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 Knives Africa


User Tag List

+ Reply to Thread
Page 7 of 9 FirstFirst 123456789 LastLast
Results 91 to 105 of 126
Like Tree158Likes

Thread: Here we go folks

  1. #91
    Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2015
    Posts
    770
    Quote Originally Posted by gadgetman View Post
    What was proposed, was what was proposed and did in fact indicate ANY shortening was covered. You'd have to be pretty stupid to let that slide, or to propose it in the first place.
    Yes, what was proposed in the DRAFT. Which was then changed to be more specific and reference 762mm.

    Only a retard would seriously think that making illegal the fitting a thinner recoil pad, or scraping 0.00002mm off by rubbing on concrete was the intention of this proposal.

    I hope all those who sent in abusive or half cocked emails sent another to apologise and congratulate him on seeking heavier penalties for those found with cut down guns.
    Settings - My Account - Edit Ignore List - Add a Member to Your List - User Name - Okay.

  2. #92
    Member Beavis's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Posts
    3,429
    Quote Originally Posted by systolic View Post
    Yes, what was proposed in the DRAFT. Which was then changed to be more specific and reference 762mm.

    Only a retard would seriously think that making illegal the fitting a thinner recoil pad, or scraping 0.00002mm off by rubbing on concrete was the intention of this proposal.

    I hope all those who sent in abusive or half cocked emails sent another to apologise and congratulate him on seeking heavier penalties for those found with cut down guns.
    Intention is worthless when it comes to writing arms amendments. Apparently some think the intention of previous arms amendments, was to limit the import of modern semi automatic rifles into the country. But I don't see that written in the arms act? Oh but it's common sense right?

    Also needing a permit to cut down a firearm? Up to 5 years in prison, so probably next to nothing in reality, served concurrently? Man that'll scare them!

    Name:  im-helping.jpg
Views: 131
Size:  77.4 KB
    gadgetman likes this.

  3. #93
    Member Banana's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2013
    Posts
    586
    Quote Originally Posted by systolic View Post
    You would have to be pretty stupid to really believe that the idea was ever to restrict guns with any shortening, not just below 762mm.
    You would have to be pretty stupid to write an entire draft amendment and forget to include the defining element.


    Sent from my SM-A510Y using Tapatalk

  4. #94
    Member 40mm's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2017
    Location
    Jaffa
    Posts
    1,434
    Quote Originally Posted by systolic View Post
    Yes, what was proposed in the DRAFT. Which was then changed to be more specific and reference 762mm.

    Only a retard would seriously think that making illegal the fitting a thinner recoil pad, or scraping 0.00002mm off by rubbing on concrete was the intention of this proposal.

    I hope all those who sent in abusive or half cocked emails sent another to apologise and congratulate him on seeking heavier penalties for those found with cut down guns.
    you calling me a retard? @systolic

    Folks get your popcorn ready.
    Use enough gun

  5. #95
    Member stretch's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2014
    Location
    Clarks Beach, (South of) Auckland
    Posts
    1,676
    Quote Originally Posted by Nick-D View Post
    Thats a pretty big cognitive leap.

    Recidivism rates don't meaningfully change with the introduction of longer sentences, neither does crime occurrence. We don't have to guess, there is plenty of empirical data to gather our conclusions from. Even capitol punishment and 3 strike laws don't work. There aren't many harsher penalties. If you want to reduce recidivism you need to use the carrot as well, not just the stick.
    Please explain how capital punishment does not reduce recidivism.

    Sent from my SM-T800 using Tapatalk
    veitnamcam likes this.

  6. #96
    Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2013
    Posts
    657
    Quote Originally Posted by Russian 22. View Post
    You know you don't make it easy to think that you're a fit and proper person when you literally advocate for the death penalty for recidivism. Murder and rape I get but recidivism is a different kettle of fish.

    The money you'd spend on killing NZ citizens would be better spent elsewhere.

    Sent from my TA-1024 using Tapatalk
    Think you need to look more carefully at what I've suggested: we outsource our corrections system - this will cost a lot less than our current spend on rehabilitating those who have proven to be incapable of rehabilitation and reintegration into society; which is what recidivism is (at the extreme end). Not everyone gets into this system - it's graduated....
    gadgetman likes this.

  7. #97
    Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2014
    Posts
    1,126
    Quote Originally Posted by Nickoli View Post
    I've said it before: outsource our justice system to China or Saudi Arabia...send crims first class, one way to somewhere that will deal with the problem - we could even pay a nominal annual upkeep (much greater savings than keeping them here - and if they don't survive to make it back: so what?)
    Of course this will only be applicable for those slow to learn their lessons....
    Cut the bleeding heart shit - as has been said before, no further crime can be committed if the problem has been removed, we just need to agree on a cost effective way of taking out the trash (again - this isn't first time offender solution talk here...)
    How is it bleeding heart shit to actually propose changes that have actual evidence of reducing crime rates? Suppose I should stick to coming up with half cocked fantasy about imprisoning criminals on the moon or somthing.

