Thread: The anti gun lobby

Well - for a start putting our hands in our pockets and raising some serious funding to assist those who do something would be a good way forward ...

Originally Posted by Southern Man

Well - for a start putting our hands in our pockets and raising some serious funding to assist those who do something would be a good way forward ...

Goodo Who, What, When?

GunDoc and JayDee from sportshooter forum have set up the "Firearms Fighting Fund" as a non-profit organisation which helps fund the National Shooters Association and other personal firearms law inititives.

Both are recently retired - GunDoc from a career as a Firearms manufacturing Gunsmith and JayDee as a Toolmaker.
Both have been involved in Firearms lobbying and several Court Cases (GunDoc as a Court recognised firearms expert and JayDee giving advice as an 'ordinary man' in several Court matters. Both were involved with PSI vs COP back in 1990 and assisted with Lincoln vs Police in 2009 (the Check Your Stocks reversal) and also in the recent NSA Statemen tof Claims case. I know them both - hence my knowledge of the cases.

Firearms Fighting Fund
WestPac
03 1599 0030592-00

Any donations are greatfully accepted - presently helping with the Regulations Review Committee 'pistol grips' regulation complaint.

great!

While it is interesting that it's not directly to the worthy but elusive NSA I'll be throwing some $ at that account on payday,as I do to other orgs that fight for our tools from other angles.

You only get the rights/privileges (whatever you want to call it) that you fight for-and the combo of colfo and NSA fight for it so fund them-even $5 helps.

I'm not associated with any of them directly for those who may wonder-hell both orgs probably think I'm a pain in there arse

res mate, you'll just be sending beer money down to a couple of law students down in christchurch

"elusive" is an interesting choice of word.

Originally Posted by ebf

res mate, you'll just be sending beer money down to a couple of law students down in christchurch

"elusive" is an interesting choice of word.

And there we go.... not only inaccurate but part of the problem.. and defamatory

The only organisations that have actually done anything about this stuff, the only reason you can still import firearms products, the only groups that actually challenge the illegal activities of the police...... and thats the support they get from the community they help....

Ebf - if you would prefer that I don't call into question your capacity, then stop giving licence....

Richard Lincoln of NSA fame is a 50 year old law student - who is working through his 3rd year of a law degree to better be able to conduct Court cases - now that is dedication.

Gundoc and JayDee are very much long term and hard core Gun Lobby personalities who have been at the coalface since before the 1983 Arms Act - and got stuff done or been instrumental in it succeeding. PSI vs COP and the 2009 Touch Our Butts amoung these successes.

They have become used to derogatory comments from the uninformed and plainly jealous BenDover merchants throughout that time.

NSA activities:

1) The 2009 court case ensured that we still have thumbholes and Dragunov stocks despite the 2012 Amendment.
[plus the much easier importation of 'sporting configuration' ARs - which continues even after the 'Pistol Grip' regulation]

2) The word 'firearm' was replaced with 'semi-auto' to limit application of regulations to semis
[revealed by NSA opperative]

3) Attempt was made via SOP 036 to extend rimfire to those less than .22LR
[Introduced by Richard Prosser NZ First MP but opposed by MOP Judith Collins and not adopted]

4) The 'semi-auto' definition loophole has been publicised as was the ability for an endorsement holder to swap configurations

5) 'Free-standing' has a Judicial definition

6) The lack of need for a P2P when 'manufacturing' an MSSA for personal use has been Judicially clarified

7) That the requirement for security to be installed before the issue of an endorsement is 'premature' has been established
[ a discretionary condition cannot be placed upon an endorsement prior to its issue]

8) A formal complaint has been laid with the Regulations Review Committee regarding the new 'Pistol Grip' regulation

9) Research into a Judicial Review of the 'Pistol Grip' (and other possible) regulations is in train

10) Ongoing investigation into 'blanket policy' transgressions underway
[this is a biggie - an attempt was made to get NSA to agree not to persue any more matters in this area - they continue]
[Already case law in this area - way back in 1990's PSI vs COP - some NSA 'oldies' were there too]

11) Information presented on this very website has been ongoing.

12) All 'authorities' efforts to obtain NSA membership lists and number of members have been resisted - It's a SECRET!

