Gunshop employee charged

**jrandom** · 6th January 2007, 20:41

Originally Posted by parsley

Blimey Fish, he looks like you.

You're just jealous because you have long hair and no guns.

Fucking hippy.

**parsley** · 14th January 2007, 08:50

Originally Posted by Fish

You're just jealous because you have long hair and no guns.

Least I have a motorbike, bitch.

**Patrick** · 14th January 2007, 09:26

Originally Posted by Lou Girardin

Closed road? Medical facilities at hand? Mine does 240.

Want a micron can? Cheap!

Sign said open road... so I opened up.

Medical facilities? Ummmm..... I carry a plaster, sometimes even two...

Have after market can, but summit up with the carbies...hits 200 and will do no more... but I don't wanna any more... been there, done that...

**Patrick** · 15th January 2007, 08:12

Originally Posted by Lou Girardin

I have. Found guilty.
But then I am a left footer. (Second only to Jews for guilt)

Must be the foot you keep shooting...

**Swoop** · 2nd February 2007, 20:34

Judge: Charging man who shot intruder an 'injustice'
Email this storyPrint this story 5:35PM Friday February 02, 2007

Ricky Beckham
A High Court judge has added his weight to a public chorus of objections over a police decision to charge a gunshop worker who shot an armed intruder.

In a relatively rare move Justice Rhys Harrison several times today said he was worried that a man who defended himself against an attacker armed with a machete, now faced firearms charges.

Greg Carvell shot Ricky Beckham in the stomach with a .45 calibre Colt revolver last July.

Beckham had entered his Penrose gunshop with a machete, threatened to kill him and demanded guns.

Minutes before he today jailed Beckham for two years and nine months on a charge of aggravated burglary, Judge Harrison said he felt a "sense of injustice" that Carvell had been charged with a firearms offence.

"I am most concerned that Mr Carvell, acting in his own defence and in the defence of another employee, is facing serious criminal charges," he said.

Carvell had spent $10,000 so far on the defence.

"There is an element of unfairness in this," said the judge who also asked if both men attended a restorative justice meeting, the charges could be dropped.

Beckham's lawyer, Jim Boyack, said Mr Carvell had refused to attend restorative justice.

The court was told Beckham was on a suicide mission and intended no harm to anyone other than himself.

He wanted to scare the gunshop workers, whom he anticipated would flee. That would allow him to get guns, drink beer and look at pictures of his son before killing himself.

Beckham was originally charged with aggravated robbery.

He initially pleaded not guilty but charged his plea to guilty when the charge was changed to aggravated burglary. Both charges carried a maximum sentence of 14 years in prison.

Crown prosecutor Aaron Perkins told the court the police summary of the incident showed Beckham was warned repeatedly to stop but kept advancing until he was shot.

The police believed Beckham intended to steal one or more guns but he told a detective he only wanted to get a gun to kill himself.

Mr Boyack said after six months of reflection in prison, Beckham appreciated the harm he had done.

He did not blame the victim for shooting him and wanted to apologise for the extreme harm "his self-centred behaviour occasioned".

He was anxious to confess as soon as he was medically able to after his treatment, Mr Boyack told the court.

He had gambled family money and separated from his partner who said he would never see his son again and that he was an unfit father.

"I was tired, very tired of life," Beckham had said, Mr Boyack told the court.

"I couldn't see the point of carrying on," he had said.

Mr Boyack told the court Beckham had said he deserved to be shot and no one else should be charged.

Outside the court, gunshop owner Ray Carvell said he did not believe Beckham and did not accept that his remorse was genuine.

"I don't swallow the bill of goods that he wanted guns to kill himself," Mr Carvell said.

Greg Carvell has been charged with possessing a firearm without lawful, proper or sufficient purposes and is due back in court later this month for a pre-depositions hearing.

- NZPA

**Clivoris** · 2nd February 2007, 21:00

Good news eh. Lifts my confidence in the justice system.

**Dai** · 3rd February 2007, 12:12

Originally Posted by Swoop

Judge: ......
Greg Carvell has been charged with possessing a firearm without lawful, proper or sufficient purposes .....
- NZPA

Its all good and well but the charge against Greg isnt that he shot the man. Or that he invoked his human right to self defence.

In this country to get a pistol licence one needs to show to the powers that control us that you have a valid reason for wanting one.

Self defence is not considered a valid reason.

All of us who use pistols have to belong to pistol clubs, we have to attend so many days either on the range at club level or in competition. Our pistol licences are granted to us so that we can use them for such purposes. ie sporting.

