Welcome guest, is this your first visit? Create Account now to join.
  • Login:

Welcome to the NZ Hunting and Shooting Forums.

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed.

DPT Black Watch


User Tag List

+ Reply to Thread
Page 5 of 6 FirstFirst 123456 LastLast
Results 61 to 75 of 85
Like Tree67Likes

Thread: E cat safe/safe room options

  1. #61
    Member Savage1's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Posts
    2,134
    I'm basing the 'very little' figure off of the number of staff employed by Police for the AO roles and how much of their time is spent dealing with this part of it.

    I'm not for or against registration but some statements on here are just manifestly untrue, eg registration has no use, our registry is inaccurate(sure there are mistakes but overall it's pretty good), it will just be used to confiscate weapons, there is a government conspiracy, won't work because of all the guns out there already etc.

    If you look at it pragmatically the issues are far from insurmountable, it's actually a very easy subject in which to play the devils advocate. People on forums have a tendency to only discuss with people on the same side of the fence with little or no opposition/challenges to arguments and Conformation Bias runs rife.

    Overall I think registration would have only a minor benefit for the costs involved and that money would be better used targeting organised crime etc
    Tommy, timattalon and canross like this.

  2. #62
    Member canross's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2017
    Location
    Western Canada - Soon to be Christchurch
    Posts
    29
    Quote Originally Posted by Savage1 View Post
    How about supplying firearms to unlicenced or unendorsed people? Registration has been used to catch/prosecute people who've done that. I also know of a person who did it with A-Cat but since there was no registration nothing could be done about the 10+ AR15s that he'd bought in the last year and sold to his head hunter associates.

    Encouraging people to not speed doesn't work on everyone, why would this be any different?
    When our long gun registry ended in Canada the gun control groups and liberal party (our current majority government and rabidly anti-gun creators of our current firearms act) claimed that this was going to happen. Ultimately it hasn't, and the few cases that have popped up have been tracked back to the stores they were bought from anyways. I accept that NZ isn't the same as Canada in terms of social and economic issues, however I would think Canada has a stronger criminal network as it's tied in with the drug trade through the US, and a far larger population, so it stands to reason if crime were to be a large issue, it would be so in Canada.

    Quote Originally Posted by Danger Mouse View Post
    encouraging people not to speed isnt effective because the public are wising up to the tax rort that it is. The arguments for the zealous enforcement are bullshit.

    Regisration of firearms is a joke, the sole purpose is to find out where they are prior to confiscation, as we have seen before.
    Ultimately the confiscation issue is what caused our long gun registration to be ended in Canada. I was more or less ok with the system we had until our federal police started to change their interpretations of the law in order to seize different makes/models of firearms based on their new interpretations (IE It looks like an AK, therefore it is an AK, therefore it's prohibited and we're taking it or you're going to jail). When this started happening frequently the firearms community voted in the government of the time (conservatives, pro-gun) and ended the long gun registry, which was good timing considering our current gov is now working on legislation to ban the guns that were de-registered, as well as those still registered (pistols and full/converted autos).

    Quote Originally Posted by gonetropo View Post
    i have photos of all my firearms complete with serial numbers and distinguishing features (eg scratch on stock).
    sorry @SAVAGE i trust no department or agency with that info unless they were stolen
    Added bonus - having clear specific photos also often helps insurance pay out on rare or unique firearms that would otherwise be hard to assess by the insurance company.

    Quote Originally Posted by Ryan View Post
    The fact is that its uses are infinitesimal compared to the astronomical monetary and administrative cost of implementing and running the system with any degree of accuracy. As has been borne out by Canada who dropped it and has one of the lowest firearm crime rates in the world and South Africa, who continues to implement it and well... *shrugs*
    Interestingly Canada's crime rates, gun violence, homicide rates and suicide rates all kept declining at a consistent and unaffected rate since the 70's, through the 90's (when our firearms act came into effect) and through to today, some 5 years after the long gun registry was scrapped. Also our registry was, and remains to be, a colossal money hole. It seems to be stabilizing a bit now (27 years later), but it's been orders of magnitude over budget every year since it was created, and only started to vaguely operate correctly after the long gun registry was ended, reducing its load by 3/4 and retaining the same excess budget to run it... so in truth the system might have been functional with a budget 4 times larger, but even now it struggles along. Last number I saw was that it was supposed to cost 2 million per year to run but by 2002 it was $629 million over budget, after which time they stopped talking about it. Keep in mind the system frequently lost registry information, was riddled with errors, transfers took 3-12 weeks to process or were lost, and it's estimated that there was only a 40-60% compliance/registration rate.

