Bye B....

[king1]

it is ok, no-one is trying to do that...

Yes, that is exactly what they are trying to do. Clubs are now suffering because of the cost and complexity of new laws, supposedly to make things "safer" in a sport that has always been pretty much the safest sport there is. There is almost no accident data for target shooting because there are almost no accidents. So why spend money on admin that clubs can't afford when there are more dangerous things to deal with? Hunting accidents do happen and are expensive individually, but are also very few and far between in relation to the numbers of people out there doing it.

All industries suffer from the same impositions, no-one is being singled out... 

It starts with governments (and departments) being held responsible or accountable for harm (legally and politically), and as such ends with governments needing to do everything possible to eliminate the risk of such harm...  Nanny state at its finest, but simply what we as a society have created in NZ...  I blame the activists...

[SueDonim]

You seem to have completely glossed over the fact that the responsibilty for Labour's policies have been entirely personalised onto Jacinda which has resulted in a shitstorm of personal abuse that has made her position untenable. That is the totality of yesterday's events and your post continues on in that vein regardless.

Didn't mean to. I totally agree that so many people blame her for the team's decisions, but she is the spokesman and the leader so that comes with the job. I don't see any indication that she inherently disagreed with anything she had to front for.

---

Yes, that is exactly what they are trying to do. Clubs are now suffering because of the cost and complexity of new laws, supposedly to make things "safer" in a sport that has always been pretty much the safest sport there is. There is almost no accident data for target shooting because there are almost no accidents. So why spend money on admin that clubs can't afford when there are more dangerous things to deal with? Hunting accidents do happen and are expensive individually, but are also very few and far between in relation to the numbers of people out there doing it.

All industries suffer from the same impositions, no-one is being singled out... 

It starts with governments (and departments) being held responsible or accountable for harm (legally and politically), and as such ends with governments needing to do everything possible to eliminate the risk of such harm...  Nanny state at its finest, but simply what we as a society have created in NZ...  I blame the activists...

I blame the government that bows to the activists instead of common sense. And you are right that it's not just sports shooting being targeted but that has to be one of the silliest. And it is putting a great sport at risk.

Another example in the misguided name of "safety" are things like - an untrained homeowner is allowed up on their roof to clean, paint, whatever they like. But anyone they employ, or to get up on their neighbour's roof, they have to have a ridiculous amount of scaffolding to stop them falling off. Even if they are a trained roofer who knows how to stay safe. Why? Because of the "accidents" from workers who go to work drugged and then fall off. Instead of dealing with the problem of drugs in the workplace, every homeowner needing roof maintenance done, or a new house built, spends tens of thousands extra.

[harm_less]

For starters the front legs of a lamb are processed as shoulders so either your farming or butchering knowledge is well off the mark.

Having had a gun licence for over 30 years it has always baffled me as to why the actual firearms aren't registered, just the licence holders, so authorities have no way of knowing what amount of weaponry an individual has in their possession, if any. The firearms regulations were well overdue for an overhaul and the strong and caring leader we had in Jacinda did well to lead the charge in the action now being taken. It will make life safer for every NZer.

Like so many critics of the current government you have personalised your dissatisfaction towards Jacinda and chosen to personally attack her and her past life. It is misguided individuals with similar twisted opinions like yours that have forced the best, most caring, selfless and genuine Prime Minister this country has had in living memory to quit the job in favour of her and her family's personal wellbeing. Take a good long look at yourself and your misdirected whingings and realise that governance of our country will become truly draconian if Luxon, Seymour, (and Peters) gain leadership. You only have yourselves to blame.

The problem with individual firearm registration is the out and out cost of it. In a cost-benefit analysis it is pointless. Our process of vetting people to ensure they are fit and proper is great if it is done properly. The problem is that it isn't done properly. If a person is "fit and proper" it doesn't matter whether they have one gun or 20. Or more.

You really do have rose-tinted glasses when it comes to the PM. So often the smile seems to be a flash of bared teeth. Usually when it's about something that is going to cost us big time.

Sometimes decisions are made based on more than just expenditure. Bear in mind that in cases of domestic abuse the attending police currently have no way of ascertaining what sort of arsenal the offender may possess (assuming they're a firearms licencee) so either go in underprepared at great risk to themselves, or turn up with armed to the teeth 'just in case' which of course often doesn't end well for the offender.

