Thread: New gun security laws

Originally Posted by GravelBen

Is that really 'for sure' though? Based on what data? Or is it just a throwaway line trotted out by the media (and that goon from the police union) to drum up reactions without any supporting evidence?

Such data is confidential. Nothing to do with the person you're referring to or the bull that the media churns out either. They have their agendas for sure.

Do you really think that firearms related crime has fallen or stayed static in NZ? Might have something to do with methamphetamine, although that's just my opinion.

meth is huge, my ex boss was doing 40k$ a year, when he finally quit he was telling me its lawyers, doctors and even surgeons using the stuff. if the cops can intercept 1/2 a billion bucks worth in one swoop gives you an idea of demand
d

Originally Posted by 10-Ring

Such data is confidential. Nothing to do with the person you're referring to or the bull that the media churns out either. They have their agendas for sure.

Do you really think that firearms related crime has fallen or stayed static in NZ? Might have something to do with methamphetamine, although that's just my opinion.

How's this for an opinion?

My opinion is the fact that the annual rate of firearm homicide per 100,000 population has remained much the same since 1995 that gun crime is not increasing and has fallen dramatically from what it was pre 1995.

We've even had record low rates during 2011 and 2012.

The annual rate of firearm homicide per 100,000 population is:

Originally Posted by Jexla

How's this for an opinion?

My opinion is the fact that the annual rate of firearm homicide per 100,000 population has remained much the same since 1995 that gun crime is not increasing and has fallen dramatically from what it was pre 1995.

We've even had record low rates during 2011 and 2012.

The annual rate of firearm homicide per 100,000 population is:

Attachment 52298

Whilst this set of figures is one perspective and represents sadly actual deaths it may be misleading on the actual extent of firearms crime. In 1990 for example David Grey was probably the total contributor to that year's statistic.

Originally Posted by Jexla

How's this for an opinion?

My opinion is the fact that the annual rate of firearm homicide per 100,000 population has remained much the same since 1995 that gun crime is not increasing and has fallen dramatically from what it was pre 1995.

We've even had record low rates during 2011 and 2012.

The annual rate of firearm homicide per 100,000 population is:

Attachment 52298

What a great example of using very selective statistics to back an argument.

Come on jexla, I'm sure you can see the blatantly obvious holes in that argument.

Originally Posted by Savage1

It took you longer to bite than I expected, do you really think c-cat is more deadly than a-cat?

Depends what the firearm is that is on C cat. If it's select fire then yes Mr policeman, I do think it is more deadly, don't you?

Originally Posted by Savage1

What a great example of using very selective statistics to back an argument.

Come on jexla, I'm sure you can see the blatantly obvious holes in that argument.

Sure, we don't have statistics on actual gun crime because your lot don't record it. What we do have however is statistics on gun murders and it's the best we have to go off, unless you know some better stats to use, cough 'em up....

Originally Posted by Jexla

Depends what the firearm is that is on C cat. If it's select fire then yes Mr policeman, I do think it is more deadly, don't you?



Sure, we don't have statistics on actual gun crime because your lot don't record it. What we do have however is statistics on gun murders and it's the best we have to go off, unless you know some better stats to use, cough 'em up....

So you think E cat is no deadlier than A but C is more deadly than A if it is select fire? I fail to follow your logic.

If you only have a narrow amount of information then avoid coming to broad conclusions, homicides are far from being the only crimes that involve firearms, a lot aren't reported, often some of the worst of them. Going off of your logic then there wouldn't have been a single firearms offence in Northland so far this year, which is funny because I've personally lost count of the number of crims I've confronted this year that who have been carrying firearms at the time and/or very recently used one in the commission of a crime. But hey, what would I know compared to someone who sits at a desk most days.

Originally Posted by Savage1

So you think E cat is no deadlier than A but C is more deadly than A if it is select fire? I fail to follow your logic.

You're thick, I have finally found my signature. I won't bother arguing with you.

Originally Posted by Jexla

You're thick, I have finally found my signature. I won't bother arguing with you.

When one stoops to ad hominem attacks the argument's already lost.

Originally Posted by Jexla

You're thick, I have finally found my signature. I won't bother arguing with you.

So,

I'll assume your logic is that a C cat can put down a higher rate of fire.

A cat rifles, can only hold 7 rounds unless .22lr. An E is unlimited. Sure you can change magazines in under 5 seconds but that is still a lot of mag changes, four to get 30 rounds out so at least 10 seconds, especially fumbling small 7 round magazines. So the rate of fire is far far higher out of an E cat than an A cat rifle and would take less skill to lay that fire down accurately.

Full auto is very hard to control, so only when you have a crush of people within 25m will it actually be any more deadly, even then it'd be questionable. I'd rather take on an idiot with a full auto than an idiot with an E cat.

E cats are also easier to conceal as you can get folding and telescopic stocks which reduce the length to below 762mm. They can also chuck a bayonet on the front. You can even get an E cat MP5 with only a slightly longer barrel than standard.

There's a reason why most Police and Army rifles have almost all the same features as an E-cat rifle.

To say an E-cat is no more deadly than an A cat is wrong in my opinion, sure it's easy enough to buy large capacity magazines and clip onto an A cat but that's another matter, and it also makes them E cat.

So keep your signature up as long as you want, it just shows a level of arrogance and immaturity.

I'm actually disappointed in myself that I bothered to reply.