Thread: Access to AR s are about to change

Originally Posted by ebf

Ryan, because with a semi it is possible to keep up a sustained rate of rapid fire, especially with high capacity magazines. If I had to choose a firearm to defend myself against a horde, that is exactly what I would want, unfortunately it is also what makes them so attractive to the Rambo types.

To state this in a different way, if you have some nutcase intent on a spree killing or a crim thinking about an armed home invasion, would you rather they have a single shot or bolt action, or a semi or to bring it closer to home for guys on this forum, if some numpty takes a shot at you in the bush without identifying their target, would you like to be on the receiving end of a semi ?

I think there are very valid reasons for owning and using semis, I just don't think that plinking, or "I like shooting shit" is a valid enough reason...

I think it is more than possible to hunt without semis, I think you can do duck-shooting quite successfully with twin shotties.

In all my years of shooting (military, recreation and competitive) I have yet to come across a person that does not start blasting away when handed a semi.

Personally, I don't enjoy being on the business end of a firearm - regardless of its action and I'm sure if someone was caught in a killing spree or being shot at in the bush that they wouldn't be thinking "oh phew he's only got a bolt action".

A bolt action in the hands of a motivated individual is equally as deadly.

I'm not sure of the relevance of your last sentence? I've seen plenty of individuals crash and bash their way through emptying a bolt action rifle too?

Given that A category semi automatics have been on the NZ firearm scene for so long, the horse has effectively bolted. There are thousands of unregistered semis out there and introducing legislation to try and regulate them will be nigh impossible to efficiently manage and would, in my opinion, be yet another waste of tax payer's money which could be better used in say... I don't know, catching the real criminals maybe?

...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 ebf

Happy, range behaviour. Very rarely see other people in the bush, mostly go mid week.

No AR. Had FN FAL and M1 carbine, never really been a fan of 223 (holes are too bloody tiny )

Wangers sounds like a plan (shot the fallow spiker there last year) will talk to you offline.

There's a pretty good chance that I'm one of those at the range who are 'blasting away'. What I'll actually be doing is practicing for my next service rifle comp. I'm not 'blasting away' I'm working on improving my shot to shot recovery and maintaining accuracy so that I'm able to compete safely and competitively. I'm also going to be practicing shooting off-hand, sitting and kneeling, all of which are useful skills for hunting. I'll be doing this against the clock, which is also good training for making good decisions and good, safe, shots under pressure.

Personally, I feel a damn sight safer next to someone with a semi 'blasting away' who demonstrates good handling and safety skills, than I do in the weeks leading up to the roar when I see more dangerous behaviour with firearms than at any other time of the year.

The reality is that semi's have always been with us. They have been, and will always be, A cat. Anyone who tries to argue that an AR is somehow more dangerous than an sks, m305, rem woodmaster, camp carbine, or BAR seems to me to have an axe to grind which centres a lot more on looks than function.

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.

Originally Posted by veitnamcam

It also weeds out many possible members who would like to own and shoot a pistol but simply cannot fullfil the no of range visits required.:thumbdown:

My personal experience is that the pistol vetting has stopped people who are clearly unsafe around them from gaining their B, despite being A license holders. I feel the current system has prevented more accidental shootings by a pistol, unlike the current rifle and shotgun accidental shootings that still occur.

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.

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

I like that kind of system, coz it weeds out some of the Rambo types .

Some??
I've seen more Rambos at pistol clubs that anywhere else.
Those that are 'armed (or disarmed?) forces' for the period of 1 wks basic, police college dropouts, security, and every other wannabe.
They are everywhere at the clubs I've been members of.
It ATTRACTS them.

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..