    Quote Originally Posted by Savage1 View Post
    You're assuming that it is only possible by spending billions like Canada, when we have one running here that costs very little. South Africa's problems have little, if anything, to do with their firearm registration and is a ridiculous comparison.
    It seems to me the gist of the conversation (now that it's not about E cat storage) is whether a registry is a good idea or not. At its core the question is: Will the government eventually decide to use the registry to force the surrender of private property, and am I ok with this?

    Quote Originally Posted by Ryan View Post
    Let's be clear about what we're discussing - universal registration. Canada has registered firearms, New Zealand has registered firearms, South Africa has registered (all, except black powder) firearms.

    It is not an assumption but an evidence based fact that Canada's attempt to introduce universal registration was a costly and cataclysmic failure. As far as the New Zealand system is concerned, presuming we're discussing the register of B, C, D, E, F - by far the least numerous firearms in the country - how much does it cost exactly?

    Can you please define "very little"?

    From what I've seen documented on this forum and others, the NZ firearm registry is often comically inaccurate. If we combined inspection periods even more so. I have not had my annual inspection since I've lived at my current residence, which is a number of years. I've even mentioned it to my arms officer more than once when I've processed P2Ps.

    If the NZP cannot administer the existing system effectively, how can one expect them to administer one with universal registration - when there are thousands of already unregistered firearms out in the wild? I certainly wouldn't want my or anyone else's hard earned taxes being squandered addressing what is essentially a non-issue in the greater scheme of problems facing this country.

    I'd rather spend that money on my child's education or making sure that I'm not a burden on the health system or any number of other more tangible reasons.

    As for South Africa - if you read my posts again carefully, I am referring to licensed firearm owners, registration, the non-effect it has on reducing firearm related crime in that country (or any country really) and the continued legislative push to introduce further firearm restrictions - in a country where poor and rich, need their firearms the most.
    It sounds like NZ is approaching firearms control the same way Canada did - as a feel-good reaction to a non-existent problem. Guns are an easy target to legislate against, the average city person or member of the public only knows guns from movies and news reports, so in their mind guns can be found anywhere easily, the minute you pick one up you're instantly rambo, and that they compel you to start world war 3, so of course they support firearms control. By legislating against firearms the government addresses media sensationalism, and looks like it's doing something, all the while not actually having to do anything to get results.

    It seems that NZ has a semi functional system in place, and I don't know enough about it to really comment on what it is, but I can say that any attempt to implement a universal system like in Canada isn't going to work - it's too expensive and complicated, and even when our government threw money at ours for 25 years, it still didn't work, and has now been partially dismantled. Additionally, I don't consider it paranoid to dislike the idea of firearms being registered. I used to be ok with it, and then went through 10 years of the police arbitrarily changing the rules, and now am facing the prospect of the current majority government changing the rules yet again and banning most of the guns on the market today, including but not limited to, a ton of great hunting guns, because they look scary.

    I guess what I'm trying to say is that I understand the respect you guys have for the system and its purpose, but I also speak from experience when I say that it does not take much time at all for the laws to change. Not having a registry was the only thing that caused the police to rethink those laws, and is currently the only bargaining tool the firearms and hunting communities have now that there's an anti-gun government in power in Canada. As said above, the real question is: What are the real costs to society from not registering firearms? Are you willing to accept that you, or your children will have their property confiscated now or later, in what is likely to be an ineffective and useless law aimed at making the public feel safe?

    Anyways, I'm out. I realize I'm new to the forum and making more waves than is generally polite, so I'll avoid the politics for a bit.
    Last edited by canross; 17-02-2017 at 08:46 AM.
    gonetropo and Danger Mouse like this.

  3. #63
    Banned
    Join Date
    Apr 2015
    Posts
    326
    Quote Originally Posted by Jexla View Post
    And how'd they get the serial number of said firearm?
    Recorded during a security inspection when Winters relicensed. Like my post said.

