The firearm thread

[husaberg]

Again, if everyone else around here is a dimwit why do you spend so much time arguing with said dimwits?

Again you never really asked it the first time, as you made a statement which you claimed i made which clearly wasnt true, nor have you answered or countered my points.
Including why you constantly are trying to misrepresent what i say. if you argument is really so strong why do you need to make up crap and misrepresent what people say, Then make claims that are simply not true.
Hint that's why when i ask you to back up what you are claiming, you changed the subject.

[Katman]

.......why do you need to make up crap and misrepresent what people say......

Fucking irony overload.

[husaberg]

Fucking irony overload.

The irony is know are posting in this thread when you are to much of a coward to answer whether you agree with the ban or not.
Feel free to prove me right again
Because proving you are wrong never requires much effort

[Graystone]

Christchurch, Charlie Hebdo, Paris Attacks, Mumbai Attacks.



That depends on your a priori viewpoint - you talk of use/misuse, but in an NZ context, there are fewer trucks than firearms and more deaths due to trucks than Firearms - how does that fit into your evaluation?

You might argue that there is a public need for Trucks in a modern Society, fine - but in NZ there is a public need for private Pest Control - so when you remove all other factors that have a degree of parity between the 2 inanimate objects, you are left with the Stigma that a Firearm is a Weapon, designed to kill.

Which is why your statement that about you not considering them comparable in the first place was accurate and the entire point, but even now, you can't acknowledge your bias against Firearms.



Of course you do, it's entirely in line with your ideological outlook...

You talk of public safety (so, at least you accept that was the stated reason for the ban, glad you agree), tell me - when no lawfully held E-Cat, Registered Firearms were used to commit a murder in nearly 30 years are banned - how does that improve public safety?

Or does it simply improve the feeling of public safety?



Various estimates by COLFO and David Tipple (Owner of Gun City) - however, that is an estimate for Semi-Autos only, not including all the repeating rifles with internal magazines that hold more than 10 rounds (that are now also illegal)

The quoted figure is from here: https://www.stuff.co.nz/national/chr...uy-back-option

Which is 600,000 semis, out of a 1.2 Million estimate firearms. So, not 'a small percentage'



How'd that work out for the Drug Trade?

Orlando Nightclub, San Bernadino, Fort Hood, Charleston, Harvest Festival are five high profile ones, let me know if they fit your goalposts...

Deaths caused by truck misuse is very rarely malicious. They're also in use far longer, so the exposure is higher. Nor am I calling for all firearms to be banned, so private pest control is still possible, the circumstances in which semi-autos are 'required' for pest control are far far fewer than our need for goods transport (there is also an exemption for authorised pest control operators). As disappointing as it may be for you, the stigma simply isn't a factor for me.

How many E-cats made their way from lawful hands to unlawful ones, and were then used to commit a crime? How many lawfully owned guns were used to commit crimes? How many of the Christchurch Terrorist's guns were obtained legally?

Sounds like just an estimate from some bloke...

Are you comparing firearms with drugs? Things that are generally sought for personal pleasure, and often cause self harm and negative effects on society? Seems like a better comparison than trucks anyway! What you should ask, is how it worked for Australia.

[TheDemonLord]

Orlando Nightclub, San Bernadino, Fort Hood, Charleston, Harvest Festival are five high profile ones, let me know if they fit your goalposts...

Yes, Yes, No, Maybe, No.

Separating out Mass Shootings done be people who simply want to inflict death and destruction is different from people who do the same in the pursuit of a political goal (Terrorism).

I'm not sure if I consider classic Racism as a political Goal - hence the Maybe.

Deaths caused by truck misuse is very rarely malicious. They're also in use far longer, so the exposure is higher. Nor am I calling for all firearms to be banned, so private pest control is still possible, the circumstances in which semi-autos are 'required' for pest control are far far fewer than our need for goods transport (there is also an exemption for authorised pest control operators). As disappointing as it may be for you, the stigma simply isn't a factor for me.

But when it is Malicious - it's capable of killing more people in a similar time period - 87 vs 51. And that happens to be relevant. Firearms, in NZ, when used properly by Lawful owners are extremely safe and that's the disconnect that you are still unwilling to accept.

Depends on how you define need - We've got a lot of unique Flora and Fauna that would be extinct if not for Pest Control - which typically has been done by Private individuals at no cost to the Tax Payer - now this has been removed, I think you will find many unintended consequences occuring, a number of which you probably aren't going to like (more 1080 drops springs to mind). Not to mention that a number of Professional Pest controllers have been saying that the new laws may cause them to go out of Business.

How many E-cats made their way from lawful hands to unlawful ones,

Well, they are all Registered with the Police, so should be a pretty easy answer - but wait! The Police can't even answer that for the Firearms that were registered with them.... I would hazard a guess the answer is little to none.

and were then used to commit a crime?

Are you trying to imply that a Gun Register will do nothing to stop Crime?

How many lawfully owned guns were used to commit crimes?

Well, we know in 10 years - it was 7. That's 7 out of 250,000 people and about 1.2-1.5 Million Guns, in 10 years.

How many of the Christchurch Terrorist's guns were obtained legally?

All of them. He then used a loophole to illegally modify them to be an E-Cat rifle - A Loophole that I'd have supported being closed. How'd he get the Licence though? His Referees were 2 people that had only known him from an Online Forum.

Does anyone in their right mind think that is acceptable as a Character reference? Do you? If the answer is No, then ask this - Why was the licence granted in the first place. That's the whole point of a licensing system.

Sounds like just an estimate from some bloke...

Yeah. someone who works for the largest Firearm Dealer in the country - what would they know about Firearms and Firearm Sales....

Are you comparing firearms with drugs? Things that are generally sought for personal pleasure, and often cause self harm and negative effects on society? Seems like a better comparison than trucks anyway! What you should ask, is how it worked for Australia.

I'm comparing Illegal Firearms with Illegal Drugs.

Well, they've had 10 mass shootings (by the FBI's definition) since the Ban, Including one where over 100 rounds were fired and several using Firearms banned for nearly 25 Years, and the Melbourne Gang wars have had a several shootings recently...

You'll probably point to the oft-cited graph of 'Gun deaths' - but that includes Suicides, a Graph which was declining well before the Gun Ban.

All I'm going to say is they've had 2 buy backs (1996, 2003) and the estimates range from 80% of Semis would handed in to as low as 40%.

[aNZBloke]

One of the arguments is that there also will be less suicides. However a number do also suicide by car. Or just like in the past (mainly in the 30's and 40's during the depression) there were many housewives who slit their wrists with a safety razor blade. Or they opened the gas of the gas cook top or stuck their head in the gas oven. If someone wants to do suicide they'll find a way. As such this whole buy back will not achieve much in that respect. Plus for suicide one does not need an automatic.

[aNZBloke]

Well, they've had 10 mass shootings (by the FBI's definition) since the Ban, Including one where over 100 rounds were fired and several using Firearms banned for nearly 25 Years, and the Melbourne Gang wars have had a several shootings recently...

You'll probably point to the oft-cited graph of 'Gun deaths' - but that includes Suicides, a Graph which was declining well before the Gun Ban.

All I'm going to say is they've had 2 buy backs (1996, 2003) and the estimates range from 80% of Semis would handed in to as low as 40%.

And the farmers in OZ aren't happy with the ban because of the kangaroos.

[Graystone]

Yes, Yes, No, Maybe, No.

Separating out Mass Shootings done be people who simply want to inflict death and destruction is different from people who do the same in the pursuit of a political goal (Terrorism).

I'm not sure if I consider classic Racism as a political Goal - hence the Maybe.



But when it is Malicious - it's capable of killing more people in a similar time period - 87 vs 51. And that happens to be relevant. Firearms, in NZ, when used properly by Lawful owners are extremely safe and that's the disconnect that you are still unwilling to accept.

Depends on how you define need - We've got a lot of unique Flora and Fauna that would be extinct if not for Pest Control - which typically has been done by Private individuals at no cost to the Tax Payer - now this has been removed, I think you will find many unintended consequences occuring, a number of which you probably aren't going to like (more 1080 drops springs to mind). Not to mention that a number of Professional Pest controllers have been saying that the new laws may cause them to go out of Business.



Well, they are all Registered with the Police, so should be a pretty easy answer - but wait! The Police can't even answer that for the Firearms that were registered with them.... I would hazard a guess the answer is little to none.



Are you trying to imply that a Gun Register will do nothing to stop Crime?



Well, we know in 10 years - it was 7. That's 7 out of 250,000 people and about 1.2-1.5 Million Guns, in 10 years.



All of them. He then used a loophole to illegally modify them to be an E-Cat rifle - A Loophole that I'd have supported being closed. How'd he get the Licence though? His Referees were 2 people that had only known him from an Online Forum.

Does anyone in their right mind think that is acceptable as a Character reference? Do you? If the answer is No, then ask this - Why was the licence granted in the first place. That's the whole point of a licensing system.



