Politics Gun laws and news around the world

[colin traveller]

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.

Accept third party cookies

 

[HisRoyalHighness]

Goddamn, I missed a good debate.

Anyway, it’s that time of the year that gun control Australia cries that gun ownership rates are increasing:

Gun 'sub-culture': Sydney's north is the state's new hot spot for firearms

President of Gun Control Australia Samantha Lee said the current system was "failing to put the brakes on firearm acquisition".
"In the lovely leafy suburbs of Sydney's north, there are numerous homes storing large caches of legally accumulated firearms," she said.

"It was never the intent of the National Firearms Agreement that individual licence holders would be able to build up their own private arsenal."

President of Manly's Swiss Smallbore Rifle Club David Williams said people from all over the north shore came to his club for target shooting.

"People come from all sorts of backgrounds," he said. "The main reason people come is it is convenient to the area they live in."

Greens MP and anti-gun activist David Shoebridge said the gun ownership numbers indicated a growing "sub-culture amongst cashed-up individuals in Sydney’s north".

"People with the money are willing to indulge themselves in purchasing firearms as a vanity project ... which I find disturbing," he said.

Gun 'sub-culture': Sydney's north is the state's new hot spot for firearms

The person who owns the highest number of firearms in all of NSW now resides in Cremorne, with 314 guns in their arsenal.

www.smh.com.au

Edit:

I noticed something interesting, GCA keep getting mentioned but hardly anyone cares about the organization nor even has heard of it unlike a certain astroturfed organization here in the states.

Also here’s a rather interesting poll concerning Australian attitudes toward firearms:

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.

Accept third party cookies

73% do not support tightening firearm laws.
85% see no need to increase firearm regulations.

That can’t be right, can it?

 

[primer]

We need NRNZ here. This factional representation and the leading voice is a retailer isn't working.

 

[muck]

@PEMM

No offence, but your objection doesn't strike me as very relevant. If some scumbag decides to shoot up his high school, he's usually not being shot at until the authorities arrive. Militaries and security forces acquired rapid-fire weapons mostly in order to even the odds against armies that either possessed such weapons already or held a considerable advantage in manpower, though. Yet still their soldiers managed to kill each other with bolt-action rifles quite successfully, even in close-quarters combat.

 

[primer]

Non self reloading mass shootings occur even in Aussie post ban.

 

[PEMM]

@PEMM

No offence, but your objection doesn't strike me as very relevant. If some scumbag decides to shoot up his high school, he's usually not being shot at until the authorities arrive.

My bad, I thought you were speaking about the difference in general. Especially as you referenced military setting.

However even in such situation, it's much easier to be deadly with semi automatic. Using the firearm under stress and on range are two different things and if the shooter is not a psychopath, then he is going to be under stress when shooting someone. That is said to have detrimental effect on fine motor skills at the moment.

It's just much simpler to do such thing with semi automatic in comparison to bolt action.

If we go down your reasoning, we can soon be talking about swords and bows. Perfectly good at killing, but more difficult to use.

 

[muck]

Mate, there've been mass killings with crossbows. Step-into-the-stirrup-and-pull conventional crossbows, mind you, which take hours to reload.

See, I certainly don't mind the banning of devices and implements that give those who'd abuse them the chance to cause much more damage than there needs to be. As far as I'm concerned, civilians have no business owning armour-piercing ammo, for example.

But there's a difference between a qualifiable security risk and a rather theoretical advantage – particularly when there's a reasonable demand on the gun owner's site.

For example, my state (Bavaria) is the only one in Germany where hunters may use sound suppressors. That's partly because a criminal police study debunked fears that suppressors could be used to commit a crime undetected, and partly because our government had the common sense to decide that irrational fears pose no reason for us to ruin our ears (hunters don't usually wear ear defenders since they need to hear what's going on).

I'm not saying I can't imagine a single argument for New Zealand's new gun laws. But I've not heard a good argument yet. I know that they don't have a right to gun ownership. What they do have, though, is a right to property (which is being seized) as well as the one right that sits at the heart of every polity: If the governors and the governed are truly equal, then the governed have the right not to be treated like offenders-to-be.

 

[TheKiwi]

You see anyone smoking meth on your last visit to the range?

You are missing the point. Remember when we banned all cold/flu drugs that contained Codine because "meth". Remember how that affected the people who produced meth (i.e. not in the slightest). Remember how that affected people who wanted something effective to treat their nasty cold or flu.

This is the same. Something that makes not the slightest difference to the criminal community while at the same time screwing over the law abiding. A nice summation of the Jacinda affect.

 

[PEMM]

Mate, there've been mass killings with crossbows. Step-into-the-stirrup-and-pull conventional crossbows, mind you, which take hours to reload.

But there's a difference between a qualifiable security risk and a rather theoretical advantage – particularly when there's a reasonable demand on the gun owner's site.