  4. #64
    Member Jexla's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2015
    Location
    Napier
    Posts
    689
    Quote Originally Posted by systolic View Post
    Recorded during a security inspection when Winters relicensed. Like my post said.
    Yes, I read it. But what good was that considering they didn't have the firearm from the scene?

  5. #65
    Member Jexla's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2015
    Location
    Napier
    Posts
    689
    Quote Originally Posted by Savage1 View Post
    Only if you consider anything but a 100% success rate a failure, which would be stupid.
    That's my point...

    Not everyone is going to register their firearms either, just like not everyone is going to record their firearm serials when largely encouraged. Also just like not everyone is going to not speed.
    100% compliance will never happen with ANYTHING, but that doesn't make registration any more effective than personally recording your own serials which are then handed to police if stolen.

    We're adults, not children and we're fed up all being treating like children because of the few people who act like children.
    mikee likes this.

  6. #66
    Member
    Join Date
    May 2016
    Posts
    143
    Quote Originally Posted by Jexla View Post
    That's my point...

    Not everyone is going to register their firearms either, just like not everyone is going to record their firearm serials when largely encouraged. Also just like not everyone is going to not speed.
    100% compliance will never happen with ANYTHING, but that doesn't make registration any more effective than personally recording your own serials which are then handed to police if stolen.

    We're adults, not criminals and we're fed up all being treating like criminals because of the few people who act like criminals
    fixed that for you.

  7. #67
    Member Jexla's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2015
    Location
    Napier
    Posts
    689
    Quote Originally Posted by Danger Mouse View Post
    fixed that for you.
    Yeah that's exactly what I was saying ;P

  8. #68
    Member Savage1's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Posts
    2,134
    Quote Originally Posted by Jexla View Post
    That's my point...

    Not everyone is going to register their firearms either, just like not everyone is going to record their firearm serials when largely encouraged. Also just like not everyone is going to not speed.
    100% compliance will never happen with ANYTHING, but that doesn't make registration any more effective than personally recording your own serials which are then handed to police if stolen.

    We're adults, not children and we're fed up all being treating like children because of the few people who act like children.
    So just because there won't be 100% compliance doesn't make it pointless, I would think that registration compliance would be a lot higher than people that keep their own records up to date and available. Keeping your own records won't deter people from selling to nefarious people either.

    If you believe you've been treated like a criminal by Police then I don't think you've ever been dealt with as a criminal by Police. I rarely deal with FAL holders as criminals, I often deal with adults who're acting like children and I do often see FAL holders acting/posting like children.

  9. #69
    Member stretch's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2014
    Location
    Clarks Beach, (South of) Auckland
    Posts
    1,286
    Quote Originally Posted by Savage1 View Post
    So just because there won't be 100% compliance doesn't make it pointless, I would think that registration compliance would be a lot higher than people that keep their own records up to date and available. Keeping your own records won't deter people from selling to nefarious people either.
    But is the cost and effort of setting-up/administering/maintaining a registry worth it to deter people from selling to nefarious people? Of all the ways crims can get hold of guns, what proportion come from naughty sales?

  10. #70
    Member Savage1's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Posts
    2,134
    Quote Originally Posted by stretch View Post
    But is the cost and effort of setting-up/administering/maintaining a registry worth it to deter people from selling to nefarious people? Of all the ways crims can get hold of guns, what proportion come from naughty sales?
    That's all unknowns really, I do think more come from 'naughty sales' than people think.

  11. #71
    Member Sasquatch's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2014
    Posts
    410
    What about customs checking 1 in 10 shipping containers or whatever it is. That's a joke. Surely that would contribute numbers to the black market?

    As for claiming that the govt wouldn't bother to come get our guns - What if a future government put a total ban on MSSA's what resources do you think they will use to track down where they are???

    Lets face it @Savage1 firearm registration sucks balls.

  12. #72
    Member Jexla's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2015
    Location
    Napier
    Posts
    689
    Quote Originally Posted by Savage1 View Post
    So just because there won't be 100% compliance doesn't make it pointless, I would think that registration compliance would be a lot higher than people that keep their own records up to date and available. Keeping your own records won't deter people from selling to nefarious people either.