    I get that being mean to bad people gives you the warm fuzzies. It just doesn't work. The whole point of the justice system is to deter people from committing crime in the first place. How long one guy is in jail for said crime is irrelevant. What matters is how many people don't commit the crime for worry of the consequence.

    Studies show that the most effective way to reduce this is to increase the chance of getting caught rather than the length of sentence. If you think the sentences are to weak that's fine, it's just a separate issue to preventing crime.

    I'm arguing the point that, it is often said on here that harsher sentencing will reduce the occurrence of gun crime, evidence shows it isn't true. Increasing the likelihood of getting caught will. So if your true intent is to deter criminals that's where your money is best spent
    Timberwolf likes this.

  8. #98
    Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2014
    Posts
    1,126
    Quote Originally Posted by stretch View Post
    Please explain how capital punishment does not reduce recidivism.

    Sent from my SM-T800 using Tapatalk
    Haha, when you out it like that. What I'm saying is the threat does not meaningfully impact the occrance or reoccuramce of crime. The 3 strike laws is more relevant to recidivism. Harsh and doesn't work

  9. #99
    Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2013
    Posts
    657
    Quote Originally Posted by Nick-D View Post
    How is it bleeding heart shit to actually propose changes that have actual evidence of reducing crime rates? Suppose I should stick to coming up with half cocked fantasy about imprisoning criminals on the moon or somthing.

    I get that being mean to bad people gives you the warm fuzzies. It just doesn't work. The whole point of the justice system is to deter people from committing crime in the first place. How long one guy is in jail for said crime is irrelevant. What matters is how many people don't commit the crime for worry of the consequence.

    Studies show that the most effective way to reduce this is to increase the chance of getting caught rather than the length of sentence. If you think the sentences are to weak that's fine, it's just a separate issue to preventing crime.

    I'm arguing the point that, it is often said on here that harsher sentencing will reduce the occurrence of gun crime, evidence shows it isn't true. Increasing the likelihood of getting caught will. So if your true intent is to deter criminals that's where your money is best spent
    ....missed a critical element in my argument: if you outsource to Saudi Arabia, China or North Korea the consequences will be severe...and it hasn't been tried, so any reference to "studies" are moot - this is a solution that fits with our capitalism mindset that has not been tried or studied. Warm fuzzies(WTF?) don't come into it: I feel nothing for people who victimise others - often repeatedly.

    I also get your need to highlight that harsher sentencing doesn't work - you want to reference the USA example where they have the highest incarceration rate in the world, and higher recidivism than any other country; it also fits neatly when juxtaposed against the Scandinavian countries who have a greater focus on rehabilitation. You conveniently ignore the underlying backgrounds and cultural factors of both examples....
    I get it - the US system creates a culture of criminality where there is "nothing to lose" - and my example is extreme; but what we are doing at the moment isn't working, and we have an issue with people getting caught more than once (definition of recidivist) - so it's not a fear of getting caught driving behaviour. We have a situation where the potential benefit outweighs any potential consequence (which is weak at best).
    Happy to be proven wrong, but I don't believe our current crop of officials are willing to actually look at the problems - so we are left with assessing consequences....
    gadgetman likes this.

  10. #100
    Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2014
    Posts
    1,126
    Quote Originally Posted by Nickoli View Post
    ....missed a critical element in my argument: if you outsource to Saudi Arabia, China or North Korea the consequences will be severe...and it hasn't been tried, so any reference to "studies" are moot - this is a solution that fits with our capitalism mindset that has not been tried or studied. Warm fuzzies(WTF?) don't come into it: I feel nothing for people who victimise others - often repeatedly.

    I also get your need to highlight that harsher sentencing doesn't work - you want to reference the USA example where they have the highest incarceration rate in the world, and higher recidivism than any other country; it also fits neatly when juxtaposed against the Scandinavian countries who have a greater focus on rehabilitation. You conveniently ignore the underlying backgrounds and cultural factors of both examples....
    I get it - the US system creates a culture of criminality where there is "nothing to lose" - and my example is extreme; but what we are doing at the moment isn't working, and we have an issue with people getting caught more than once (definition of recidivist) - so it's not a fear of getting caught driving behaviour. We have a situation where the potential benefit outweighs any potential consequence (which is weak at best).
    Happy to be proven wrong, but I don't believe our current crop of officials are willing to actually look at the problems - so we are left with assessing consequences....
    I'm sorry man but outsourcing draconian prison and torture as a form of punishment is
    1. Entirely unrealistic
    2. Absolutely not a new idea. It's been the way things have happened for the majority of our civilised history.

