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.

NZGR Black Watch


User Tag List

+ Reply to Thread
Page 2 of 5 FirstFirst 12345 LastLast
Results 16 to 30 of 66
Like Tree67Likes

Thread: More stupidity

  1. #16
    Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Location
    South Waikato
    Posts
    1,988
    Quote Originally Posted by systolic View Post
    Because you know you are wrong and I am right.
    Yes you quite possibly are right.
    So as you are so certain you know you are right, please enlighten us as to what is acceptable under the law relating to direct supervision.

  2. #17
    Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2015
    Posts
    434
    Quote Originally Posted by 7mmwsm View Post
    Yes you quite possibly are right.
    So as you are so certain you know you are right, please enlighten us as to what is acceptable under the law relating to direct supervision.
    I never said what is or isn't acceptable. I asked: Where does it say anywhere in the law how close supervision is? The law says "immediate supervision".

  3. #18
    Member 10-Ring's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2014
    Posts
    646
    The word "immediate" can mean:

    1.occurring or accomplished without delay; instant: an immediate reply.

    2.following or preceding without a lapse of time: the immediate future.

    3.having no object or space intervening; nearest or next: in the immediate vicinity.

    Therefore is it not reasonable to assume that "immediate supervision" means supervision where the supervisor can supervise immediately by being next or nearest to the unlicensed person; to act instantly, if necessary?
    gadgetman, Steve123 and keneff like this.
    Never try to teach a pig to sing...
    ...it wastes your time and annoys the pig!

  4. #19
    Member Boaraxa's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2014
    Location
    Southland
    Posts
    999
    [QUOTE=10
    Probably wasting your breath 10ring its kinda funny how the "smart ones " can be total dumb asses when it comes to common sense
    Last edited by Boaraxa; 25-03-2017 at 12:10 AM.
    keneff likes this.

  5. #20
    Member kidmac42's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2014
    Location
    central otago
    Posts
    536
    Sheldon.
    Doesn't realize that he offends others,
    and really doesn't care.
    Frosty likes this.
    Why do people that can't take advice, insist on giving it?

  6. #21
    Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Location
    Thornbury , Southland
    Posts
    490
    Quote Originally Posted by kidmac42 View Post
    Sheldon.
    Doesn't realize that he offends others,
    and really doesn't care.
    Sheldon Cooper ?
    Boar Freak and kidmac42 like this.
    Vegetarians Bah !! . If god didn't want us to eat animals he wouldn't have made them out of meat ! .

  7. #22
    Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Location
    spreydon christcurch.
    Posts
    2,726
    if i am supervising/training an unlicensed shooter I make bloody sure of the following
    1 I am within arms length .
    2 they only act on my instruction,when i speak
    3 once shot is fired weapon is made safe and handed to me.bolt open -action broken etc. barrells must always point down range.
    4 I load the rounds no one else.
    5 anyone else in the vicinity is made aware of what we are doing and stays well clear ,unless specifically invited in
    6very occasionally with cocky users a wee bit of army discipline is required ,or else my pet I tell you once then my boot goes up your arse.
    had that happen with one little smartarse who wouldnt listen using his old mans .270-reckoned it was just a pussy to shoot -didnt like it when i grabbed the barrel and pulled it then shoved it hard back-a baby would hold it tighter,and when he fired the shot it kicked him hard.his old man had no sympathy with him whining about his shoulder.he declined the boot in the arse even though we pointed out it would take the focus away from the so called painful shoulder.
    he actually turned out to be a gifted shooter,and funnily enough a very good teacher.

    In relation to the above thought coroners have been harping on in this vein for for the past 5 yrs at least,and its highly likely to continue as "classic solution to" all firearms tragedies given they are in fact civil servants reliant on police input
    gadgetman likes this.

  8. #23
    Member zimmer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Posts
    1,769

    From Days Gone By - a bit of useless remembering

    I am sure some of the older forum members may have experienced this, and don't come across all perfect and say "nope":
    - Aged ~ 12 yrs, visiting parents' friends property on the edge of town. Farmland out the back. Given 15 shot tube mag 22 to go on my own and get a rabbit whilst olds drank tea and yakked. Happened on several occassions/visits. Had received firearm instruction on many outings with Dad (ex serviceman).
    - Aged ~ 15 years, on L&S farm behind Taupo. Dad and mate headed off with one 22. Mate and I given box of bullets and other 22 and headed off in opposite direction. Met up later and compared numbers shot (in those days teaming with rabbits). Jokingly chastised if the ratio per bullets fired wasn't 1:1.
    - Aged ~ 14 years. Staying on L&S farm during school hols. Out every day on my own shooting rabbits with farm's 22 Gecado Plinker. Meeting mate from adjacent farm of similar age also armed. More rabbit dead.

    Cringe now when I think back. Supervision, even down to the finer point of how it should occur up close - NOPE.
    How common in those days - pretty common from my recollection and comparing notes with mates.
    Last edited by zimmer; 25-03-2017 at 12:24 PM.

  9. #24
    Member outdoorlad's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    Christchurch
    Posts
    1,186
    Quote Originally Posted by systolic View Post
    I never said what is or isn't acceptable.
    Typical laywers answer & that will be $300 thanks
    Shut up, get out & start pushing!

  10. #25
    Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2014
    Posts
    1,354
    My own view is with supervision comes responsibility. The person "supervising" is 100% completely responsible for everything that occurs while the unlicensed person is with the firearm. If you are within arms length or you choose not to be does not matter in the sense that if something goes wrong, no matter how stupid or Darwin like the action may be, you were responsible because you were supervising.

    In the situation from the original article, this means that the person supervising those boys is responsible for the death because as a supervising person he was in sole charge and should have been in a position to stop the incident happening. If you have taken every possible step that you can and someone gets hurt, your only defence is what you have done, and what you could have done to prevent it occurring but didn't, that will affect the outcome. If there was nothing further you could have done then that means it probably would have happened anyway.
    kotuku likes this.

  11. #26
    Member Ricochet's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2014
    Location
    Tauranga
    Posts
    198
    Quote Originally Posted by systolic View Post
    I never said what is or isn't acceptable. I asked: Where does it say anywhere in the law how close supervision is? The law says "immediate supervision".

    IMMEDIATE SUPERVISION
    No matter how old you are, if you do not have a firearms
    licence but want to use a firearm, you may do so only under the
    immediate supervision of someone who has a firearms licence.
    In other words, the person with the licence must be with the
    shooter, and close enough to take control of the firearm if
    necessary. To meet this requirement the supervisor cannot be
    using a firearm at the same time. Generally, this means that
    there will be only one firearm between the two people.


    Close enough to take control of the firearm if necessary. Unless you deem kicking it out of their hands as acceptable then I would suggest that 'within arms length' is correct.
    mikee likes this.

  12. #27
    Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2015
    Posts
    434
    Quote Originally Posted by Ricochet View Post
    IMMEDIATE SUPERVISION
    No matter how old you are, if you do not have a firearms
    licence but want to use a firearm, you may do so only under the
    immediate supervision of someone who has a firearms licence.
    In other words, the person with the licence must be with the
    shooter, and close enough to take control of the firearm if
    necessary. To meet this requirement the supervisor cannot be
    using a firearm at the same time. Generally, this means that
    there will be only one firearm between the two people.


    Close enough to take control of the firearm if necessary. Unless you deem kicking it out of their hands as acceptable then I would suggest that 'within arms length' is correct.
    Taken from the police Arms Code. NOT law. NOT regulation.

    Are you willing to accept police made up policy? Like their policies around MSSA length, safe wall thickness, caliber import restrictions, special reasons etc.
    Wirehunt and Jexla like this.

  13. #28
    Member Ricochet's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2014
    Location
    Tauranga
    Posts
    198
    Really? The arms code isn't the law? I never knew that. I concede the point to you then Sir.

  14. #29
    Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Posts
    119
    Quote Originally Posted by systolic View Post
    Taken from the police Arms Code. NOT law. NOT regulation.

    Are you willing to accept police made up policy? Like their policies around MSSA length, safe wall thickness, caliber import restrictions, special reasons etc.
    If you are so smart , then get the bloke who lent him the shotgun off the charge ???????

  15. #30
    OPCz Rushy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Location
    Nor West of Auckland on the true right of the Kaipara River
    Posts
    24,062
    Quote Originally Posted by zimmer View Post
    I am sure some of the older forum members may have experienced this, and don't come across all perfect and say "nope":
    - Aged ~ 12 yrs, visiting parents' friends property on the edge of town. Farmland out the back. Given 15 shot tube mag 22 to go on my own and get a rabbit whilst olds drank tea and yakked. Happened on several occassions/visits. Had received firearm instruction on many outings with Dad (ex serviceman).
    - Aged ~ 15 years, on L&S farm behind Taupo. Dad and mate headed off with one 22. Mate and I given box of bullets and other 22 and headed off in opposite direction. Met up later and compared numbers shot (in those days teaming with rabbits). Jokingly chastised if the ratio per bullets fired wasn't 1:1.
    - Aged ~ 14 years. Staying on L&S farm during school hols. Out every day on my own shooting rabbits with farm's 22 Gecado Plinker. Meeting mate from adjacent farm of similar age also armed. More rabbit dead.

    Cringe now when I think back. Supervision, even down to the finer point of how it should occur up close - NOPE.
    How common in those days - pretty common from my recollection and comparing notes with mates.
    No need to cringe. It was very different back then Zimmer. At 12 I was shooting rats with a .22 at the dump in Newells Road in Tokoroa and I sure as hell wasn't dropped off out there. Kid, bike, rifle across handle bars. No one thought twice about seeing a kid with a rifle back then. Despite the over regulated world we live in, I bet there are still places in this country where kids that age and younger are still shooting bunnies by themselves and are perfectly safe in doing so because they have been drilled in how to properly handle a firearm since they were old enough to walk across a paddock with their old man. For those of you that have grown up wrapped in the cotton wool of modern nanny state legislation I would note that this is not me being an advocate for illegal activities, it is just the pragmatist in me saying that it will still be happening.
    Wirehunt, zimmer, 10-Ring and 3 others like this.
    It takes 43 muscle's to frown and 17 to smile, but only 3 for proper trigger pull.
    What more do we need? If we are above ground and breathing the rest is up to us!
    Rule 1: Treat every firearm as loaded
    Rule 2: Always point firearms in a safe direction
    Rule 3: Load a firearm only when ready to fire
    Rule 4: Identify your target beyond all doubt
    Rule 5: Check your firing zone
    Rule 6: Store firearms and ammunition safely
    Rule 7: Avoid alcohol and drugs when handling firearms

 

 

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!!