Your dollar driven logic comes as no surprise based on your apparent support of National's approach. There are those of us though that saw Jacinda's political approach as caring, understanding of the less well off and mindful of the big picture in terms of health, welfare and social good. Sooner "rose tinted glasses" than blinkers.

[king1]

You seem to have completely glossed over the fact that the responsibilty for Labour's policies have been entirely personalised onto Jacinda which has resulted in a shitstorm of personal abuse that has made her position untenable. That is the totality of yesterday's events and your post continues on in that vein regardless.

Which unfortunately is probably what the fringe idiots were hoping would happen - sling enough abuse and insults, force her into an untenable position. They will take this as a win. But sadly it does not reflect well on NZ society when the fringe idiots can control the outcome...

[SueDonim]

The problem with individual firearm registration is the out and out cost of it. In a cost-benefit analysis it is pointless. Our process of vetting people to ensure they are fit and proper is great if it is done properly. The problem is that it isn't done properly. If a person is "fit and proper" it doesn't matter whether they have one gun or 20. Or more.

You really do have rose-tinted glasses when it comes to the PM. So often the smile seems to be a flash of bared teeth. Usually when it's about something that is going to cost us big time.

Sometimes decisions are made based on more than just expenditure. Bear in mind that in cases of domestic abuse the attending police currently have no way of ascertaining what sort of arsenal the offender may possess (assuming they're a firearms licencee) so either go in underprepared at great risk to themselves, or turn up with armed to the teeth 'just in case' which of course often doesn't end well for the offender.

Your dollar driven logic comes as no surprise based on your apparent support of National's approach. There are those of us though that saw Jacinda's political approach as caring, understanding of the less well off and mindful of the big picture in terms of health, welfare and social good. Sooner "rose tinted glasses" than blinkers.

If a licensee has gone off the rails, how much "aresenal" they have is irrelevant. They can only present one firearm at a time. In the case of a domestic abuse situation, if the "Fit and Proper" aspect were applied properly the problem would be less likely anyway. What does happen is that a bitter spouse only has to sow the seed of doubt to have the police swoop in and confiscate a person's private property. Understandable on one level, but the owner of the firearms can lose thousands of dollars worth of assets on a lie.

My dollar logic simply comes from having paid taxes all my life I expect to see them spent prudently where they will do the most good, not on nonsense. They should benefit society, not disrupt people's freedom for no reason.

[king1]

All industries suffer from the same impositions, no-one is being singled out... 

It starts with governments (and departments) being held responsible or accountable for harm (legally and politically), and as such ends with governments needing to do everything possible to eliminate the risk of such harm...  Nanny state at its finest, but simply what we as a society have created in NZ...  I blame the activists...

I blame the government that bows to the activists instead of common sense. And you are right that it's not just sports shooting being targeted but that has to be one of the silliest. And it is putting a great sport at risk.

Another example in the misguided name of "safety" are things like - an untrained homeowner is allowed up on their roof to clean, paint, whatever they like. But anyone they employ, or to get up on their neighbour's roof, they have to have a ridiculous amount of scaffolding to stop them falling off. Even if they are a trained roofer who knows how to stay safe. Why? Because of the "accidents" from workers who go to work drugged and then fall off. Instead of dealing with the problem of drugs in the workplace, every homeowner needing roof maintenance done, or a new house built, spends tens of thousands extra.

IF every accident was caused by drugged up mules then that could make sense, but it is not the case.  Accidents don't just happen to druggies and drunks.

[Olive]

There's a surprising amount of glossing over happening today. For example, Henry Cooke in The Guardian managed to write a long opinion piece about the PM's resignation without once mentioning the death threats, the threats agains Neve and all the rest of the deranged vitriol that she has faced over the past two years.

---

[/quote]
IF every accident was caused by drugged up mules then that could make sense, but it is not the case.  Accidents don't just happen to druggies and drunks.
[/quote]

But for those who support ACT, or the rightist wing of National, everyone is responsible for their own situations: an accident is always the fault of the victim; poverty is always caused by fecklessness; disparities in educational achievements are always caused by unwillingness to learn.

[king1]

Sometimes decisions are made based on more than just expenditure. Bear in mind that in cases of domestic abuse the attending police currently have no way of ascertaining what sort of arsenal the offender may possess (assuming they're a firearms licencee) so either go in underprepared at great risk to themselves, or turn up with armed to the teeth 'just in case' which of course often doesn't end well for the offender.

