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 9 of 11 FirstFirst 1234567891011 LastLast
Results 121 to 135 of 154
Like Tree286Likes

Thread: Support for tighter Acat storage

  1. #121
    Almost literate. veitnamcam's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    Nelson
    Posts
    16,083
    Quote Originally Posted by Ryan View Post
    New Zealand Bill of Rights Act 1990 No 109 (as at 01 July 2013), Public Act – New Zealand Legislation

    Life and the Security of the Person
    As part of the right to life and security of the person, the Act guarantees everyone:

    "The right not to be deprived of life except in accordance with fundamental justice (Section 8)"

    Means to me that I can defend that right with any means necessary.
    And lose your entire lifes earnings defending it in court....= you still lose.
    mikee and Danger Mouse like this.
    Rule 3: Load a firearm only when ready to fire

    Chicken Intolerant.

  2. #122
    Member mikee's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    Nelson, New Zealand
    Posts
    5,581
    I view the "requirements" as the minimum requirement. If you can afford to / want to do better there is nothing to stop you. I also firmly believe that if someone wants to steal my stuff I cannot stop them only make it harder..
    veitnamcam, tetawa, res and 2 others like this.
    The mass of men lead lives of quiet desperation................................but I'm not one of them

  3. #123
    Member Cordite's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2017
    Location
    NZ Mainland
    Posts
    123
    Quote Originally Posted by Ryan View Post
    New Zealand Bill of Rights Act 1990 No 109 (as at 01 July 2013), Public Act – New Zealand Legislation

    Life and the Security of the Person
    As part of the right to life and security of the person, the Act guarantees everyone:

    "The right not to be deprived of life except in accordance with fundamental justice (Section 8)"

    Means to me that I can defend that right with any means necessary.
    No, it means you can defend yourself with reasonable force. You have to be prepared to justify any such action because you should assume that you WILL be put on trial for use of lethal force.

    Of course, you are NOT allowed to simply defend your property with potentially lethal force, e.g. do not send a couple of .308 rounds in the direction of fleeing cattle rustlers.

  4. #124
    MIA somewhere in Nam 300CALMAN's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2014
    Location
    Reluctantly JAFA
    Posts
    2,227
    NZ is far too pink and the police won't want to give up their legal monopoly on shooting crims.
    Putting them in prison long term too keep them out of circulation is probably the only short term option.
    Let's just move along.

    I suggest that regardless of the law purchasing the best security you can afford is worth it. Regardless of the outcome you will have done the best you can.

  5. #125
    Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2015
    Posts
    423
    Quote Originally Posted by Ryan View Post
    New Zealand Bill of Rights Act 1990 No 109 (as at 01 July 2013), Public Act New Zealand Legislation

    Life and the Security of the Person
    As part of the right to life and security of the person, the Act guarantees everyone:

    "The right not to be deprived of life except in accordance with fundamental justice (Section 8)"

    Means to me that I can defend that right with any means necessary.
    Any means necessary? Really?

    Why don't you talk to a lawyer and see what they say about that?
    Settings - My Account - Edit Ignore List - Add a Member to Your List - User Name - Okay.

  6. #126
    MIA somewhere in Nam 300CALMAN's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2014
    Location
    Reluctantly JAFA
    Posts
    2,227
    Quote Originally Posted by systolic View Post
    Any means necessary? Really?

    Why don't you talk to a lawyer and see what they say about that?
    Are you a lawyer troll features?

  7. #127
    Member Sasquatch's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2014
    Posts
    522
    Out if interest, can anyone reference what is actually statute law for reasonable force and/or necessary force in the defense of oneself or others?

  8. #128
    Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    Whangarei
    Posts
    363
    Not wishing to offend anyone but talk of defending yourself is laughable, how many guns are stolen in home invasion?, as to breaking into safes ? How many thieves come equipped with a disc cutter ?
    I personally have broken into two safes, both required removing from the wall first, one required a drill, and a socket set, the other a drill , long punch, a near copy of the key, and a schematic of the safe, neither was a quick job.
    Having done a few quotes for customers to give to insurance company's , I would say alot of gun owners security is a joke, two I know of had safes broken into, both were in sheds away from there homes.
    But if we are to have new storage regulations then we must have new minimum sentencing for illegal possession of firearms, say a minimum of 5yrs jail time.
    As to semi auto,s, the horse has already bolted on that one, regarding a cat.

  9. #129
    MIA somewhere in Nam 300CALMAN's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2014
    Location
    Reluctantly JAFA
    Posts
    2,227
    Yeah defending your castle is only going to work if you are home. I have no stats to back this up but I would assume most burglaries still happen when the residents are out. In some places in the world the crims don't care and home invasion is common.

  10. #130
    res
    res is online now
    Member res's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Location
    globe trotting
    Posts
    2,770
    You remind me of Clinton during the "Assault Weapons" ban during the 90's in the US.

    It has nothing to do with the "evil" aesthetics of firearms being attracted to a certain type of person. Your statement is so stereotypical and tasteless. It's much more simpler then that and it's to do with where the industry is headed man. Our cars are more technologically advanced & safer to drive now and so too are our firearms - Their modularity alone is endless. Hence forth I have no qualms in why I choose to use firearms with such (safety) features and the reasons behind it. I threw safety in there because I have a bad wrist... And a pistol grip helps me immensely in the operation of those types of firearms. Does that make me a weirdo because of it?

    Savage was not stating his opnion, he was stating the resoning that was used when the rule was made- maybe it was valid back then and maybe it wasnt but I personly think the modern modular nature of a lot of modern firarms makes it a mute point these days
    Using Tapatalk

  11. #131
    Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2014
    Posts
    1,300
    Quote Originally Posted by 300CALMAN View Post
    NZ is far too pink and the police won't want to give up their legal monopoly on shooting crims.
    Putting them in prison long term too keep them out of circulation is probably the only short term option.
    Let's just move along.

    I suggest that regardless of the law purchasing the best security you can afford is worth it. Regardless of the outcome you will have done the best you can.
    Additional anti theft security does not have to be expensive to be effective. Everyone keeps going on about "this safe" and "that safe". Where some of the most effective security I have seen involved an average safe at best. But inside that safe were a number of big heavy F--K off steel eyes with a wire bike lock that passed though each magazine well and onto a big padlock. $10 to $20 per padlock, with two rifles to a padlock, and about 5 bike cables cost about $100 all up. The U/O that did not have a mag well had a Hasp and staple arrangement that meant the action / trigger was attached to the inside of the cabinet with another padlock.

    If a thief has time, they can get anything. We need to make it as difficult as possible.

    A cat security has a primary function of stopping those who should not be playing with them from hurting them selves- Children and people in the house etc. We can only do our best to stop theft, but we must stop a child getting access and hurting themselves or others by mistake.
    mikee likes this.

  12. #132
    JWB
    JWB is offline
    Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2017
    Posts
    27
    Quote Originally Posted by Sasquatch View Post
    Out if interest, can anyone reference what is actually statute law for reasonable force and/or necessary force in the defense of oneself or others?
    Crimes Act 1961, section 48
    48 Self-defence and defence of another

    Every one is justified in using, in the defence of himself or herself or another, such force as, in the circumstances as he or she believes them to be, it is reasonable to use.

    Section 48: replaced, on 1 January 1981, by section 2(1) of the Crimes Amendment Act 1980 (1980 No 63).

  13. #133
    Member outdoorlad's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    Christchurch
    Posts
    1,164
    They need to make the thief of firearms in a burglary a mitigating factor, mandatory minimum sentence of 5yrs+ no parole. At the moment it's a joke & the crimes know it. Get caught supplying/making meth 15yrs minimum.
    Shut up, get out & start pushing!

  14. #134
    Member Hunt4life's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Location
    Katikati
    Posts
    593
    Quote Originally Posted by Cordite View Post
    Hunt4Life, thanks for bringing this case to our attention. Some points.

    1. Too early to say, "luckily it didn't", don't you think?

    2. Minimum A-cat security requirement by law is "sturdy construction". How does this case demonstrate the law should be tightened?
    Simply because the AO had approved the cabinet as compliant ie. of sturdy construction. Yet one solid strike with a mallet proved it wasn't so sturdy. Interpretation seems to be a common theme.

    I agree the primary focus should be on significantly harsher penalties for burglary and particularly when caught with illegal possession of firearms.



    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
    Maca49 likes this.

  15. #135
    Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2017
    Location
    Hamilton
    Posts
    38
    Another great example of tougher sentencing Sentence overturned for paintball shooter who blasted group outside a bar - NZ Herald This is simply a joke, I kind of feel like our legal system is just taking the piss.

 

 

Similar Threads

  1. FS: AR 15 762x39 Acat
    By Nga in forum Buy, Sell or Swap
    Replies: 8
    Last Post: 13-08-2017, 12:32 PM
  2. FS: AR-15 in ACat
    By Geraldo in forum Buy, Sell or Swap
    Replies: 23
    Last Post: 24-06-2017, 07:56 PM
  3. FS: nea15 14.5 acat new
    By v1025566 in forum Buy, Sell or Swap
    Replies: 8
    Last Post: 01-09-2016, 06:56 PM
  4. Husbands support group ( please )
    By akaroa1 in forum Off topic
    Replies: 189
    Last Post: 27-07-2016, 09:28 AM
  5. Ecat Acat Scenario
    By 7mmwsm in forum Firearms, Optics and Accessories
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 26-07-2012, 02:29 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!!