Thread: New government will rewrite Arms Act

Quote: I used to think the US was crazy for no being willing to give an inch with regards to 2A but seeing how things played out here, in the UK and in Australia I know completely understand.

Touche!!!!… and the reasons are obvious for most here.When these politicians say ,”I guarantee “…. I say ,there are no guarantees until signed into law as such.

Early days and big promises from the 3 musketeers,ACTs participants in this Firearms debate will be severely tested by the others,they won’t get it all “their” way!!

Originally Posted by A330driver

Quote: I used to think the US was crazy for no being willing to give an inch with regards to 2A but seeing how things played out here, in the UK and in Australia I know completely understand.

Touche!!!!… and the reasons are obvious for most here.When these politicians say ,”I guarantee “…. I say ,there are no guarantees until signed into law as such.

Early days and big promises from the 3 musketeers,ACTs participants in this Firearms debate will be severely tested by the others,they won’t get it all “their” way!!

acts "rise to power" was largely due to their promises and campaigning with regards to firearms. There are a shitton of firearms owners out there. If they do not deliver on this they might as well all retire because they will not be a thing come next election. Act voters are no labour voters with 2 braincells and an attention span of 3 seconds.

Originally Posted by STC

acts "rise to power" was largely due to their promises and campaigning with regards to firearms. There are a shitton of firearms owners out there. If they do not deliver on this they might as well all retire because they will not be a thing come next election. Act voters are no labour voters with 2 braincells and an attention span of 3 seconds.

Interesting.
I think there are estimated 300,000 gun owners in NZ (is that correct?). Act won 246,409 party votes.
If one in ten gun owners voted Act on the basis of gun laws alone (generous I think) that's 30,000 votes.
Without those votes ACT would have still got in with about 8 seats. Plus Seymour's seat gets them in anyway.

Originally Posted by Tahr

Interesting.
I think there are estimated 300,000 gun owners in NZ (is that correct?). Act won 246,409 party votes.
If one in ten gun owners voted Act on the basis of gun laws alone (generous I think) that's 30,000 votes.
Without those votes ACT would have still got in with about 8 seats. Plus Seymour's seat gets them in anyway.

Where did you pluck the one in ten voters from? You would have no idea how many voted for ACT on the basis of gun laws.

Originally Posted by Bush Basher

Where did you pluck the one in ten voters from? You would have no idea how many voted for ACT on the basis of gun laws.

It's suits his point of view.

I would hazard a guess at 5/10 or higher, if you remove the rural and business owner motivated National voters. In which case it would be a tick for the nats and one for act.

I am surprised by the number of expats who voted Act too, 6 out of 8 Voted Act and the other two voted Green.I think people are just looking for new ideas and new faces as well as a bit sick of the rhetoric we have been fed.

Originally Posted by norsk

It's suits his point of view.

I would hazard a guess at 5/10 or higher, if you remove the rural and business owner motivated National voters. In which case it would be a tick for the nats and one for act.

I am surprised by the number of expats who voted Act too, 6 out of 8 Voted Act and the other two voted Green.I think people are just looking for new ideas and new faces as well as a bit sick of the rhetoric we have been fed.

My point of view is simply that I do not think that a lot (I said 10% of gun owners as an example) of Acts votes came from gun law specific single issue voters. Mostly people have far broader issues to worry about at the moment. I did not vote Act (I voted Nats) but Im very pleased that Act got in and have these proposed changes in the coalition agreement.

Originally Posted by Tahr

My point of view is simply that I do not think that a lot (I said 10% of gun owners as an example) of Acts votes came from gun law specific single issue voters. Mostly people have far broader issues to worry about at the moment. I did not vote Act (I voted Nats) but Im very pleased that Act got in and have these proposed changes in the coalition agreement.

I think what has been missed is that ACT only gained one seat from 2020 so it is stretching it somewhat to say that the arms act issue was major in peoples thoughts. Other than Labour all of the other parties gained more than that. The National, ACT and NZ first coalition scraped in by a narrow majority so who knows what will happen in 2026.
GPM.

Originally Posted by Tahr

My point of view is simply that I do not think that a lot (I said 10% of gun owners as an example) of Acts votes came from gun law specific single issue voters. Mostly people have far broader issues to worry about at the moment. I did not vote Act (I voted Nats) but Im very pleased that Act got in and have these proposed changes in the coalition agreement.

For what it's worth, I vote single issue and it is firearms legislation every time

sample of 1 but I vote every time come hell or high water

Originally Posted by Tahr

My point of view is simply that I do not think that a lot (I said 10% of gun owners as an example) of Acts votes came from gun law specific single issue voters. Mostly people have far broader issues to worry about at the moment. I did not vote Act (I voted Nats) but Im very pleased that Act got in and have these proposed changes in the coalition agreement.

You’re making assumptions again and you know what they say about assumptions….
You have no idea the reasons why people voted for ACT.

Originally Posted by Bush Basher

Where did you pluck the one in ten voters from? You would have no idea how many voted for ACT on the basis of gun laws.

73.98% of statistics quoted on the internet are made up by the poster.

Including this one.....

Originally Posted by Tahr

Interesting.
I think there are estimated 300,000 gun owners in NZ (is that correct?). Act won 246,409 party votes.
If one in ten gun owners voted Act on the basis of gun laws alone (generous I think) that's 30,000 votes.
Without those votes ACT would have still got in with about 8 seats. Plus Seymour's seat gets them in anyway.

Combining estimates with assumptions (why 1 in 10? why not 1 in 5 or 1 in 2)

Does not yield in any numbers that have any meaning. You are essentially making stuff up and make it look like "math"

We will have to wait and see what happens.

Originally Posted by STC

Combining estimates with assumptions (why 1 in 10? why not 1 in 5 or 1 in 2)

Does not yield in any numbers that have any meaning. You are essentially making stuff up and make it look like "math"

We will have to wait and see what happens.

Because I prefer to be realistic. And was responding to this "acts "rise to power" was largely due to their promises and campaigning with regards to firearms".
The fact that I think you are incorrect though should not diminish the enthusiasm for what the coalition might achieve for gun owners.

Originally Posted by Tahr

Because I prefer to be realistic. And was responding to this "acts "rise to power" was largely due to their promises and campaigning with regards to firearms".
The fact that I think you are incorrect though should not diminish the enthusiasm for what the coalition might achieve for gun owners.

Making shit up to suit your opinion has nothing to do with realism.

Originally Posted by Tahr

Interesting.
I think there are estimated 300,000 gun owners in NZ (is that correct?). Act won 246,409 party votes.
If one in ten gun owners voted Act on the basis of gun laws alone (generous I think) that's 30,000 votes.
Without those votes ACT would have still got in with about 8 seats. Plus Seymour's seat gets them in anyway.

@Tahr
Plus van Velden winning the Tamaki seat.

Keep it relevant guys as it’s close to getting shitcanned