Sure, and there was a mass stabbing in Finland just now. But difference is with the outcome. The adventage is fairly easy to see: how many targets one is able to engage with each weapon per minute.

After all: in these mass and school shootings the victims are trying to get away and time is limited. In Kuopio it was eight minutes from beginning of the attack to the moment police shot the attacker.

I'm not saying I can't imagine a single argument for New Zealand's new gun laws. But I've not heard a good argument yet. I know that they don't have a right to gun ownership. What they do have, though, is a right to property (which is being seized) as well as the one right that sits at the heart of every polity: If the governors and the governed are truly equal, then the governed have the right not to be treated like offenders-to-be.

I would agree if this was done here.

But as a principle I am not for or against when it comes to gun laws of other countries.

 

[muck]

But as a principle I am not for or against when it comes to gun laws of other countries.

I try to keep my mouth shut on matters than don't affect me or don't parallel matters that do.

This one doesn't fit the bill, though. We have a similar gun control debate right now. Remember the Halle attacks three weeks ago? The perpetrator was using a self-tinkered gun. He wasn't licenced to own weapons nor had ever entered himself into the legal process. As far as the system is concerned, the guy didn't even exist.

Yet still the government is talking more gun control, i.e. more measures that would not have prevented this particular crime.

It seems fairly obvious to me that in both cases, the government tries to appeal the collectivist masses that cry for prohibitions all the time, without providing any real evidence whatsoever that their plans are actually warranted. Show me evidence, and I shall support them; I'm not unreasonable. However, it seems to me that in both cases the first order of business should have been to bring the administration to get its S**t together.

 

[digrar]

Greens MP and anti-gun activist David Shoebridge said the gun ownership numbers indicated a growing "sub-culture amongst cashed-up individuals in Sydney’s north".

"People with the money are willing to indulge themselves in purchasing firearms as a vanity project ... which I find disturbing,"

What an annoying little twat.

 

[Devil Child]

What an annoying little twat.

That he is.

These reporters remind me of this soy-latte drinking reporter who wrote of the PTSD he acquired from trying to shoot an AR.

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.

Accept third party cookies

 

[NZM305]

Got a phone call today asking if i still want to speak to the select committee when they are in Chch in 2days time............. ?

 

[primer]

Good luck.

 

[HisRoyalHighness]

I try to keep my mouth shut on matters than don't affect me or don't parallel matters that do.

This one doesn't fit the bill, though. We have a similar gun control debate right now. Remember the Halle attacks three weeks ago? The perpetrator was using a self-tinkered gun. He wasn't licenced to own weapons nor had ever entered himself into the legal process. As far as the system is concerned, the guy didn't even exist.

Yet still the government is talking more gun control, i.e. more measures that would not have prevented this particular crime.

It seems fairly obvious to me that in both cases, the government tries to appeal the collectivist masses that cry for prohibitions all the time, without providing any real evidence whatsoever that their plans are actually warranted. Show me evidence, and I shall support them; I'm not unreasonable. However, it seems to me that in both cases the first order of business should have been to bring the administration to get its S**t together.

Speaking of, what are they proposing, how far are they, and will it pass?

 

[muck]

Speaking of, what are they proposing, how far are they, and will it pass?

That's still being debated, and our government seems at least willing to sit down with gun owners' representatives and talk things through, but the list is quite F***ed-up.

First, they want to introduce an extensive background check, which I'm told is 100% going to come.

Up to now, all you needed to have was a clean criminal record – but now they want to include a query whether or not the counter-terrorism office has got a file on you. In fairness, a licence holder was already liable to losing their licence should their name appear in the list of violence-prone extremists, so it's kinda difficult to argue against the closing of an obvious gap in the law, but it's going to string the licencing process out something terrible. And it's probably going to be more expensive as well.

If the agents in your local town hall weren't total slackers, you could secure a licence as quickly as any other paperwork (ideally on the same day). Now we're talking eight weeks.

Second off, they plan to impose a rather draconical measure: Currently, to get a licence you have to produce evidence you're not just filing in paperwork to get a gun but you're actually engaged in the activity the gun is meant for.

For example, as a competition shooter you have to provide documentation you are a regular member of a shooting club. Now, they'd like to turn that one-time requirement into a permanent requirement, which seems to suggest once you stop being a regular for whatever reason, you could lose your licence.

This is clearly designed to harass gun owners. It's got nothing to do with the Halle attacks or the criminal situation in this country.

Thirdly, they want to ban rifle magazines holding more than ten rounds and handgun magazines for more than twenty rounds. Pure harassment again! As though it were rocket science to change mags in between series of shots.

But the worst blow of the package is their intention to rewrite the law governing the licencing process. You'll be able to spot the hot potato right away when I tell you they wish to replace the words "must be granted unless" with "can be granted". This plan contradicts any notions of legal certainty or due process. Theoretically, the agent you're dealing with could deny a licence just because they don't like you.

The gun owner's association has sent the government a letter of protest by its 2 million members, hopefully that'll open their eyes.