Your dollar driven logic comes as no surprise based on your apparent support of National's approach. There are those of us though that saw Jacinda's political approach as caring, understanding of the less well off and mindful of the big picture in terms of health, welfare and social good. Sooner "rose tinted glasses" than blinkers.

If a licensee has gone off the rails, how much "aresenal" they have is irrelevant. They can only present one firearm at a time. In the case of a domestic abuse situation, if the "Fit and Proper" aspect were applied properly the problem would be less likely anyway. What does happen is that a bitter spouse only has to sow the seed of doubt to have the police swoop in and confiscate a person's private property. Understandable on one level, but the owner of the firearms can lose thousands of dollars worth of assets on a lie.

My dollar logic simply comes from having paid taxes all my life I expect to see them spent prudently where they will do the most good, not on nonsense. They should benefit society, not disrupt people's freedom for no reason.

 Disagree totally, any action movie will show that at least two if not three or more weapons at a time can be brandished...   and then, the type of weapons in possession become an issue,  yes we need a firearms register, it would certainly help in knowing this information

A bitter spouse cannot and should not stop appropriate action being taken, just in case.  If it is found to be malicious then there are laws and processes to sort the spouse out...  You cannot second guess a firearms incident response by doubting the motives of the caller...   I would suggest many woman would appreciate this aspect...

[Oh_hunnihunni]

How someone lives, their environment and their interests tells a pretty clear story about what kind of person they are. Someone who has a collection of fluffy bunnies is unlikely to be a threat in a stress situation, where someone with a wall full of guns, rifles or knives would make anyone form a different opinion.

And I say that as someone who has held a gun licence, been a hunter, and who could probably still hit a target given the opportunity...

---

Btw, our history has unlimited examples of activists leading the way in social change and other areas. Suffrage for example. Slavery. Prisoner rights. Abolition of the death penalty. Anti nukes. Whaling. A very recent example would be  ACC changing its rules on birth injuries...

Activists often embody common sense, and have the guts and drive to step up to promote that common sense.

Climate change would be a perfect example.

[zkted]

Well my lambs are only selling for $150 each yet a leg of lamb at the supermarket will cost upwards of $90 and remember there are four on each animal.

Firearms she took the easy option and went after law abiding and legally licenced owners only and not any of the illegally owned guns used almost weekly by the gangs and remember it was the police who failed all of the law by not following the laws guidelines when issuing a certain nutter with a licence.

She also kept the borders open until after her photo opportunity so letting Covid get a toehold.

Those who know me from the other pub know that I'm usually a Labour supporter but she failed to impress me with anything she did apart from all the hugs and photo ops she did those real well and failed at just about everything else. How can you lead a country when you have never had a real job and so have no life experience to call on?

For starters the front legs of a lamb are processed as shoulders so either your farming or butchering knowledge is well off the mark.

Having had a gun licence for over 30 years it has always baffled me as to why the actual firearms aren't registered, just the licence holders, so authorities have no way of knowing what amount of weaponry an individual has in their possession, if any. The firearms regulations were well overdue for an overhaul and the strong and caring leader we had in Jacinda did well to lead the charge in the action now being taken. It will make life safer for every NZer.

Like so many critics of the current government you have personalised your dissatisfaction towards Jacinda and chosen to personally attack her and her past life. It is misguided individuals with similar twisted opinions like yours that have forced the best, most caring, selfless and genuine Prime Minister this country has had in living memory to quit the job in favour of her and her family's personal wellbeing. Take a good long look at yourself and your misdirected whingings and realise that governance of our country will become truly draconian if Luxon, Seymour, (and Peters) gain leadership. You only have yourselves to blame.

I just hate her because she is the most useless PM the country has ever had and she has messed around our gun laws and affected me. You can love her you are obviously a lefty but dont personally attack people who despise here

[king1]

personally, I like the fact that someone that hates has been affected by our stricter gun laws... Clearly they are working as intended...

[king1]

This might explain some the discontent from gun owners... 
https://www.todayfm.co.nz/home/national/...ol-nz.html

License costs are going up...  Now it would make far more sense to again, license the firearm as well, that way those that own more will pay a bigger share of the regulatory costs... 

and then we have the added benefit of having a register of all firearms...

[Garysixtyseven]

Since a few on here have slammed my opinion I will address some of the things you have assumed I mean.

Firstly I have a family member who was at the mosque and received an award for what he did, I know a community member from here who was at the mosque, I have a friend who was sent to the mosque as part of their job, I have met and spoken with the police officers who arrested the nutter, I live next door to two police officers great people doing a difficult job. Not one of these people was in favour of the changes to the firearms laws it was directed from on high and came from the office of the prime minister.

The friend was told to surrender his own licence simply because his Ex wife told police he was unstable after the shootings, a psychologist says otherwise but they still don't have their licence back so it can and does happen.

The prime minister stood up on television and promised New Zealand two things.
One that removing these weapons would make NZ safer. This hasn't happened see all the gang shootings.
Two a completely independent from police firearms authority to allow police to carry out their core work of catching criminals and upholding the law. This also has not happened.

The register while a good idea in practice will as other countries have found cost billions to make happen, will attract attempts from organised crime to obtain 'shopping lists' of firearms and will not make any difference at all as illegally held firearms will not be registered.

As any leader finds out being at the top the buck stops at your door, its not a job I would want and I detest anyone who slams family and friends of our leaders, but as leader you have to stand on your merit. Did she deliver on election promises No, did her party get elected with a MMP majority on her personality rather than the parties results from policies Yes. Ultimately it was a government with her at the helm so it is only right that she ultimately is responsible for its failings, hugs don't get results.

This is my final piece in this thread, so go on slay me I don't care I have thick skin.

[Oh_hunnihunni]

I think telling the world about who someone hates via a public message board is pretty much a message about the person doing it rather than the unfortunate target.

How can anyone hate a politician they have never met for long enough to know well enough to dislike to the point of hatred? Maybe they don't really know the difference between dislike and true hatred.

Either way,  it is not a good look.

[Olive]

I think telling the world about who someone hates via a public message board is pretty much a message about the person doing it rather than the unfortunate target.

How can anyone hate a politician they have never met for long enough to know well enough to dislike to the point of hatred? Maybe they don't really know the difference between dislike and true hatred.

Either way,  it is not a good look.

I agree.   As with all of the shrieking abuse it's an infantile response, like a four year old shouting "I hate you".

[Pato]

I am always amused by the claim 'hasn't had a real job' made by folk who have never held any kind of public office, never even had the guts to volunteer to stand for one, but who get their rocks off abusing, insulting, and running down those who not only have, but have been immensely successful in doing so...

Fuckwits.

Well said.

[king1]

As any leader finds out being at the top the buck stops at your door, its not a job I would want and I detest anyone who slams family and friends of our leaders, but as leader you have to stand on your merit. Did she deliver on election promises No, did her party get elected with a MMP majority on her personality rather than the parties results from policies Yes. Ultimately it was a government with her at the helm so it is only right that she ultimately is responsible for its failings, hugs don't get results.

This is my final piece in this thread, so go on slay me I don't care I have thick skin.

I'm not sure on the government's hit rate for election promises, but I would suggest no government in the past 40 years has delivered substantially on their election promises...  Why is it any different for the this government?

She also isn't the only politician to trade on personality, I would suggest it is actually a mandatory requirement for the job TBH.  But it was the Toxic mess that was National at the time that handed Labour an easy election win, not Jacinda's personality...   But when you develop a dislike for someone it is hard not to pick on the personality...

[SueDonim]

IF every accident was caused by drugged up mules then that could make sense, but it is not the case.  Accidents don't just happen to druggies and drunks.

Of course some accidents are genuine accidents, but most are not. The amount of drug-taking in our society is a HUGE problem, and I am sure that a very high proportion of "accidents" would not have happened if the people weren't stoned. In the trades, the employers are between a rock and a hard place. Threats of drugs tests don't work because everyone would fail. Well-trained drug-free roofers don't fall off.

But part of my point was the fact that home owners who are not trained are still allowed up there. So clearly they also don't fall off to a degree that bothers ACC.

---

[/quote]But for those who support ACT, or the rightist wing of National, everyone is responsible for their own situations: an accident is always the fault of the victim; poverty is always caused by fecklessness; disparities in educational achievements are always caused by unwillingness to learn.
[/quote]

That can be twisted the other way. Currently, an accident is never the fault of the victim - no matter how drugged, drunk or stupid they were; poverty is never caused by fecklessness - no matter how much they have frittered their money away on junk food, alcohol and drugs; disparities in educational achievement are never caused by unwillingness to learn. Of course all of them are ridiculous in that extreme, and neither ACT not National will be to the extreme in your list. What we do need though is for people to start taking some responsibility for their situations.

---

 Disagree totally, any action movie will show that at least two if not three or more weapons at a time can be brandished...   and then, the type of weapons in possession become an issue,  yes we need a firearms register, it would certainly help in knowing this information

A bitter spouse cannot and should not stop appropriate action being taken, just in case.  If it is found to be malicious then there are laws and processes to sort the spouse out...  You cannot second guess a firearms incident response by doubting the motives of the caller...   I would suggest many woman would appreciate this aspect...

One of the biggest problems we have is that since our society has become increasingly urbanised what people know about guns tends to be what they have learned on action movies. Kids no longer grow up shooting rabbits and learning basic firearms skills and safety. While it might be theoretically possible to hold a rifle or shotgun in each hand, there would be a minimal amount of control and it's really not feasible in reality.

You are correct that erring on the side of caution is appropriate in domestic situations, but under our present system the police know whether or not there are firearms in the house. How many might be there is not important. Remember, in the "heat of the moment" a potential offender has to find the keys, unlock the gunsafe, unlock the second safe where the ammunition is kept, then load up. The knives in the kitchen drawer are a bigger problem if things have gone really bad.

---

personally, I like the fact that someone that hates has been affected by our stricter gun laws...  Clearly they are working as intended...

I think we have a huge problem in that the use and definition of the word "hate" has changed. There's an emotional continuum between Love and Hate. Most of us feel somewhere between the two extremes for most people. Just because we dislike someone extremely and may say we "hate" them doesn't mean we want to kill them.  On the other hand, most criminals don't even know let alone hate their victims. So just because someone uses the word conversationally doesn't mean they are a problem.

---

Since a few on here have slammed my opinion I will address some of the things you have assumed I mean.

Firstly I have a family member who was at the mosque and received an award for what he did, I know a community member from here who was at the mosque, I have a friend who was sent to the mosque as part of their job, I have met and spoken with the police officers who arrested the nutter, I live next door to two police officers great people doing a difficult job. Not one of these people was in favour of the changes to the firearms laws it was directed from on high and came from the office of the prime minister.

The friend was told to surrender his own licence simply because his Ex wife told police he was unstable after the shootings, a psychologist says otherwise but they still don't have their licence back so it can and does happen.

The prime minister stood up on television and promised New Zealand two things.
One that removing these weapons would make NZ safer. This hasn't happened see all the gang shootings.
Two a completely independent from police firearms authority to allow police to carry out their core work of catching criminals and upholding the law. This also has not happened.

The register while a good idea in practice will as other countries have found cost billions to make happen, will attract attempts from organised crime to obtain 'shopping lists' of firearms and will not make any difference at all as illegally held firearms will not be registered.

As any leader finds out being at the top the buck stops at your door, its not a job I would want and I detest anyone who slams family and friends of our leaders, but as leader you have to stand on your merit. Did she deliver on election promises No, did her party get elected with a MMP majority on her personality rather than the parties results from policies Yes. Ultimately it was a government with her at the helm so it is only right that she ultimately is responsible for its failings, hugs don't get results.

This is my final piece in this thread, so go on slay me I don't care I have thick skin.

Thank you for this post. A voice of sense and reason.

[zkted]

As far as firearms register goes it could be done by a few a volunteers for zip, yes zero yes free. One simple xcel  file sort column A firearms owner saved on the cloud  enter in the name of the firearms owner, licence number, brand of gun, model and serial number. Info emailed in by the owners. Police could access it if they pay a fee which would be what a gun licence will cost maybe $700 which would go to the about four data input volunteers. Data entry people in my plan would have to be firearms owners and users of at least 20 years, born in New Zealand preferably with both parents both born in NZ.
Now no one knows how many guns are in new Zealand but we would probaly have rifle ownership comparable to US and Finland.
I await the negative internet bullies comments to my proposal.

[Oh_hunnihunni]

Slash their tyres?

What a stupid comment. And I suspect breaks a few laws as well as rules.