13) You can help by continuing to contribute to the advancement of your interests ... or not - that is your choice!
[Thank you for previous assistance]

That is the short list - add to that a considerable number of cases where NSA has given private assistance and been involved in serveral other matters in Court. Plus the NSA submission to the Law & Order Select Committee - and several individual NSA members submissions as well

From Gundoc:

The NSA exists to fight for the rights of firearms owners, particularly in regard to the government and its various departments acting within the law, and in accordance with the various rights that we have as NZ citizens. I use the words 'rights' advisedly!

The various people that set up the NSA originally, did so against a background of failed attempts to bring about change by the various shooting sports organisations. Their failure was due entirely to their 'give up something in exchange for something else' attitude, even with full knowledge that they were being shafted. Their attitude was one of 'not rocking the boat in case we lose everything' when in fact what they had could NOT be taken away.

Most of the original founders of the NSA had long history of refusing to back down in the face of strong opposition. These people, by their relatively singular efforts had achieved the following for NZ shooters; the introduction of IPSC and 3-gun shooting (against the NZ Pistol Assn. and the NZ Police), the introduction of Metallic Silhouette shooting (against the NZ Pistol Assn and the NZ Police), defining what constitutes the overall length of a firearm in the Courts (against NZ Police), taking the Commissioner of Police to Court over blanket ban policies and winning (a far-reaching decision that made legal history), etc.

Thus the NSA was formed to provide a single entity to pursue these goals, not by negotiating but by drawing a line in the sand. Since then the victories have mounted as outlined in a previous post by JayDee. These efforts have been partly member funded and partly by various NSA founders putting up the balance. The NSA is fortunate to have the services of Richard Lincoln who, despite still being a law student, has performed exceptionally well in Court on our behalf. The initial Court battle in Palmerston North saw the Crown Solicitor shake Richard's hand and warmly congratulate him on a very well presented case. That is not too bad for a student who only had completed one year of study at that stage. I was there in Court to assist with the technical aspects of firearms for the benefit of the Judge.

The NSA seldom meets face to face but uses email and phone calls when a decision needs to be made, takes the appropriate action, and slips back into the lair, watching and waiting. It is not an organisation that has regular meetings, puts out newsletters, etc. The various people who chew these things over all have other jobs to do to keep food on the table, and Richard is very busy with his studies. The NSA funding is used specifically and exclusively to fight these battles when they are identified, and our legal team has all their ducks in a row. Jaydee and I are both laymen but we both have a sharp eye for the written law (and a bit of Celtic fire in our blood), the others are qualified lawyers. First and foremost however, we are all shooters.

I would have define the NSA as a movement, rather than a club.

Touchy point Sidney, or should I say Richard ? Want to have another go at answering questions about membership ?

Res, dude, it is your money, do with it what you want. For me, I choose to support organisations that are happy to publicly disclose their membership numbers (not some fantasy they dreamt up), easily verifiable by dividing the subs income. Can you easily get hold of financial statements for the last couple of years ? How hard is it to get info about organisational structure, regional representatives, background of the leadership team etc. Think of it as buying shares in a company...

Originally Posted by ebf

Touchy point Sidney, or should I say Richard ? Want to have another go at answering questions about membership ?

Res, dude, it is your money, do with it what you want. For me, I choose to support organisations that are happy to publicly disclose their membership numbers (not some fantasy they dreamt up), easily verifiable by dividing the subs income. Can you easily get hold of financial statements for the last couple of years ? How hard is it to get info about organisational structure, regional representatives, background of the leadership team etc. Think of it as buying shares in a company...

Here is the thing Efb.... your wrong again.... so capacity obviously is an issue for you...

I know Richard, but am not him... I am not a member of the NSA and have not been associated with their legal activities..

I am however a law student, the only bit you have right so far....

If you want to buy shares in a company you should do so.... if you wish to support activates that encourage accountability, that might be a different thing.

Applying your formulae of how to achieve end game results sounds like you are prescribing inactivity... Analysis of membership and representation is purely a red herring. I am far more interested in the aims, activities and capacity of the group that I am supporting. What are our choices here...? Listening to the likes of you or going with something that actually achieves something?

You do not need large membership to pursue legal remedy, you need funding streams. Large memberships are more often than not, inefficient and indecisive, just witness your own diversionary opinion.

We have an extremely diverse community within the recreation firearms users community and getting everybody on the same page will always seem to be an exercise in herding cats....

Thankfully some people just get on with it.... your should go and do some more memberships analysis...

By memory NSA threads have a tendency to go pear-shaped very quickly. Is this what this thread is about ?

Don't think so

Gosh Sidney, I bet you get a lot of dates