Their plans are particularly egregious considering how detached they are from the alleged "cause". This wasn't an attack by someone who'd abused a legally owned firearm, ostensibly exposing the weaknesses of the law in the process. He'd built his own bloody weapon! Their entire catalogue of measures couldn't have stopped him.

I hope a compromise can be reached that doesn't go beyond the first part, which is the utmost of what I could live with. But I fear the worst.

 

[HisRoyalHighness]

That's still being debated, and our government seems at least willing to sit down with gun owners' representatives and talk things through, but the list is quite F***ed-up.

First, they want to introduce an extensive background check, which I'm told is 100% going to come.

Up to now, all you needed to have was a clean criminal record – but now they want to include a query whether or not the counter-terrorism office has got a file on you. In fairness, a licence holder was already liable to losing their licence should their name appear in the list of violence-prone extremists, so it's kinda difficult to argue against the closing of an obvious gap in the law, but it's going to string the licencing process out something terrible. And it's probably going to be more expensive as well.

If the agents in your local town hall weren't total slackers, you could secure a licence as quickly as any other paperwork (ideally on the same day). Now we're talking eight weeks.

Second off, they plan to impose a rather draconical measure: Currently, to get a licence you have to produce evidence you're not just filing in paperwork to get a gun but you're actually engaged in the activity the gun is meant for.

For example, as a competition shooter you have to provide documentation you are a regular member of a shooting club. Now, they'd like to turn that one-time requirement into a permanent requirement, which seems to suggest once you stop being a regular for whatever reason, you could lose your licence.

This is clearly designed to harass gun owners. It's got nothing to do with the Halle attacks or the criminal situation in this country.

Thirdly, they want to ban rifle magazines holding more than ten rounds and handgun magazines for more than twenty rounds. Pure harassment again! As though it were rocket science to change mags in between series of shots.

But the worst blow of the package is their intention to rewrite the law governing the licencing process. You'll be able to spot the hot potato right away when I tell you they wish to replace the words "must be granted unless" with "can be granted". This plan contradicts any notions of legal certainty or due process. Theoretically, the agent you're dealing with could deny a licence just because they don't like you.

The gun owner's association has sent the government a letter of protest by its 2 million members, hopefully that'll open their eyes.

Their plans are particularly egregious considering how detached they are from the alleged "cause". This wasn't an attack by someone who'd abused a legally owned firearm, ostensibly exposing the weaknesses of the law in the process. He'd built his own bloody weapon! Their entire catalogue of measures couldn't have stopped him.

I hope a compromise can be reached that doesn't go beyond the first part, which is the utmost of what I could live with. But I fear the worst.

Keep us updated on this matter and good luck.

PITTSBURGH’S ILLEGAL GUN ORDINANCES STRUCK DOWN

Chief Counsel Joshua Prince of the Firearms Industry Consulting Group, a division of Civil Rights Defense Firm, P.C., was successful in obtaining a decision by Judge James of the Allegheny County Court of Common Pleas, striking down all three of Pittsburgh’s illegal ordinances – 2018-1218, 2018-1219, and 2018-1220 – which unlawfully regulated firearms and ammunition in the City of Pittsburgh.

Pittsburgh’s Illegal Gun Ordinances Struck Down

Chief Counsel Joshua Prince of the Firearms Industry Consulting Group, a division of Civil Rights Defense Firm, P.C., was successful in obtaining a decision by Judge James of the Allegheny County C…

blog.princelaw.com

Nice.

 

[primer]

Technical peril that these new laws introduce also need consideration.

So Jack accidentally peppers Freds ass. It goes to court. Bingo all judge sees it terrorist steel shot instead of environment friendly= Extra fine or length on his sentence.

If you start a big fire or shoot someone on public land without a permit to be there even though the permit is stupidly free to get all Jack had to do was fill in a one minute form online = Extra fine or length on his sentence as proven in trials and sentencing.

Well respected medical profession is now in the line of the legal sights. Clealry when one fails to predict the next murder with a firearm they are in for it.

 

[muck]

Keep us updated on this matter and good luck.

The government has moved today a bill containing the extended background check and the magazine size cap be read the first time in parliament. The press reports make no mention of the other amendments, so I hope they're not lurking in there as well, but they could still press them by way of ordinances.

Unfortunately, this subject was not declared a 'matter of conscience', so the MPs are obliged to vote in accordance with their side's policy or face the removal of the whip. In other words, the bill is highly unlikely to be defeated. Goddamnit.

 

[bdpopeye]

Whats the Average price of a Pistol , Rifle , Shotgun in per state in America ???

I don't know. But I do know that Farm & Fleet has stores in Iowa, Wisconsin,Minnesota also North & South Dakota . Anyone with a permit can go to any Farm & Fleet and buy any of the weapons in the link;

https://www.fleetfarm.com/category/hunting/firearms/_/N-3970765060