What the police have charged Greg with is using the pistol for another purpose other than that stated. ie he defended himself by shooting a man rather than firing it at an authorised "target"

This is a bullshit charge brought by a power hungry corrupt segment of our society who choose to impose their personal beliefs and moral standards upon the majority. They knew they had no chance of sucessfully proscecuting Greg of anything directly related to him defending himself and protecting others, so they dreamt up this charge.

Just as an example let me try and parody this charge.

Suppose that you were only allowed to buy machetes if you lived on a farm.

You had to give reason why you wanted this item and you explained it was for scrub cleearance. One day you needed some firewood and couldnt find the axe so you proceed to chop small logs with the machete. Along comes the local police who, seeing you using this item for a purpose you hadnt stated, promptly arrests you.

The reasoning is absurb.

The powers that RULE and their enforcers, the police, are looking for any way that they can take all right of self determination , self protection and therefore self respect from those they percieve to be little more than cattle, fit only to provide them with the means of justifying their existance.

If you think I an a bit off wack then look around, read a little history, think for yourself.

As bikers and road users we are constantly having new rules and regulations thrust upon us. Our speed limit was set by those in power, not for any reason but because they chose a number. The old age pension was originally set at 65 for the very fact that then life expectancy wasnt as high as it is now and the govenments wouldnt have to pay out as much as the operson paid into the scheme. Even now they are talking about raising the retiring age because they cant afford to give you back your own monies.

I digress.

They are charging Greg with a bullshit charge so that they can sneak in bullshit regulations without having the general populace realising what they are doing.

If Greg is sucessfully proscecuted then the next time somone uses a firearm to defend themselves the case against Greg will form the basis of the charge.

I'm really sorry to say it but as I have gotten older my faith in a fair and equitable government has diminished dramatically. All I can see is miorities furthering their own aims at the expense of the majority. These persons/groups are not in the least interested in what we the people want. Only in what they can get.

I've said it before and I will say it again.

Firearme laws have nothing whatso ever to do with "gun control" and everything to do with "people control"

Rant over

**jrandom** · 4th February 2007, 08:36

Originally Posted by Dai

These persons/groups are not in the least interested in what we the people want...

All very good points.

The only flaw in your reasoning is that in fact, We are not The People. We are a minority.

The People, generally speaking, are shit-scared of firearms, and will bleat their assent to anything that takes guns away from anyone. It's not corrupt leaders we have to blame - it's the ignorant populace.

I've personally seen a couple of friends change from complete ambivalence, tending toward anti-gun sentiment, to enthusiasm and support for the idea of a gun-owning citizenry, after nothing but a single afternoon's instruction and shooting.

I'm on a mission from God.

**rok-the-boat** · 4th February 2007, 09:19

If the guy gets charged and sent down, then the message is clear. If a thief wants your gun then you have to hand it over with no resistance. Might as well give him some bullets too, especially if he asked for them. And if he looks like he's going to shoot you then you may as well prevent a crime and shoot yourself.

**ynot slow** · 4th February 2007, 10:01

i renewed my firearms licence back in sept 06,talk about 3rd degree,nice guy doing interview though had a brain for once,interviewed wife stepson there too,passed that stage ok re mental ability,asked couple of questions re self defence if burglar came in ,my reply was use enough force required was my understanding and said if the guy had a .22 or so you can't pull out your ak47 and waste him,but if he had a machete or knife or just himself and i could get .22 from locked cupboard in garage and bolt from small safe in wardrobe and ammunition from bedside cabinet also in locked cash tin then ask him if i could load then shoot him would that be self defence,guy nearly pissed himself,if you break into firearm dealer you can't expect the salesperson to give rifles so they can cause mayhem,if you produce arms in public with menace you expect the wrath of the cops,be you have a golfclub axe or similar,remember the mangakino cop was killed by guy in steelcap boots,so don't give me that crap about arseholes with weapons not meaning to kill,you don't need to have weapons feet can kill

**Patrick** · 4th February 2007, 10:23

Originally Posted by ynot slow

you don't need to have weapons feet can kill

Shit... lets licence 'em... give em an odour tax, like the fart tax the farmers were/are going to get?

**Dai** · 4th February 2007, 22:30

Originally Posted by Fish

All very good points.

The only flaw in your reasoning is that in fact, We are not The People. We are a minority.

The People, generally speaking, are shit-scared of firearms, and will bleat their assent to anything that takes guns away from anyone. It's not corrupt leaders we have to blame - it's the ignorant populace.

I've personally seen a couple of friends change from complete ambivalence, tending toward anti-gun sentiment, to enthusiasm and support for the idea of a gun-owning citizenry, after nothing but a single afternoon's instruction and shooting.

