Here is an excellent video regarding how NZ (and some other countries) refuse to issue licenses to people to own a firearm if they say they would use it for "self defense."
I know the liberals/progressives here in the U.S. would love to have these anti-self defense laws passed here.
Here is an excellent video regarding how NZ (and some other countries) refuse to issue licenses to people to own a firearm if they say they would use it for "self defense."
"Self-defense" is not a valid purpose to own one. It doesn't mean you're banned from using it in self-defense if a situation required it.
I would bet that in New Zealand you're not allowed to carry around any type of item whatsoever if you are carrying it specifically for the purpose of self-defense. But you would be allowed to use an item you are carrying for another legitimate purpose, in self-defense, if need be.
Laws like this are pretty common across the world.
In 2006, my wife and I went to New Zealand, to hunt for Chamois, Tahr, and Red Stag. Our flight to Queenstown was diverted due to weather to Invercargill, at the south end of the South Island. We had to take a bus to Queenstown. Upon arriving, we walked the several blocks to our hotel, with luggage and rifle case in tow, down the main street. There was not so much as a sidelong glance toward us and the rifle case!
Here is an excellent video regarding how NZ (and some other countries) refuse to issue licenses to people to own a firearm if they say they would use it for "self defense."
"Self-defense" is not a valid purpose to own one. It doesn't mean you're banned from using it in self-defense if a situation required it.
I would bet that in New Zealand you're not allowed to carry around any type of item whatsoever if you are carrying it specifically for the purpose of self-defense. But you would be allowed to use an item you are carrying for another legitimate purpose, in self-defense, if need be.
Laws like this are pretty common across the world.
self defense IS the reason to own firearms...…..bob
self defense IS the reason to own firearms...…..bob
Nonsense, there's also the reasons of fun, collecting, hunting, sport, and offense. Some people also buy them ostensibly for one of the former reasons, but really more as a symbol of liberty and power.
In any case I'm pretty sure no one ever bought a .257 Roberts for "self-defence".
Of course, look at all of the far-left socialists/marxists who have plowed money into 'Alpine redoubts' over there. You think they didn't purchase a government to reflect their personal politics, too??
Here is an excellent video regarding how NZ (and some other countries) refuse to issue licenses to people to own a firearm if they say they would use it for "self defense."
"Self-defense" is not a valid purpose to own one. It doesn't mean you're banned from using it in self-defense if a situation required it.
I would bet that in New Zealand you're not allowed to carry around any type of item whatsoever if you are carrying it specifically for the purpose of self-defense. But you would be allowed to use an item you are carrying for another legitimate purpose, in self-defense, if need be.
Laws like this are pretty common across the world.
Exactly right. You can in a life or death situation use a firearm to protect yourself or one of your loved ones from death or grievous bodily harm. Self defence is a basic human right. The gun laws are designed to stop those with criminal records and crazies such as the mentally sick from getting access to firearms. Works well and NZ has a very low level of gun related crime from legal gun owners considering the huge amount of firearm ownership here.
"Works well and NZ has a very low level of gun related crime from legal gun owners considering the huge amount of firearm ownership here."
Exactly - "legal gun owners" .
You don't seem to get the correlation between LEGAL and not committing gun related crimes. According to the video above far more gun related crimes are committed in NZ by those whe ILLEGALLY posses firearms. Criminals, crazies, etc. by very definition are not going do the law bit.
So keeping upright people from legally owning a firearm for possible self defense is going to help this how? Your onerous "screening" prevents rightous people from having an effective tool for an undeniable right, but sure doesn't seem to prevent illegal possession. There, as here, it is a burden on sane, honest people, and no prevention to speak of for those who are not. They will find a way.
[quote=Crockettnj]NJ basically negates a persons right to self defense using a firearm. No castle law, no CCW, no stand your ground...
Gun =yo uare wrong. Sucks. This place sucks.
Ya know what, I am so freaking done with NJ.
Hey, Crockett, Whereabouts in New Jersey are you? I’m up near Frenchtown, cross the river in PA. I have family and friends that live in Jersey, the gun laws do suck but you can still have a 50 BMG :-)
Here is an excellent video regarding how NZ (and some other countries) refuse to issue licenses to people to own a firearm if they say they would use it for "self defense."
"Self-defense" is not a valid purpose to own one. It doesn't mean you're banned from using it in self-defense if a situation required it. ..."
I would submit that preventing people from owning firearms for "self defense" would throw up a very thick psychological barrier for MOST of the NZ citizens to actualy use a gun for self defense, even if under a dire threat. I believe the possibility of going to prison for using one's firearm for self defense, would cause a person to hesitate long enough for the "bad guy(s)" to harm or kill him or her. "Lag time" in a rapidly deteriorating deadly situation can prevent the person from making that decision to aim and pull the trigger.
