• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Anti-Muslim Terrorist Attack in... NZ?

cullennz said:
And Peterson's book is an over rated self help book with zero reference to race hate.

Which kind of makes the reason for one to be banned over a white supremacist mass killing about the Author.
Click to expand...

uke2se said:
They - a private company - is chosing to remove a product that they feel is detriment to their brand. Good for them.
Click to expand...

Yup. You won't find any of David Irving's books at Whitcoulls either.... even his genuine WW2 history books; the one's that are NOT about Holocaust denial.
 
Belz... said:
What does "military style" or "assault" mean in this context? In the US all that seemed to amount to how the thing looked.
Click to expand...

Was looking at that.

Think it is looks and to catch things like some guns that don't look like Military style

In NZ what the US call an assault weapon we call a MSSA I think

Saying both covers all bases

NZ definition of MSSA

The 2013 version of the Arms Code describes a military style semi-automatic firearm as any "self-loading" (i.e. semi-automatic) firearm, other than a pistol, with any of the following features:

Folding or telescopic butt
Magazine that holds, or is detachable and has the appearance of holding more than 15 cartridges (for .22 rimfire)
Magazine that holds more than 7 cartridges, or is detachable and has the appearance of holding more than 10 cartridges (for other than a .22 rimfire)
Bayonet lug
Pistol grip as defined by regulation
Flash suppressor
Click to expand...

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Military-style_semi-automatic
 
Last edited:
LTC8K6 said:
My condolences to the victims.

NZ will probably go for much tighter laws now.

What a nutcase.

This will only make everything he supposedly hates, worse.
Click to expand...

I predicted the new laws, but the guns haven't been turned in yet.

I wonder if we will see acceptance or some attempt to hold on to rights?

We've already seen nose-thumbing at bans in the USA, so I'm pretty sure that merely declaring a new law won't work here.
 
"This was in stark contrast to the speed with which the then Australian PM John Howard acted after 35 people were killed with MSSA weapons in Port Arthur.

He banned all semi-automatic weapons, including shotguns and .22 rifles, in the face of stiff opposition. The total ban is considered Howard's defining legacy and the impact he is most proud of."

https://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=12215066

I am somewhat irritated at the thread split, because fragmentation denies serial debate. Discuss NZ gun laws seperately and obfuscate the OP here.
 
LTC8K6 said:
I predicted the new laws, but the guns haven't been turned in yet.

I wonder if we will see acceptance or some attempt to hold on to rights?

We've already seen nose-thumbing at bans in the USA, so I'm pretty sure that merely declaring a new law won't work here.
Click to expand...

The vast majority will be just turned in


They have already said the cost to buy back is between 100 and 200 million so it will be budgeted.

The rest can just be picked up as and when and they will phase out.

Farming, hunting and fishing have already said they agree with the laws.

Farmers still get to keep with .22 semis with up to 10 mags, etc.

Frankly any decent hunter doesn't need a semi with more than 5-7 shots

DOC have their .22s

Cops and army exempt

C Class exempt so film studios still get their pistols and fully autos firing either blanks or inoperable. Competitions shooters their pistols

All pretty logical really
 
"This led to a loophole where anyone with a basic A-category licence could purchase a semi-automatic, such as an AR-15, and easily upgrade the firearm into a more dangerous MSSA weapon."

https://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=12215066

What's he taking about here? How does one upgrade an AR-15 to make it "more dangerous"? Detachable mags are quickly swapped out, even if they are only 7 rounds or whatever.
 
cullennz said:
The vast majority will be just turned in


They have already said the cost to buy back is between 100 and 200 million so it will be budgeted.

The rest can just be picked up as and when and they will phase out.

Farming, hunting and fishing have already said they agree with the laws.

Farmers still get to keep with .22 semis with up to 10 mags, etc.

Frankly any decent hunter doesn't need a semi with more than 5-7 shots

DOC have their .22s

Cops and army exempt

C Class exempt so film studios still get their pistols and fully autos firing either blanks or inoperable. Competitions shooters their pistols

All pretty logical really
Click to expand...

Shame to see citizens roll over like that.

But I have been saying for years that it's inevitable here in the USA.

The political shifting here will get it done eventually.

Just a matter of a few more election cycles.
 
LTC8K6 said:
"This led to a loophole where anyone with a basic A-category licence could purchase a semi-automatic, such as an AR-15, and easily upgrade the firearm into a more dangerous MSSA weapon."

https://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=12215066

What's he taking about here? How does one upgrade an AR-15 to make it "more dangerous"? Detachable mags are quickly swapped out, even if they are only 7 rounds or whatever.
Click to expand...