    You are claiming causation based entirely on your oppinion and not on evidence. I get that it seems logical but humans are not logical creatures. It isn't a matter of weighing up benifits vs consequence.
    Recidivism is a complex issue. But again in the context of this discussion (firearms and firearms law) not really relevant.

    In the 1st world there is no harsher recidivism policy than the 3 strikes laws. Yet people still repeat offend.

    It's all about the psychology of prevention. Imagine you are a kiwi bloke who likes to drive at 115. Now you have road a and road b. Road a has a $500 fine for driving 115. However you drive road a all the time, you never see a cop or speed camera on there.

    Road b only has a $200 fine for going 115, but you see cops on there all the time. At least a couple times a week. You see people pulled over and getting tickets. Hell your mate got pinged last week.

    Which road are you more likely to slow down on?

  11. #101
    Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2018
    Location
    kaiapoi
    Posts
    1,562
    Quote Originally Posted by systolic View Post
    Yes, what was proposed in the DRAFT. Which was then changed to be more specific and reference 762mm.

    Only a retard would seriously think that making illegal the fitting a thinner recoil pad, or scraping 0.00002mm off by rubbing on concrete was the intention of this proposal.

    I hope all those who sent in abusive or half cocked emails sent another to apologise and congratulate him on seeking heavier penalties for those found with cut down guns.
    Really? If it wasn't for the fact hardly anyone seems to trust the police hierarchy anymore nor vote seeking pollies who may mean well and think they are doing the right thing by listening to aforementioned police with coming up with these then maybe it wouldn't happen.
    Politicians need to be abused and often otherwise they kowtow to the vocal minority and the apathetic majority is screwed.
    I've seen what an agenda can do to firearms ownership in Australia which was strongarmed in by Johnny H, we don't want them to ever, ever think we are soft enough to let it happen here.
    He should also only get congratulations if it doesn't turn out bad and why should he get an apology?
    Its not the fact that it was the intention of the proposal to infer all shortening would make them illegal, the fact it wasn't excluded give a copper with an attitude to enforce if he see's fit, much like they do now. @systolic, you weren't a politician in an earlier life were you? Cant be as you aren't that diplomatic.
    40mm likes this.

  12. #102
    Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2018
    Location
    kaiapoi
    Posts
    1,562
    Quote Originally Posted by stretch View Post
    Please explain how capital punishment does not reduce recidivism.

    Sent from my SM-T800 using Tapatalk
    The ones who get it don't do it again...
    40mm likes this.

  13. #103
    Member stretch's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2014
    Location
    Clarks Beach, (South of) Auckland
    Posts
    1,676
    With you on that, csmiffy. Precisely the opposite of what Nick-D was claiming.

  14. #104
    Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2014
    Posts
    1,126
    Quote Originally Posted by stretch View Post
    With you on that, csmiffy. Precisely the opposite of what Nick-D was claiming.
    What? No it isn't.

    I'm "claiming" that the threat of capitol punishment does not reduce recidivence rates. Obviously if you are dead you can't repeat offend.

  15. #105
    Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2017
    Posts
    1,740
    Quote Originally Posted by Nickoli View Post
    Think you need to look more carefully at what I've suggested: we outsource our corrections system - this will cost a lot less than our current spend on rehabilitating those who have proven to be incapable of rehabilitation and reintegration into society; which is what recidivism is (at the extreme end). Not everyone gets into this system - it's graduated....
    I have. You're suggesting that criminals have less human rights than you and I. And that you are perfectly comfortable with others doing the dirty work.

    If you think the government would stop at actual criminals and leave us alone then you're na´ve at best.

    Sent from my TA-1024 using Tapatalk

 

 

Similar Threads

  1. G'day folks
    By keneff in forum Introductions
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 30-08-2015, 02:56 PM
  2. Hi Folks
    By Daleworx in forum Introductions
    Replies: 13
    Last Post: 13-05-2015, 11:35 AM
  3. What vid camera are folks using
    By Happy in forum Photography and Video
    Replies: 18
    Last Post: 05-03-2015, 05:09 PM
  4. Hi folks
    By Ahuroa SC in forum Introductions
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 29-07-2013, 05:33 PM
  5. Any HB folks know
    By Happy in forum Off topic
    Replies: 6
    Last Post: 01-03-2013, 05:34 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!!