I'm on a mission from God.

Are we a minority?

From the COLFO website

http://www.colfo.org.nz/Reference_Li...earms_Laws.php

Comments in bnlue are by me and not from site

"Statistics

Around 225,000 New Zealanders have firearms licences and a recent Government inquiry estimates that New Zealand civilians hold between 700,000 and 1,000,000 firearms.

Thats about a 1/16th of the population of the country with that number owning enough firearms to arm 1/4 of the population

Nearly half a million responsible New Zealanders used firearms in the year to Dec 1996. They safely fired around 15 million cartridges.

So 1/8th of the population participated in the shooting sports in some way

Each year around 5,500 New Zealanders apply to the Police for firearms licences. Almost all applicants list hunting or pest destruction as the reason for their application. "

If 5500 people a year got motorcycle licences we would consider ourselves quite a political force

My own thoughts now.

Yes the majority of the people are very nervous of firearms. That is because of the climate of fear the anti gun lobby insist upon fostering and the media expolit to sell papers, get viewers and entertain people with.

I too have introduced a number of people to the sport of shooting and all of them have become real enthusasts. Not one has gone out and commited atrocities or eaten any babies.

If you watch the arguements by the anti firearms groups, as I have over the years, you will note that they very rarely resort to statistics. When faced with raw stats that show that sports like fishing kills more people in this country than firearms, they inevitable resort to pure emotional rhetoric, name calling and character assasination.

We are a very sizable minority. If 230,000 people marched to the steps of the beehive demanding that we cut our time scale from a 24 hour day to a 23 1/2 hour day, the PC tree huggers would find the time to listen to them.

If 230,000 motorcycle riders rode through Auckland demanding the right to use all the bus lanes the ARC would shit themselves.

The problm with firearms owners is that we are an extremely timid and law abiding lot. We know that if we kicjk up a fuss the powers will remove our sport.

When, in the UK, they brought in the regulations that all shotgun serial numbers had to be recorded, especially those multi shot pumps or semi autos, they made a great fuss that 50,000 had been converted to 3 shot only. It was only later they realised that 500,000 multi capacity shotguns had been imorted and sold in the UK. 450,000 shotguns just legally ceased to exist. Similar has happened in Australia, especially the Northern Teritories.

**Swoop** · 6th June 2007, 12:34

Auckland gunshop owner in court
New 11:00AM Wednesday June 06, 2007

The man who shot an intruder threatening him at his south Auckland gunshop faces a depositions hearing today on a gun possession charge.

Greg Carvell is accused of with possessing a firearm without lawful, proper or sufficient purpose. The hearing is being held in Auckland District Court.

Carvell shot Ricky James Beckham in the stomach with a .45 calibre revolver when Beckham entered Carvell's south Auckland gunshop in July, threatened staff with a machete and demanded guns.

The police decision several months later to charge Carvell was met with a chorus of public opposition.

Beckham was jailed for two years and nine months for aggravated burglary.

At his sentencing at the High Court in Auckland in February, Judge Rhys Harrison said he was worried that a man who defended himself against an attacker armed with a machete now faced firearms charges.

Judge Harrison said he felt a "sense of injustice" that Carvell had been charged.

"I am most concerned that Mr Carvell, acting in his own defence and in the defence of another employee, is facing serious criminal charges.

"There is an element of unfairness in this."

- NZPA

**peasea** · 7th June 2007, 00:33

I took the time to go and meet Greg Carvell. He's a nice guy, so is his dad. I took with me a sum of cash (from passing round a hat to help his defence fund) and I personally shelled out for a box of Corona's (Greg's fave) which I delivered to Greg personally.

Why?

Because I firmly believe that this man deserves this nations support for defending himself, his family, his fellow workers and his livelihood. Plus he prevented a demented dickhead from getting his hands on some guns; Greg is a hero.

Any of you would do the same, if you had the balls, and then Greg is charged for doing this!!! WTF?

I also firmly believe the charges are BOLLOCKS! So lame, so hollow and it's a new-age witch hunt that needs to be stomped on. I'm not cop-bashing here, I think this is politically motivated. I doubt the cop that delivered the charges was happy about it.

Really, that poor pizza delivery guy (Choi) who got killed for working hard, the RSA killings, don't start me. The list is endless, then some guy (Greg) defends himself....????? He needs a medal, not a trial. He needs our support and I can hold my head high when I say I took the time to go and give him some hard cash, some beer and a handshake. I met the guy, face to face, he's one of us. I shook his hand and put my cash where my mouth is.

I challenge you all to do the same.