    If you believe you've been treated like a criminal by Police then I don't think you've ever been dealt with as a criminal by Police. I rarely deal with FAL holders as criminals, I often deal with adults who're acting like children and I do often see FAL holders acting/posting like children.
    I'd disagree, I'd say more people would keep records of their own than would register all firearms. We could even make it a requirement that you keep records of serial numbers and have to give them to police in the event. Although this may deter people who haven't done so from reporting it which wouldn't be good.

    So because I disagree with you I am acting/posting like a child? Get out of here, you're taking the piss now.

  13. #73
    Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2014
    Posts
    1,100
    Quote Originally Posted by Savage1 View Post
    That's all unknowns really, I do think more come from 'naughty sales' than people think.
    These "Naughty sales" raise another point. How many firearms "disappeared" when the MSSA came in? Or when Aussie did its major buy back / ban? From what I hear from a plumber from Oz that used to work where I work, that year he sold out of large diameter PVC and end caps as fast as he could source them. (Heresay I realise...), and pre MSSA rifles such as the mini 14 with the 30rnd mags, 10/22s with the bananas and SKS unaltered ones that were now only able to be sold to the black market as they could not be sold on the open market.

    If these laws were enacted PRIOR to these types of firearms entering the country then it would be workable (Whether it is right or wrong is not the point) but introducing a ban or change like this has several affects, 1) these firearms that are already here become harder to sell legitimately, and harder to buy legitimately 2) the price lowers for illegitimate sales as there is no longer legitimate sales point to compete with. For example, think in the early 90s when the SKS first hit the market at $299. They sold like hotcakes, cheap, reliable and cheap to feed with milsurp ammo. Then they change the rules to say 7 rounds only. Options spend $100 (or there about at the time) to modify it, spend $200 on an endorsement each year (pointless when you want a cheap rifle) or flick it off at $200 to "someone at the pub" who doesn't mind the problem. While I do not know of any myself that vanished, I also only know of a few that were altered to A-cat. So how many SKS rifles made it to E cat, how many were imported and how many vanished? And was this what the law maker actually wanted to happen? (I guess No is that answer)

    Final big question: Did this law change encourage less or more rifles went into criminal hands?

  14. #74
    Member Savage1's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Posts
    2,134
    @Jexla, the childish comment wasn't aimed at you or anybody else in particular, I actually think your style of post has somewhat improved lately but with a few still being unnecessarily obtuse, but I guess that's just your style.

    The problem with your idea is that it doesn't discourage a FAL holder from buying legally and selling to unlicenced people, which would be one of the main goals of a database.

    Decent firearms are actually worth more on the black market, paticulary amongst gangs who have huge amounts of cash available, pistols are 5-10k+. But yes if you're outside those circles it would be hard to get that kind of money for them.

    As for your final question @timattalon I'm not sure anyone could answer that with any kind of certainty.

  15. #75
    Member Beavis's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Posts
    2,889
    Serious question regarding dodgy sales. Wiĺl registration deter gang members from selling off or having their guns stolen? If it is to get a patch or raise their status in the gang, are they gonna care if they get caught, especially with our wet bus ticket sentencing? Is their not something that can be addressed to prevent such people being deemed fit and proper?

 

 

Similar Threads

  1. FS: Arma-safe 6-8 gun safe
    By dale in forum Buy, Sell or Swap
    Replies: 12
    Last Post: 04-02-2017, 07:30 PM
  2. WTB: A-cat safe
    By brodster in forum Buy, Sell or Swap
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 11-01-2017, 06:13 PM
  3. FS: 3-Gun Safe - Never Used
    By Barb K in forum Buy, Sell or Swap
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: 07-10-2016, 03:44 PM
  4. How many 243's in the safe is enough?
    By gadgetman in forum Firearms, Optics and Accessories
    Replies: 78
    Last Post: 11-07-2013, 03:21 PM
  5. E-Cat gun safe
    By Burb122 in forum Firearms, Optics and Accessories
    Replies: 61
    Last Post: 19-04-2013, 09:28 PM

Tags for this Thread

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
Welcome to NZ Hunting and Shooting Forums! We see you're new here, or arn't logged in. Create an account, and Login for full access including our FREE BUY and SELL section Register NOW!!