Yeah. someone who works for the largest Firearm Dealer in the country - what would they know about Firearms and Firearm Sales....



I'm comparing Illegal Firearms with Illegal Drugs.

Well, they've had 10 mass shootings (by the FBI's definition) since the Ban, Including one where over 100 rounds were fired and several using Firearms banned for nearly 25 Years, and the Melbourne Gang wars have had a several shootings recently...

You'll probably point to the oft-cited graph of 'Gun deaths' - but that includes Suicides, a Graph which was declining well before the Gun Ban.

All I'm going to say is they've had 2 buy backs (1996, 2003) and the estimates range from 80% of Semis would handed in to as low as 40%.

Seems like semantics, the law change addresses both in equally measure. I've attached a list of incidents between 08 and 17, excluding the countries you listed, and including only ones where firearm was a weapon, and which resulted in fatalities; there are 18207 listed in the Global Terrorism Database, the export is limited to 1000, assuming 40% of even the export make it past your goalposts as above, it clearly dwarves the count of Truck incidents you have supplied; which you should probably list also, to ensure they too pass your goalposts...

Such violence in a single incident is a statistical anomaly for truck attacks, however there are many shooting with more than 50 killed by one perp, and many shootings with more than 100 killed by more than one perp.
Don't think flora is generally dealt to with a gun mate, and there is an exception to the ban for pest control purposes, and not all guns are banned so private pest control can continue.

Little to none? so they don't get stolen at all? I'd think a gun register would do fuck all to stop crime. So lawfully owned guns are used to commit crimes. And the law change would have prevented the Christchurch terrorist from obtaining the weapons he used through the channel he used. How can you possibly say this change will do nothing but penalise law abiding citizens after what you have just admitted? Clearly it would have at least penalised the perpetrator of the even that caused the law change, and through that potentially even limited the violence he committed.

And what if you remove the suicides from that gun death graph, then what would it show?

[pritch]

http://www.americanthinker.com/artic...ietnam_ki.html

vietnamwar.fandom.com/wiki/M1_carbine under combat use, notably in The Philippines

I'm at something of a loss to know why you posted those, they support my point. Most NZ infantry carried 7.62mm SLRs.

Interesting comment in the first link about the tumbling bullets. Ballistics involve considerable arithmetic, one formula is Greenhill's Equation which is used to calculate the rifling twist required to stabilise a bullet of a given length. If there is a mismatch the bullet will not stabilise which can result in the projectile tumbling in flight. Unlikely as it may seem, it may well be that the engineers at Colt just got a sum wrong. The error would have been corrected quickly but it didn't stop a lot of crap being written.

As bullet design changes so the twist of the 223 rifles has had to change. Apparently recent developments in bullet construction are causing yet another rifling rate of twist to be considered.

[aNZBloke]

I'm at something of a loss to know why you posted those, they support my point. Most NZ infantry carried 7.62mm SLRs.

....
Unlikely as it may seem, it may well be that the engineers at Colt just got a sum wrong. The error would have been corrected quickly but it didn't stop a lot of crap being written.

I made the remark that there is a valid reason for having a semi automatic, e.g. when hunting boars in the undergrowth. I may take more than one shot to stop a boar. Similarly to that at times it took more than one shot to stop a Vietnamese freedom fighter. The latter was questioned, hence these links.

Colt did not get it totally wrong, it was the change of explosive that fouled the mechanism causing it to jam. Change of ammo stopped the problem of jamming. The change of rifling is the questionable one. I had a M16 and I liked it, just did not like the handle but liked the ability to move the bolt manually. Later I had an AR10 and that worked fine from a helicopter, was not impressed with the M16 in that role.

[TheDemonLord]

Seems like semantics, the law change addresses both in equally measure. I've attached a list of incidents between 08 and 17, excluding the countries you listed, and including only ones where firearm was a weapon, and which resulted in fatalities; there are 18207 listed in the Global Terrorism Database, the export is limited to 1000, assuming 40% of even the export make it past your goalposts as above, it clearly dwarves the count of Truck incidents you have supplied; which you should probably list also, to ensure they too pass your goalposts...

What a lovely little Spreadsheet, and if the Meaning of 'GunCertain 1' is to be what I presume it to be, then that gives a total of:

14 Fatalities due to Firearms.

(when Countries with active Conflicts/Civil Wars are filitered out and GunCertain 1 is set to 1 {there's a value of 1 and 0, so presumably it's a binary where 1 is true and 0 is false})

Such violence in a single incident is a statistical anomaly for truck attacks, however there are many shooting with more than 50 killed by one perp, and many shootings with more than 100 killed by more than one perp.