Presumably by putting a 100 round magazine in it

Because as fast as some one can change a magazine 14 X. Not having to do it at all is faster
 
LTC8K6 said:
Shame to see citizens roll over like that.
But I have been saying for years that it's inevitable here in the USA.

The political shifting here will get it done eventually.

Just a matter of a few more election cycles.
Click to expand...

Your one problem there is I can think of very few people who will be "rolling over"

The vast majority of people agree with it

It has been on the cards, brought up, had govt bills argued over and very nearly been done already, for the past 25 odd years
 
cullennz said:
Presumably by putting a 100 round magazine in it

Because as fast as some one can change a magazine 14 X. Not having to do it at all is faster
Click to expand...

That will jam almost instantly, which is why they aren't used.

The difference with magazine swaps has been demonstrated to be miniscule, iirc.

But it doesn't really matter in the end.

The political trend is pretty clear.
 
cullennz said:
Your one problem there is I can think of very few people who will be "rolling over"

The vast majority of people agree with it

It has been on the cards, brought up, had govt bills argued over and very nearly been done already, for the past 25 odd years
Click to expand...

It seems like if the vast majority already agreed, it would have been the law already.

But if they actually do, then so be it.

I hope crime doesn't become a big problem.
 
LTC8K6 said:
Shame to see citizens roll over like that.

But I have been saying for years that it's inevitable here in the USA.

The political shifting here will get it done eventually.

Just a matter of a few more election cycles.
Click to expand...

This is something you Americans just fail to understand. You are just about the only place in the western world where owning a firearm is a right, and the only one with a national fear that "y'all are comin' tuh take muh gunz away".

Most everywhere else, firearms ownership is a privilege, one that you have to show that you deserve to be granted, and that you have to pay for.

In NZ, there really is no equivalent of the NRA rating politicians on their position on gun ownership, no firearms lobby pressuring politicians and offering campaign contributions in exchange for favourable consideration in legislation. Gun rights advocates aren't really a "thing" here to any serious degree.

LTC8K6 said:
It seems like if the vast majority already agreed, it would have been the law already.

But if they actually do, then so be it.

I hope crime doesn't become a big problem.
Click to expand...

You understand that, in NZ

- handguns are almost non-existent?
- owning a firearm for self-defense is specifically outlawed
- there is no "stand your ground" law
- there is no right to carry firearms in public
- there is no right to shoot people on your property even if they are committing a crime

This will have ZERO impact on crime.
 
Last edited:
smartcooky said:
This is something you Americans just fail to understand. You are just about the only place in the western world where owning a firearm is a right, and the only one with a national fear that "y'all are comin' tuh take muh gunz away".

Most everywhere else, firearms ownership is a privilege, one that you have to show that you deserve to be granted, and that you have to pay for.

In NZ, there really is no equivalent of the NRA rating politicians on their position on gun ownership, no firearms lobby pressuring politicians and offering campaign contributions in exchange for favourable consideration in legislation. Gun rights advocates aren't really a "thing" here to any serious degree.



You understand that, in NZ

- handguns are almost non-existent?
- owning a firearm for self-defense is specifically outlawed
- there is no "stand your ground" law
- there is no right to carry firearms in public
- there is no right to shoot people on your property even if they are committing a crime
Click to expand...
Thus the Bain slaughter and the Scott Guy semi auto shotgun killings by gang prospects got by. Notable for false prosecutions, not infrequency.
 
Samson said:
Thus the Bain slaughter and the Scott Guy semi auto shotgun killings by gang prospects got by. Notable for false prosecutions, not infrequency.
Click to expand...

What do you mean by "got by"

What the hell has this to do with anything here? Use of firearms as self defence would have made no difference to either of these cases.
 
Last edited:
smartcooky said:
This is something you Americans just fail to understand. You are just about the only place in the western world where owning a firearm is a right, and the only one with a national fear that "y'all are comin' tuh take muh gunz away".

Most everywhere else, firearms ownership is a privilege, one that you have to show that you deserve to be granted, and that you have to pay for.

In NZ, there really is no equivalent of the NRA rating politicians on their position on gun ownership, no firearms lobby pressuring politicians and offering campaign contributions in exchange for favourable consideration in legislation. Gun rights advocates aren't really a "thing" here to any serious degree.



You understand that, in NZ

- handguns are almost non-existent?
- owning a firearm for self-defense is specifically outlawed
- there is no "stand your ground" law
- there is no right to carry firearms in public
- there is no right to shoot people on your property even if they are committing a crime
Click to expand...

Well that seems odd, given the previous ease of ownership.

The NRA is not all that big with a self-reported 5 million members, which is Shirley inflated. They aren't going to stop the political shift in the USA, imo.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom