in the U.S. is 80,000,000.
(Yes, that's 80 million..)
(B) The number of accidental gun deaths per year, all age groups, is 1,500.
(C) The number of accidental deaths per gun owner is .000188
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Statistics courtesy of the FBI
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
So, statistically, doctors are approximately
9,000 times more dangerous than gun owners.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Remember, "Guns don't kill people, doctors do."
What a load of bullshit. This is typical NRA statistical crap. To make comparisons with unrelated data. (medical misadventure or for that matter anykind of death by misadventure) The NRA and their apologists do this sort of thing all the time.
FACT:In 2003 (the most recent year for which data is available), there were 30,136 gun deaths in the U.S: That's total.
Fact. 730 unintentional shootings (2% of all U.S gun deaths), Thats a far cry from what you are trying to say
Now 'ponder' on those facts.
Skyryder
scumdog
24th December 2006, 07:48
BTW: Gun registration does not necessarily make things 'safer'
It was abandoned when it was realised that the only real benefit was it enabled recovered stolen to be returned to their rightful owners - and that's assuming said owners are still alive/still live at the last know address.
It sounds 'nice' and 'it will make things safer' to have all guns registered - but that's an illusion.
jonbuoy
24th December 2006, 08:08
What a load of bullshit. This is typical NRA statistical crap. To make comparisons with unrelated data. (medical misadventure or for that matter anykind of death by misadventure) The NRA and their apologists do this sort of thing all the time.
FACT:In 2003 (the most recent year for which data is available), there were 30,136 gun deaths in the U.S: That's total.
Fact. 730 unintentional shootings (2% of all U.S gun deaths), Thats a far cry from what you are trying to say
Now 'ponder' on those facts.
Skyryder
True & most people who go to see a doctor aren't in the best of health anyway.
doc
24th December 2006, 08:15
BTW: Gun registration does not necessarily make things 'safer'
It was abandoned when it was realised that the only real benefit was it enabled recovered stolen to be returned to their rightful owners - and that's assuming said owners are still alive/still live at the last know address.
It sounds 'nice' and 'it will make things safer' to have all guns registered - but that's an illusion.
I sort of agree with you but at least they knew where most of them were. Why fix something that wasn't really broke. The coppers also got to see the individuals time to time.
Skyryder
24th December 2006, 10:30
I sort of agree with you but at least they knew where most of them were. Why fix something that wasn't really broke. The coppers also got to see the individuals time to time.
I understand that there is some legislation with firearms that says that all firearms are to consficated. Don't know the exact wording but I think the hands of the Police were tied in this. Anyone got any info on this??
Skyryder
jonbuoy
24th December 2006, 10:58
its bad enough when some fruit loop goes crazy with a handgun in a school,hate to think what carnage would be left behind if it was done with an uzi. And a 20min physc evaluation isn't going to pick up all the nutters.
Swoop
24th December 2006, 11:43
its bad enough when some fruit loop goes crazy with a handgun in a school,
Can you please point out the last time that happened in New Zealand please?
Don't confuse the laws we have here, with those of other countries.
jonbuoy
24th December 2006, 12:24
Best to just wait for it to happen aye?
scumdog
24th December 2006, 13:33
I sort of agree with you but at least they knew where most of them were.
THAT was the problem, - when they looked into it they realised the address etc of so many of the owners was waay out of date - and as a preventative measure registration did not have much going for it.
(When was the last time knowing who had what gun registered to them stopped a crime?)
Lou Girardin
24th December 2006, 15:37
THAT was the problem, - when they looked into it they realised the address etc of so many of the owners was waay out of date - and as a preventative measure registration did not have much going for it.
(When was the last time knowing who had what gun registered to them stopped a crime?)
Well that's the Arms Offices stuff up, isn't it? Perhaps they should have taken gun ownership more seriously. Maybe there wouldn't have been an Aramoana.
At least registration of individual weapons shows when someone is building their own little armoury, and a courtesy visit by the Plod may reveal the owner to be a tad wacky. You know the type, strokes his guns and has names for them all.
Swoop
24th December 2006, 18:56
its bad enough when some fruit loop goes crazy with a handgun in a school,
Fruit loop in a mall? about 2 years ago.
The "fruit loop" went crazy in a mall? Shooting spree?
Swoop
24th December 2006, 20:42
He shot at cops, bullets went through the mall at st lukes into a hair salon.
Police apprehended him at gunpoint before any civvies were injured.
This was the incident with the car chase, apprehension on the motorway? Did this incident involved a rifle or a handgun?
scumdog
24th December 2006, 20:59
Well that's the Arms Offices stuff up, isn't it? Perhaps they should have taken gun ownership more seriously. Maybe there wouldn't have been an Aramoana.
At least registration of individual weapons shows when someone is building their own little armoury, and a courtesy visit by the Plod may reveal the owner to be a tad wacky. You know the type, strokes his guns and has names for them all.
Like I would register the firearms I was buying if I was getting an arsenal together to go troppo with???
As -if!!
TLDV8
24th December 2006, 21:40
..................
Apply for a restricted firearm permit to import the weapon of choice .....Even better get 10 people to do so,give all the permits to a licensed dealer who brings the lot in as one shipment.Customs look at the permits. (There is no liason between Customs and the Police on this matter at the time of import,correct me if wrong) ..... If all is in order the firearms are released.It is then up to the permit holder to register that restricted weapon with the Police.There is no formal follow up on issued permits ?
Most problems start at the law maker who is normally in dream world making laws to suit honest people.
Lou Girardin
25th December 2006, 05:36
Like I would register the firearms I was buying if I was getting an arsenal together to go troppo with???
As -if!!
You know as well as I do that they get the guns first, while they're relatively sane, then go troppo later when the pressure gets too much.
Maybe one too many speeding tickets or somesuch.
Smorg
25th December 2006, 10:22
fuck the world buy a gun
Swoop
25th December 2006, 21:31
its bad enough when some fruit loop goes crazy with a handgun in a school,
Can you please point out the last time that happened in New Zealand please?
Fruit loop in a mall? about 2 years ago.
SKS 7.62mm semit auto rifle with a 15 round clip.
Leonard Hall, the offender in that incident, also supplied a 9mm pistol to an associate which was use to rob a dairy in New North Road about 2 months later. The owner of the dairy was shot dead in the robbery.
OK. So we have deduced that someone has not actually gone on a shooting spree with a handgun in an NZ shopping mall. An SKS cannot hold more than 10 rounds maximum, so it must be an SKK that he had. Irrelevant to the line of thought here anyway since it isn't a handgun.
Different topic area: He supplied another crim with a handgun that was used to rob a dairy.
Handguns are regularly found when police raid gang/drug houses and appear to be readily available to the underworld of crime.
I doubt that the criminals bother to wander down to the local station to have the serial number recorded, as Scummy has quite correctly stated previously.
Having a gun register does not prevent crime, as the Canadian gun registry fiasco has proven, it simply wastes vast amounts of taxpayers dollars (Canadian dollars $2billion and rising I believe - without solving one crime).
Lou Girardin
26th December 2006, 06:09
So why aren't we hearing of more raids seeking illegal guns.
Is it a resources thing? Or is it a can't be fucked thing like the response I received when I had two weapons stolen. I even told the cops who the likely offender was, a 12 year old boy, they phoned his mother and that was the end of it.
Patrick
26th December 2006, 14:50
Good one only took me a day to comprehend it. I'm geting betta
He did mean to say "preceded..."
fatnold
27th December 2006, 18:46
Gun control....look what happened in the UK. Handguns and firearms put under very strict control so that Joe Soap couldn't get to buy and play with them. What happens? Gun crime spirals out of control! The government mandarins have no idea and simply provide a populist quick fix solution that has no long term merit or palpable favourable outcome. And what's worse? We fucken vote them back in again!
Lias
27th December 2006, 19:30
As a total change of topic does anyone else think someone really needs to STAB phillip alpers to death (or brutally kill him some other way that doesnt involve a gun)?
Sanctimonious fucktard that he is.
Lou Girardin
27th December 2006, 20:27
As a total change of topic does anyone else think someone really needs to STAB phillip alpers to death (or brutally kill him some other way that doesnt involve a gun)?
Sanctimonious fucktard that he is.
Just what the anti-gun lobby needs - a martyr.
Better to let him wallow in his own insignificance.
jonbuoy
27th December 2006, 21:53
I have no problem with people owning guns for hunting or target shooting - hell if I lived out in the sticks I'd probably get a shotgun for home protection but Uzi's?? They were only designed for one thing and it wasn't pest control.
James Deuce
27th December 2006, 21:54
Philip Alpers. Heehee. He's bald. No one listens to bald people.
Swoop
27th December 2006, 22:12
Uzi's?? They were only designed for one thing and it wasn't pest control.
Depends on your point of view... Israelis have many local pests to control...
Philip Alpers. Heehee. He's bald. No one listens to bald people.
Bald and with a beard.....:shit:
Unfortunately he makes a lot of noise. Somehow he has deceived his way into some form of "policy advisor" role. He has a firearms licence but dosen't shoot though. I would question whether he is "fit and proper"!
NighthawkNZ
28th December 2006, 00:17
:yawn: :zzzz:
Just about need to move this thread to pointles drivel
Lou Girardin
28th December 2006, 05:56
Philip Alpers. Heehee. He's bald. No one listens to bald people.
Pardon?:yes:
Dai
28th December 2006, 07:28
Philip Alpers. Heehee. He's bald. No one listens to bald people.
Mmmmm.......
I'm bald !
Come to think of it nobody listens to me either.
Point proven.
James Deuce
28th December 2006, 07:32
Pardon?:yes:
If you can't laugh at yourself, who can you laugh at?
Skyryder
28th December 2006, 12:12
If you can't laugh at yourself, who can you laugh at?
Or 'you have no right to laugh at others.'
Skyryder
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.5 Copyright © 2025 vBulletin Solutions Inc. All rights reserved.