With the Exception of America (which is a unique - for various reasons), there aren't that many mass shootings, even in countries that allow for the ownership of Semi or even Fully Automatic Weapons. They are as Statistically Anomalous as the Truck attacks are.

Don't think flora is generally dealt to with a gun mate, and there is an exception to the ban for pest control purposes, and not all guns are banned so private pest control can continue.

Are you sure? I'll give you a hint, most of the Pest Animals eat Flora. Remember when I said unintended Consequences...

As others have pointed out to you - the ability to see a herd of Wild goats, grab your personal AR (~30-60 minutes to go back, open your safe, load a mag travel back to the rough area they were in), crack off 5 rounds before they disappear into the Bush isn't the same as seeing the herd, calling the Pest Control who 'Yeah, Nah, Might be able to fit you in sometime next week' - by which time the Goats have long since fucked off and you are left footing a Bill, for nothing.

But what would Federated Farmers know.... And what would the professional Pest Controllers who are saying they will go out of business Know...

Little to none? so they don't get stolen at all? I'd think a gun register would do fuck all to stop crime.

E-Cat licence holders were subject to a higher level of Safe requirements and also required an additional Security Measure (such as restricted access to the location of the safe) - Point is, that system worked, so why get rid of it?

And based on your last statement - you'll be opposing the next round of Legislation I take it? Writing a Submission pointing out that a Register will do nothing except be a burden on the Tax Payer, the Police and the law-abiding Firearm owner whilst don't fuck all to stop crime, yes?

So lawfully owned guns are used to commit crimes. And the law change would have prevented the Christchurch terrorist from obtaining the weapons he used through the channel he used.

But won't stop the next terrorist from obtaining Weapons. Which is the problem. And you have still yet to address how he was granted the ability to obtain the Firearms in the first place - Do you think an Internet Forum persona is an Acceptable Character Reference?

If the Answer is No, then why are you blaming the Firearm, when the the first link in the chain is how that was allowed to pass for a Firearms Licence?

How can you possibly say this change will do nothing but penalise law abiding citizens after what you have just admitted?

Terrorists will always find a way. Criminals will always find a way. They are still finding Ways in Australia, in the UK - both of which have had Bans in place for over 2 Decades. When the Gangs announced on Public TV they wouldn't hand over their Firearms - what did the Police do?

The only person that will be penalised is the Law Abiding Citizen.

Clearly it would have at least penalised the perpetrator of the even that caused the law change, and through that potentially even limited the violence he committed.

By that logic, everyone should be kept in Isolation, only being allowed out with written permission - afterall that would have at least Penalised the Perpetrator - Right?

That would also limited the Violence he Committed - Right?

Do you want to live in that World? No? Then you have to acknowledge that Freedoms (knowing they will be abused to cause harm) are worth it. We limit the harm that some freedoms can do by licencing and vetting - I'll ask again - is someone from the Internet a valid referee for a Character Reference?

And what if you remove the suicides from that gun death graph, then what would it show?

A relatively flat graph with a slight downward trend that started to decline since about the mid 80's. Meaning that Australias Gun Laws have had:

No.
Discernible.
Effect.

Except for Increase in Pests, like Kangaroos, Wild Pigs etc. Figures indicating that just after the Semi-Auto ban, the Total Economic cost to Invasive Pests was about $2.3 Billion, in 2011 it was closer to $14 Billion.

Remember that 'unintended Consequences' point?

[Graystone]

What a lovely little Spreadsheet, and if the Meaning of 'GunCertain 1' is to be what I presume it to be, then that gives a total of:

14 Fatalities due to Firearms.

(when Countries with active Conflicts/Civil Wars are filitered out and GunCertain 1 is set to 1 {there's a value of 1 and 0, so presumably it's a binary where 1 is true and 0 is false})



With the Exception of America (which is a unique - for various reasons), there aren't that many mass shootings, even in countries that allow for the ownership of Semi or even Fully Automatic Weapons. They are as Statistically Anomalous as the Truck attacks are.



Are you sure? I'll give you a hint, most of the Pest Animals eat Flora. Remember when I said unintended Consequences...

As others have pointed out to you - the ability to see a herd of Wild goats, grab your personal AR (~30-60 minutes to go back, open your safe, load a mag travel back to the rough area they were in), crack off 5 rounds before they disappear into the Bush isn't the same as seeing the herd, calling the Pest Control who 'Yeah, Nah, Might be able to fit you in sometime next week' - by which time the Goats have long since fucked off and you are left footing a Bill, for nothing.

But what would Federated Farmers know.... And what would the professional Pest Controllers who are saying they will go out of business Know...



E-Cat licence holders were subject to a higher level of Safe requirements and also required an additional Security Measure (such as restricted access to the location of the safe) - Point is, that system worked, so why get rid of it?

And based on your last statement - you'll be opposing the next round of Legislation I take it? Writing a Submission pointing out that a Register will do nothing except be a burden on the Tax Payer, the Police and the law-abiding Firearm owner whilst don't fuck all to stop crime, yes?



But won't stop the next terrorist from obtaining Weapons. Which is the problem. And you have still yet to address how he was granted the ability to obtain the Firearms in the first place - Do you think an Internet Forum persona is an Acceptable Character Reference?

If the Answer is No, then why are you blaming the Firearm, when the the first link in the chain is how that was allowed to pass for a Firearms Licence?



Terrorists will always find a way. Criminals will always find a way. They are still finding Ways in Australia, in the UK - both of which have had Bans in place for over 2 Decades. When the Gangs announced on Public TV they wouldn't hand over their Firearms - what did the Police do?

The only person that will be penalised is the Law Abiding Citizen.



By that logic, everyone should be kept in Isolation, only being allowed out with written permission - afterall that would have at least Penalised the Perpetrator - Right?

That would also limited the Violence he Committed - Right?

Do you want to live in that World? No? Then you have to acknowledge that Freedoms (knowing they will be abused to cause harm) are worth it. We limit the harm that some freedoms can do by licencing and vetting - I'll ask again - is someone from the Internet a valid referee for a Character Reference?



A relatively flat graph with a slight downward trend that started to decline since about the mid 80's. Meaning that Australias Gun Laws have had:

No.
Discernible.
Effect.

Except for Increase in Pests, like Kangaroos, Wild Pigs etc. Figures indicating that just after the Semi-Auto ban, the Total Economic cost to Invasive Pests was about $2.3 Billion, in 2011 it was closer to $14 Billion.

Remember that 'unintended Consequences' point?

It's not what you presume it to be, even a cursory glance at the referenced incident could tell you that. That you would take a list of 1000 incidents, and find some excuse to reduce that down to 14 without even the most rudimentary checking (and ignored the other 95% of the list which did not fit into the export), just shows how incredibly biased you are on this issue.

They are not as anomalous as the truck attacks are, since there are far more of them; do you understand what an anomaly is?

Not the same, but also not a huge deal. Grab a bolt action instead. We clearly just have a subjective difference here, so I see no need to comment further on this point.

Did that system work? Were no E-Cat weapons stolen?

Nope, I've got better shit to do than submit on that.

How do you know? It will close off the easy channel to them, thus it will penalize those who are not law abiding.

How the fuck to you pull that logic from my statement? You're losing the plot again it would seem...

Care to share that graph with the suicides removed then? Or perhaps you are making shit up that you want to be true rather than checking...

[jasonu]

I wonder why these fellas haven't handed over their guns yet???
https://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/a...ectid=12232207

[husaberg]

A survey done in 1988 which showed there were 50,00 big game hunters - 40,000 of them hunting deer -
but one third did not kill any animals, and most of the others killed fewer than three animals a year.

So you have 24,242 active deer hunters only in NZ out of 250,000 licenced gun owners
Altogether killing only on average 3 deer per year. yet some suggest they all need aemi autos. so 6% hunt deer. of those probably 80% would use bolt action rifles (my Guess)
of the rest targeting other animals there is only 10,000 hunters of big game.
of the 10,000s remaining hunters they kill on average 99,000 pigs or ten per year 60% hunt with dogs so normally slit the throat of the cornered pig.
These hunters kill the majority of pigs Yet We have some suggesting they all need semi autos.
Just for their safety though, everyone else's safety is less important than theirs

[jasonu]

A survey done in 1988 which showed there were 50,00 big game hunters - 40,000 of them hunting deer -
but one third did not kill any animals, and most of the others killed fewer than three animals a year.

So you have 24,242 active deer hunters only in NZ out of 250,000 licenced gun owners
Altogether killing only on average 3 deer per year. yet some suggest they all need aemi autos. so 6% hunt deer. of those probably 80% would use bolt action rifles (my Guess)
of the rest targeting other animals there is only 10,000 hunters of big game.
of the 10,000s remaining hunters they kill on average 99,000 pigs or ten per year 60% hunt with dogs so normally slit the throat of the cornered pig.
These hunters kill the majority of pigs Yet We have some suggesting they all need semi autos.
Just for their safety though, everyone else's safety is less important than theirs

So what's your point?