Well, all I can say is that I have a gut feeling many here do have a firearm for self defence but won't admit to it on any legal document. I may be wrong about that because we don't have the problem you guys have with criminals being armed. Some are obviously, but they tend to be gang members and drug dealers who deal with their own kind.
Well, all I can say is that I have a gut feeling many here do have a firearm for self defence but won't admit to it on any legal document. I may be wrong about that because we don't have the problem you guys have with criminals being armed. Some are obviously, but they tend to be gang members and drug dealers who deal with their own kind.
So you have to lie to your Government to have a fire arm for self preservation............Freedom at it highest level!!
The simple fact is that we don't need to have firearms for self defence because no one threatens us. The last home invasion where someone was killed happened over 20 years ago. That's the point that some of you guys don't seem to understand.
The simple fact is that we don't need to have firearms for self defence because no one threatens us. The last home invasion where someone was killed happened over 20 years ago. That's the point that some of you guys don't seem to understand.
News flash, you just had over 40 people killed! So YES, you do obviously need guns for self-defense!
Had any of them been armed and willing fight back, those numbers would have been greatly reduced!
You ignore the fact that guns don't kill anyone. Evil people kill. There are untold numbers of people who prevented attacks because they had the means to protect themselves, a loved one or a total stranger. Thank god for America's 2nd Amendment Right to Bear Arms. Too bad none of those killed in New Zealand had that same right!
The simple fact is that we don't need to have firearms for self defence because no one threatens us. The last home invasion where someone was killed happened over 20 years ago. That's the point that some of you guys don't seem to understand.
Sounds like paradise. I would imagine there is no need for policemen in new Zealand?
The simple fact is that we don't need to have firearms for self defence because no one threatens us. The last home invasion where someone was killed happened over 20 years ago. That's the point that some of you guys don't seem to understand.
Sounds like paradise. I would imagine there is no need for policemen in new Zealand?
And if there is, why do you need them?
We need cops because we have law breakers but those lawbreakers don't go around threatening people with a gun. Generally, low life criminals such as meth peddlers and the like will sometimes shoot at a cop trying to arrest them or whatever but not at the public.
Originally Posted by Dixie_Rebel
News flash, you just had over 40 people killed! So YES, you do obviously need guns for self-defense!
Had any of them been armed and willing fight back, those numbers would have been greatly reduced!
You ignore the fact that guns don't kill anyone. Evil people kill. There are untold numbers of people who prevented attacks because they had the means to protect themselves, a loved one or a total stranger. Thank god for America's 2nd Amendment Right to Bear Arms. Too bad none of those killed in New Zealand had that same right!
The last time there was shooting such as this was in 1990 when a guy shot up his little seaside town killing 15. Cops killed him. Hardly a daily occurrence.
We need cops because we have law breakers but those lawbreakers don't go around threatening people with a gun. Generally, low life criminals such as meth peddlers and the like will sometimes shoot at a cop trying to arrest them or whatever but not at the public.
That's great. You guys must have a different kind of meth than we do. Our public knows all too well about meth heads.
But if the cops didn't exist, your meth heads wouldn't have anything to shoot at correct? You may be able to achieve total nirvana. Just thinking out loud.
The simple fact is that we don't need to have firearms for self defence because no one threatens us. The last home invasion where someone was killed happened over 20 years ago. That's the point that some of you guys don't seem to understand.
Sounds like paradise. I would imagine there is no need for policemen in new Zealand?
And if there is, why do you need them?
We need cops because we have law breakers but those lawbreakers don't go around threatening people with a gun. Generally, low life criminals such as meth peddlers and the like will sometimes shoot at a cop trying to arrest them or whatever but not at the public.
Originally Posted by Dixie_Rebel
News flash, you just had over 40 people killed! So YES, you do obviously need guns for self-defense!
Had any of them been armed and willing fight back, those numbers would have been greatly reduced!
You ignore the fact that guns don't kill anyone. Evil people kill. There are untold numbers of people who prevented attacks because they had the means to protect themselves, a loved one or a total stranger. Thank god for America's 2nd Amendment Right to Bear Arms. Too bad none of those killed in New Zealand had that same right!
The last time there was shooting such as this was in 1990 when a guy shot up his little seaside town killing 15. Cops killed him. Hardly a daily occurrence.
Point is, there IS going to be a next time when it happens again. Why not be prepared to limit the loss of life. Good men with guns should not be feared by big brother government. You'd rather a loved one be gun down because it isn't a daily occurrence? Be prepared to defend your life before something happens.
The only trouble with that logic is that with everyone carrying it's easy for some hot head to lose it and settle an argument with a gun. Then it becomes like the wild west.
The only trouble with that logic is that with everyone carrying it's easy for some hot head to lose it and settle an argument with a gun. Then it becomes like the wild west.
but you just said??????
Quote
lawbreakers don't go around threatening people with a gun.
The only trouble with that logic is that with everyone carrying it's easy for some hot head to lose it and settle an argument with a gun. Then it becomes like the wild west.
You simply don't understand. The 2nd Amendment Right to Bear Arms.
You'd rather a hot head pull a gun (like they just did and kill 40+ people) instead of allowing responsible people the ability to protect themselves. I choose to protect myself and loved ones instead of being a helpless sheep hoping it doesn't happen.
Exactly right. You can in a life or death situation use a firearm to protect yourself or one of your loved ones from death or grievous bodily harm. Self defence is a basic human right. The gun laws are designed to stop those with criminal records and crazies such as the mentally sick from getting access to firearms. Works well and NZ has a very low level of gun related crime from legal gun owners considering the huge amount of firearm ownership here.
The only trouble with that logic is that with everyone carrying it's easy for some hot head to lose it and settle an argument with a gun. Then it becomes like the wild west.
but you just said??????
Quote
lawbreakers don't go around threatening people with a gun.
That is because most of their crims come here, more opportunity I suppose.
The simple fact is that we don't need to have firearms for self defence because no one threatens us. The last home invasion where someone was killed happened over 20 years ago. That's the point that some of you guys don't seem to understand.
Sounds like paradise. I would imagine there is no need for policemen in new Zealand?
Point is, there IS going to be a next time when it happens again. Why not be prepared to limit the loss of life. ... .... Be prepared to defend your life before something happens.
so how would some of the folks here be with every NZ muslim man and woman carrying an AR just like the perp had...?
that would be considered 'legally arming terrorists who want to kill infidels'.. in some CF minds.
The only trouble with that logic is that with everyone carrying it's easy for some hot head to lose it and settle an argument with a gun. Then it becomes like the wild west.
but you just said??????
Quote
lawbreakers don't go around threatening people with a gun.
No they don't because they're not armed. Don't know of anyone personally who has ever been threatened with a firearm. Not in my little town anyway.
I've been using shotguns, handguns and rifles for over fifty years. Used go rabbit shooting when I was a kid with a .22 slung over my shoulder. Riding through town on my bike heading out in to the countryside, people would wave out and say good luck hunting' and such like. A kid can't do that anymore and hasn't been able to for a long time either. Someone is bound to phone the police and report they've just seen someone with a GUN.
Unfortunately that's the way it is today. As hookeye says, 'things don't stay nice forever'.
You simply don't understand. The 2nd Amendment Right to Bear Arms.
You'd rather a hot head pull a gun (like they just did and kill 40+ people) instead of allowing responsible people the ability to protect themselves. I choose to protect myself and loved ones instead of being a helpless sheep hoping it doesn't happen.
I understand perfectly your 2nd Amendment Right to Bear Arms. I've also lived in RI and I'll wager I've seen more of the U.S. than 95% the members of the campfire.
Tell me if you will, do think the average citizen carries a gun to church in the U.S. assuming they go to one?
One Incident and now no one has the right to protect themselves anyone, the Drug dealers, buglers, and Criminals in Nz would be so happy to hear this.
No you can rob someone and the most they can do is call the cops who are usually late to the scene. Maybe i should move to NZ. LOL.
Some misunderstanding here. You still have the right to protect yourself in a life or death situation. That won't change. The present government is not trying to ban all firearms. They've just indicated that they want to ban semi-automatic rifles. If there is a change, it will be to ban military style, thirty shot mag assault rifles. No changes to firearms laws have occurred yet. That's politicians for you; they have to be seen to do something in the wake of the tragedy last Friday. Still they'll have a fight on their hands as those that have an interest in those type of firearms won't role over easily.
Zeissman. I do. I did yesterday. Actually, it's one of the places I feel most vulnerable. We have a divorce going on in our church. The husband is unstable, nut job. The wife, her parents, and brothers family attend. Great place to find them all.
Couple that with, A crowd, Backs to the door, Limited escape routes, Christians. (Not really a thing here, but who knows).
Unbelievable to consider this in a country church of 50 people. But, here we are......
I think the point that Zeissman is trying to get across is that NZ has been, and will continue to be a relatively safe place where there is no need to go about armed or to hold a gun for protection against an undefined threat.
One reason for this is the lack of guns in the general population when compared to America.
50 people killed in NZ is a terrible thing to happen. The last one was 1990, then 2019 - 29 years between mass shooting events.
50 people killed is a fraction of the gun deaths in the US each year where 29 months between mass shooting events is unlikely.
Think about relative safety and need for guns to 'protect' yourself. Perhaps other countries have a better attitude than some, perhaps they still have some sense of 'community' instead of their citizens constantly looking to their individual 'rights' rather than their collective responsibilities?
Originally Posted by 12344mag
Originally Posted by zeissman
Well, all I can say is that I have a gut feeling many here do have a firearm for self defence but won't admit to it on any legal document. I may be wrong about that because we don't have the problem you guys have with criminals being armed. Some are obviously, but they tend to be gang members and drug dealers who deal with their own kind.
So you have to lie to your Government to have a fire arm for self preservation............Freedom at it highest level!!
Still no answer on that gun control question?
You sir, are an idiot.
Lets see how well you go holding out against just your local Sheriff's force, let alone state or federal law enforcement. This attitude of 'we will not abide government tyranny and have guns to fight it' is rubbish. A small professionally trained team will overcome a large, disorganised and untrained force any given night. You and your militia buddies are disorganised rabble.
My visits to NZ suggest it is a very free and egalitarian part of the world to live in. Perhaps you should get out of the lower 48 a bit?
The simple fact is that we don't need to have firearms for self defence because no one threatens us. The last home invasion where someone was killed happened over 20 years ago. That's the point that some of you guys don't seem to understand.
News flash, you just had over 40 people killed! So YES, you do obviously need guns for self-defense!
Had any of them been armed and willing fight back, those numbers would have been greatly reduced!
You ignore the fact that guns don't kill anyone. Evil people kill. There are untold numbers of people who prevented attacks because they had the means to protect themselves, a loved one or a total stranger. Thank god for America's 2nd Amendment Right to Bear Arms. Too bad none of those killed in New Zealand had that same right!
It was extremely rare incident so no one expected it and didn't feel the need to arm themselves. Especially here in NZ which WAS considered one of the safest places in the world. Firearm deaths per capita in the U.S. far outnumber any other western nation. Why do you think that is? Could it be because of your 2nd Amendment Right to Bear Arms?
Originally Posted by Adamjp
I think the point that Zeissman is trying to get across is that NZ has been, and will continue to be a relatively safe place where there is no need to go about armed or to hold a gun for protection against an undefined threat.
The simple fact is that we don't need to have firearms for self defence because no one threatens us. The last home invasion where someone was killed happened over 20 years ago. That's the point that some of you guys don't seem to understand.
In 2012 you had 52,937 Unlawful entry with intent/burglary, break and enter.
2006: Greg Carvell shot a machete-wielding Ricky Beckham, 29, in the stomach with a handgun at his father's Penrose gunshop. Police charged him with possession of a pistol for unlawful purposes but in June 2007 the charges were dismissed.
April 2009: The owner of Tokoroa's Aotea Chinese Restaurant and Takeaways, Zhuo Feng Jiang, wrestled a semi-automatic .22 rifle off a masked robber and shot him in the leg. Police decided against charging Mr Jiang.
A 68-year-old Auckland pharmacist at the centre of a police investigation into the death of an intruder in his store has been through a "very, very traumatic" ordeal, his family said last night.
25 Aug, 2010: The Herald understands pharmacist Grant Gillard - who was confronted by the burglar in his shop early yesterday - struggled with the man and was holding him down before he went into cardiac arrest.
Police tried to revive the middle-aged man - who has not been identified - but he died on the floor of the Mt Albert pharmacy. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Here is an excellent video regarding how NZ (and some other countries) refuse to issue licenses to people to own a firearm if they say they would use it for "self defense."
I know the liberals/progressives here in the U.S. would love to have these anti-self defense laws passed here.
The simple fact is that we don't need to have firearms for self defence because no one threatens us. The last home invasion where someone was killed happened over 20 years ago. That's the point that some of you guys don't seem to understand.
In 2012 you had 52,937 Unlawful entry with intent/burglary, break and enter.
2006: Greg Carvell shot a machete-wielding Ricky Beckham, 29, in the stomach with a handgun at his father's Penrose gunshop. Police charged him with possession of a pistol for unlawful purposes but in June 2007 the charges were dismissed.
April 2009: The owner of Tokoroa's Aotea Chinese Restaurant and Takeaways, Zhuo Feng Jiang, wrestled a semi-automatic .22 rifle off a masked robber and shot him in the leg. Police decided against charging Mr Jiang.
A 68-year-old Auckland pharmacist at the centre of a police investigation into the death of an intruder in his store has been through a "very, very traumatic" ordeal, his family said last night.
25 Aug, 2010: The Herald understands pharmacist Grant Gillard - who was confronted by the burglar in his shop early yesterday - struggled with the man and was holding him down before he went into cardiac arrest.
Police tried to revive the middle-aged man - who has not been identified - but he died on the floor of the Mt Albert pharmacy. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
A little less than 20 years ago.
None of those are home invasions that resulted in murder. So a burglar died of cardiac arrest. Another one got shot in the leg. