Thread: Access to AR s are about to change

Originally Posted by Wired

Its an interesting discussion so ill lend my views.

I believe that E cats should very very tightly controlled. You should only be allowed one for a very valid reason not just cause you want one.

The recent availability to buy AR s as an A cat was in my view stupidity. These made weapons of this nature much more accessible to nasty bad people. Not all firearms owners are suitable firearms owners they have just never been caught at much and therefore the police have no reason to refuse them a licence. For example you could waltz into your gun store buy an AR and walk down the road and sell it to your local Mongrel Mob dealer for a tidy profit. They file off the number and there is nothing tying it back to the guy who bought it. He just says he sold it to a guy who had a licence and no proof is required that this happened. With an E gun this cannot happen as they are kept track off.

New Zealand black market is not quite like the states where they have access to racks of uzis and AKs and Id like this to stay that way. The easy access of these guns as an A Cat means that more of them filter down into criminal hands weather they are sold to them or they are stolen from under secured A cat safes etc. Getting a large capacity mag is an easy step from there.

Its all just a numbers game. The more of these guns out there increases the chances that sooner or later some nut job is gonna have his cheese slide off his cracker and go all Colombine. Then we are all fucked. As then knee jerk politicians WILL jerk all there knees at once and semis will all be gone like in Aussie.

The fact of the matter is that guns like this in the wrong hands are fucken scary. Listening to Jan Molenar rattle of full clips one after the other was enough to make you piss your pants. A bolt gun with 3 bullets in it just isnt that scary and is much easier to deal with from a tactics perspective.

I have an E cause I want one not because I need it to do a job and I love having it.

I trust myself to own a gun like this I just don't trust everyone else to own one.

"I'm the best gun owner in the world, everyone else is shit. As such, only I should have these types of guns."

The hypocrisy, it burns.

Originally Posted by AzumitH

"I'm the best gun owner in the world, everyone else is shit. As such, only I should have these types of guns."

The hypocrisy, it burns.

Not everyone but some are.

As for Hypocrisy........maybe a little. Just saying I want a high level of control with these types of firearms. I truly believe it will pay off in the long run.

don't get me wrong ether I own a mix of bolts, single shots (including muskets ) and a few semis and I enjoy shooting with them all was simply seeing what people thought that's it

...And we have like one high profile firearm incident per decade. Doesn't really seem significant to me.

Frankly this thread has turned into politics and its now a case of 'I don't believe in semis, so no one should have one' vs 'we are owners for legal purposes, have been vetted by the Police and aren't imposing our view on others, so leave us alone'.
Wired's post is a gem, I thought it was piss take at first, but now it is the personification of hypocrisy. ie I have one for an insufficient purpose, but no one else should have the same right.

Some absolute bullsh*t opinions posted here based on a few instances of bad firearms handling skills with semi.
I've seen more bad handling skills from bolt action rifles by the 2 weekend a year hunters than I have ever seen by any other type.
Its not the gun, its the idiot at the trigger end that is the issue.
A semi in the wrong hands is no different to a lever action or pump. Do you want to ban those as well?

The antis and Police HQ must be loving it, firearms owners dictating to other ones what they should be allowed to own for legal purposes.

Divide and conquer boys...you are doing their job for them.

Originally Posted by dogmatix

The antis and Police HQ must be loving it, firearms owners dictating to other ones what they should be allowed to own for legal purposes.

Divide and conquer boys...you are doing their job for them.

Hahaha, the old "if you're not with is you're against us" approach.

Mate, here's a news flash for you, not all firearms licence holders are alike. We all have differing opinions and ideas. So far this thread has been a very interesting (and civil) discussion amongst people with lots of different approaches, but all with a common thread - they enjoy shooting in its various forms.

I for one don't want to live in your monochrome world, I like the fact that we are all different. To give you an example, Beavis and I have very different views on this topic, but I am always interested to see his views, I don't think we are ever going to agree, but just reading how he sees stuff helps me understand a topic that affects all of us in some way or another a little better...

Originally Posted by ebf

Hahaha, the old "if you're not with is you're against us" approach.

Mate, here's a news flash for you, not all firearms licence holders are alike. We all have differing opinions and ideas. So far this thread has been a very interesting (and civil) discussion amongst people with lots of different approaches, but all with a common thread - they enjoy shooting in its various forms.

I for one don't want to live in your monochrome world, I like the fact that we are all different. To give you an example, Beavis and I have very different views on this topic, but I am always interested to see his views, I don't think we are ever going to agree, but just reading how he sees stuff helps me understand a topic that affects all of us in some way or another a little better...

Of course we are all different (I can't be bothered listing each and every view, so that's hardly evidence of a black and white view and saying my view of the world is monochrome from a few comments is being pretty judgemental isn't it?), but you don't see me slagging off other types of shooters or hunters saying 'in my opinion' that they shouldn't be allowed to have that privilege because I don't like it or am not interested in it?

Originally Posted by ebf

Hahaha, the old "if you're not with is you're against us" approach.

Mate, here's a news flash for you, not all firearms licence holders are alike. We all have differing opinions and ideas. So far this thread has been a very interesting (and civil) discussion amongst people with lots of different approaches, but all with a common thread - they enjoy shooting in its various forms.

I for one don't want to live in your monochrome world, I like the fact that we are all different. To give you an example, Beavis and I have very different views on this topic, but I am always interested to see his views, I don't think we are ever going to agree, but just reading how he sees stuff helps me understand a topic that affects all of us in some way or another a little better...

Yet your bagging his opinion?

Scagly, I am an ex 3-gun competitor, so know a little bit about controlled rapid fire

And yes, I see Service Rifle as a perfectly valid reason to own/use a semi.

Completely agree with you about the crazy distinction between ARs and something like a mini14 or m305 from a function point of view a semi is a semi, no matter how it looks.

I guess that is where we differ. I don't see any need to have a valid reason to own/use a semi. If you have a FAL, you should be fine to use anything for any lawful purpose.

I agree with EBF in most respects.

Our current vetting system is not capable of identifying all people that shouldn't have a licence, they don't have the resources and information, and they probably never will. Until they do then I think extra steps need to be in place for people wanting the more military oriented guns.

I have no problem with people having and using them if they're responsible, I just think it's too easy for the wrong type of people to get their hands on them. As a responsible firearms owner and user, I support any laws that make it harder for the wrong people to obtain firearms so long as it isn't unreasonable for the lawful users, and I don't see getting an endorsement and upgrading security as unreasonable.

Sure crims will ignore any law you put in, but does that mean we should just make it easier for them? Should we just get rid of the Arms Act because it doesn't effect them? Just because a law won't stop ALL gun crime isn't a reason that it will not be effective and a useful tool in tackeling firearms crime. "Gun laws only effect the law abiding", what a load of crap.

I don't know what the answers are to the holes in our laws, registration in theory would be a great tool, it would take a few years to really start taking effect. I've seen many B-cats traced back to certain crimes where the person has ended up being prosecuted for it and the gun returned to the owner. I know I know, Canada blah blah, I said 'in theory', if they could come up with a cheap effective system I would support it, I don't believe there are any aims by big brother to confiscate all firearms.

I think the B-cat system is about bang on.

I don't know where I'm going with this, I'm a bit on the fence, I know there are problems in our current system but haven't put in the thought to know what the answers are. More funding for Police would be a good start

I reckon you are bang on the mark there Savage1. The current laws that everyone is trying to work around were largely the result of the politicians knee jerk reaction of the time to one incident. The main aim, it seemed to me at the time, was to try make the politicians look good rather than put the funds where they should be, ... namely better resourcing the police to deal with the real issues.

It is not a simple problem. As in everything there is no black and white, there are huge grey areas.

My beef with the current system, isn't that you have to get vetted, there are different kinds of categories etc etc, it is more with arbitrary and unnecessary restrictions placed on heavily vetted people. Such as B endorsement holders not being allowed to use your pistol off the range, the hand in policy for E cat holders who want to import (seems to be gone at least), not allowed to let others shoot your E cats under your supervision, collectors not being allowed to fire their collection etc. If there HAS to be an endorsement system, I would be all for a one for everything endorsement, and being allowed to use your pistol, MSSA, and yes your machine gun for any lawful proper and sufficient purpose.

I often wonder what we would be compared to if Sly didn't make those shitty movies

Originally Posted by Beavis

I often wonder what we would be compared to if Sly didn't make those shitty movies

Arny..