The firearm thread

[jono035]

Thanks for the +rep on that last comment. "sport doesnt necessarily mean humane. try pig huntin with dogs."

Lots of guys go hunting with dogs in the bush that my parent's place borders on, never gone after pigs myself though.

I've always figured it isn't a black and white issue though. If something is a pest (possums, pigs, goats and deer in some areas) then I would tend to lower the bar for what is considered 'humane' in those circumstances. Likewise if someone was hunting entirely for sport, then I would think that the bar should be pretty damn high.

Hunting pigs with dogs may not be a quiet, peaceful death but as long as you make sure that you kill the pig as quickly as is feasible and take measures to avoid letting a wounded animal escape then I'd say it's fair enough.

[jono035]

one day I'll get my 308 back

Sheeeesh, anyone hunting possums, rabbits or ducks with a .308 gets a gigantic WTF from me. Possums would be downright dangerous though given that you're generally shooting with no reasonable expectation that the bullet is going to stop in the possum/trees (I don't even assume that with a .22). You'd have to be pretty damn certain that there was nothing within about 5kms?

Ducks and rabbits aren't necessarily all that dangerous, they just make me curious as to your motives

[Indiana_Jones]

Sheeeesh, anyone hunting possums, rabbits or ducks with a .308 gets a gigantic WTF from me.

.............How about an RPG?

-Indy

[jono035]

.............How about an RPG?

-Indy

Depends on whether I'd get a turn or not...

[The Pastor]

Sheeeesh, anyone hunting possums, rabbits or ducks with a .308 gets a gigantic WTF from me. Possums would be downright dangerous though given that you're generally shooting with no reasonable expectation that the bullet is going to stop in the possum/trees (I don't even assume that with a .22). You'd have to be pretty damn certain that there was nothing within about 5kms?

Ducks and rabbits aren't necessarily all that dangerous, they just make me curious as to your motives

you should see me hunt sheep with my bit of 4x2 then!

[Brett]

Talking about messy kills, I f%cked up today.....

Mate of mine has a permit to hunt in the Hunua ranges. We decided to head up for a spot of night shooting, mainly possums and try for goats.

He was carrying a .223 and me a .22 with silencer (hence sub-sonic rounds) to get the possums with. The .22 has one of those hunting lights on a pressure switch. I had deemed the .270 too large for the nights targets.

Night was going all fine, we each got a few possums (one of which had a young one in the pouch which we had to kill with a knife - first nastiness) then we decided to call it a night and make our way back to the truck.

So heading our way back, still stealthily and what should we come upon but a small herd of 3 goats about 50m away, a nanny and 2 juveniles. Well, since I was set up with the light, I shined it their way so that my mate could get them in the scope of the .223. He was taking his time and meanwhile I had one of them in my scope nicely and they got spooked and were just about to break so I (stupidly) thought that I better take one...so I, knowing the rounds would have limited killing power being sub sonic, tripple tapped. A split second later my mate fired the .223. He knocked the nanny goat down and I made the big mistake of assuming it was dead because it dropped hard. I then heard the bleating of the little male I had hit and suddenly realising that it was only half maimed, realised that I had to finish it off.

So I fell my way down the bank to where the little goat was stuck in a tree, it gave a plaintive little bleat and then coffed up a bit of blood...I felt gutted. I put one last shot into its head at about 3m and that ended it.

But I am fucking pissed off at myself. I enjoy hunting but absolutely HATE maiming animals. I was really stupid to try take it with a suppressed .22 and to be honest, had I realised how young it was I would probably have not shot at all.

To make matters worse, the goat my mate hit didn't die on the spot, when we went back to where it was hit, there was no body to be found. Spent 2 hours trying to track it to no avail. So will go back out there tomorrow to try find it that being my pennance for being a dick head.

I broke some of the rules I feel strongest about tonight. I shot before the guy who was officially meant to shoot, by shooting and then removing his light source I enabled an injured animal to escape and die a painful death and I shot an animal I wouldn't normally go for.

I feel like a right cock. Especially since I am normally so anal about safety and correct hunting ethics.

[jono035]

I feel like a right cock. Especially since I am normally so anal about safety and correct hunting ethics.

That's pretty rough but the fact that you sound pretty pissed off about it means I doubt anyone would hold it against you.

I've had to finish a couple of possums off with a knife (down banks where I couldn't drag the .22 or on stones) and it's a nasty business to be sure, tough little bastards. Prefer to either nail them at close range with the .22 providing they're on mud/clay or a solid boot to the head crushes their skull, which according to my vet sister who comes out shooting sometimes is an instant death with any twitching being random nerves firing.

[Swoop]

Has anyone else received one of these?

Subject: Illegal NZ
From: Joe.Green@police.govt.nz
Date: Tue, 28 Jul 2009 09:30:13 +1200

Your e mail to the minister of Police has been referred to me for a direct
response.

The following is a standard response that I have been sending to the
numerous licence holders that have contacted me.

I am getting bulk feedback from licence holders, but others I've spoken to
generally recognise the programme for what it is: a beat up.

Some of the points about the first programme:

*Firstly, this is a media programme prepared with an objective in
mind - it was not an open investigation. The reporter set out to prove
something and generally did so. It was sensationalised considerably. So I
view what happened with a 'jaundiced eye' (and having been 'set up by the
media' am very wary of leaping into anything!). In other words my advice to
people is - don't believe all you saw.
*A person was pictured firing a .22 into the open air from his
backyard. He commented that there was a big paddock out the back. As far as I am aware no complaints were received. The offence is one of 'discharging a firearm in or near a dwelling house or public place so as to endanger property or to endanger, annoy, or frighten any person'. It certainly was not good practice however I also noted it was a .22 and that the empty field was a vacant playground, and the shot was fired into the air. I don't know who the person was and it would probably require a court warrant to get that information - if it exists. For all we know he might have been able to see that the field was vacant. In the absence of a complaint I would be wary of charging him with anything.
*The same person commented that he had a near miss. But it was a near
miss.
*A firearm was shown as being sold without the seller viewing the
licence. The offence is that of 'selling or supplying a firearm to any
person who is not the holder of a firearms licence' - the standard for
determining that is not in the Act (as it is in the Sale of Liquor Act). The
seller asked the person with the purchaser if he had a licence, but did not
ask to see it, however the person with the purchaser responded 'yeah, yeah'.
It appears that the seller made an overall judgement call - one that was
actually correct. I agree, on the face of it an offence was committed
against section 43 of the Arms Act, however a statutory defence is provided.
If I were him and charged I would subpoena that companion to prove he had a licence. The statutory defence might or might not be satisfied. Good (and
legally safe) practice is that sighting the licence is good evidence of
having supplied the firearm to a licence holder.
*It has been suggested that the seller should have shown the
purchaser his licence - No, no offence here..
*The reporter used video footage filmed without the approval of the
person or activity being filmed.The reporter was asked if he had camera in
his bag - he said he did not, and it would seem he did not. The camera was
on his person. Had the question about recording been more general I
understand that the footage could not lawfully have been used - but have not sought further legal advice on this.
*People have commented that Greg O'Connor showed a general lack of
knowledge of the law, and promoted registration 'of all the guns entering NZ
from here on', not 'catching up on those already here'. I appreciate that he
has a politicised role. However let's examine what he is actually shown as
suggesting: there about 1.2 million firearms in NZ. He suggested not
worrying about back capturing these in a registration process, but capture
those coming in. In 2000-2007 124 000 firearms came into NZ, averaging about 12 000 a year. So he suggests registering this number, but not worrying
about the 1.2 million - really!? I suspect only part of the picture was
shown.
*In terms of internet sales: the producer suggested that firearms
were easily purchased unlawfully over the internet. Well, what actually
happened was that the reporter obtained the identity of the seller from the
internet, however the sale was by personal contact. Sales through two large
internet sites that I know of require the seller and purchaser at the time
of registration to provide a firearms licence number, and that is verified
as current. That's why the reporter possibly couldn't complete the sale over
the internet (but of course that level of control doesn't make for a good
story).
*The reporter commented, and had a firearms licence on the computer
screen, that a licence could easily be photoshopped and used. Well - he then
actually didn't use it, but used the actual licence of his companion. I
wouldn't mind seeing the 'easily photoshopped licence', and I wouldn't mind
seeing the outcome (not on the screen - in the hard). $20 is pinned to my
whiteboard for the reporter if it even comes close to replicating a real
licence (because we've had a few try (fraud and under age drinking) and the
licence is obviously fake - there are some security features in the
licence). I don't think his 'photoshopped licence' would have been good for
anything (it wasn't good enough for him to use by fax).
*The programme suggested 40 000 illegally held firearms. Thorp's 1997
estimate had a top end of 25 000, and he did substantial analysis. He also
commented that it was not possible to determine the exact number, but it
might be more than the 25 000 indicated. In other words - the programme
stated as definitive fact what is really a guestimate.
*What the programme didn't tell viewers, and what I think the public
actually take notice of is that homicide, suicide and non intentional death
by firearm has been tracking steadily downward over several decades, and,
violent crime with firearms as a % of all violent crime is between 1.2 and
1.3 %.
*In terms of the second programme:
*Again, do not believe all you see.
*The footage of the pile of firearms was taken at the police Armoury
and was file footage.
*The inspector seen on the programme was filmed 4 years ago - again,
file footage.
*Firearms could not sustain burying in the ground and remain in sound
condition.
*Interestingly the 'informant' connected the reported with a person
(Maybe) who has been named and address given in the open media - a beat up.

All in all at this point police do not intend prosecution action due to the
unreliability of the reporting.

Joe Green
Inspector
Manager Licensing and Vetting Service Centre

[Mr Merde]

Amazing how bad things can be made to look or how a point of view can be exagerated, by some judicious editing and ommisions.

One sided reporting. Sensationalism. Bias. Questionable activities. Plagerism (didnt source his stock file clips but passed them off as his own investigation).

We have a 3rd rate, Mike Moore wannabe here in NZ.

I recieved a letter from TVNZ last week informing me they will be looking into my complaint. Tui moment I think.

Chris

[Mr Merde]

....

I feel like a right cock. Especially since I am normally so anal about safety and correct hunting ethics.

We all have made mistakes. Wouldnt be human if we didnt.

Did you learn from them?

Can you stop yourself from making the same or similar mistake?

Did you hurt anyone?

Dont beat yourself up too much. I know its not nice to cause suffering but there are situations and events that make it unavoidable at the time. You will have learnt a lesson and will not make the same mistake again. Thats a bonus.

[Wolf]

Talking about messy kills, I f%cked up today.....

Reminds me of a less-than-sterling job I made of euthanasing a beloved pet dog - ended up having to finish the job with the shovel as I had no quick means of a follow-up shot. Felt really awful because I caused undue suffering in what was supposed to be a quick, humane kill.

Henceforth, when called on to administer the final mercy, I have more than one bullet in the mag.

[Drunken Monkey]

The suffering happens from time to time, by chance or even conditions outside of our control. It's how you feel when it happens that's important.

[wbks]

I can't really see why people are so touchy about cutting throats out hunting or something, but that's pretty nasty

[Indiana_Jones]

So what do people think about Ruger bolt action rifles?

Seen one that has taken my fancy

That or a Stevens-Savage .243

-Indy

[Brett]

We all have made mistakes. Wouldnt be human if we didnt.

Did you learn from them?

Can you stop yourself from making the same or similar mistake?

Did you hurt anyone?

Dont beat yourself up too much. I know its not nice to cause suffering but there are situations and events that make it unavoidable at the time. You will have learnt a lesson and will not make the same mistake again. Thats a bonus.

Yep, I learnt a few things from this. However I am always always always safe with guns...will make sure that I never unintentionally hurt anyone. The only thing I was unhappy with this time was a kill that was unnecessarily nasty.

So what do people think about Ruger bolt action rifles?

Seen one that has taken my fancy

That or a Stevens-Savage .243

-Indy

They are really good IMO. Not quite a Remington 700, but really good rifles. Have used a Ruger Mod 77 .243 on a few occasions and I really liked it.

Personally I am hoping to make my .243 a Tikka T3 Tactical. But then, they are bloody expensive.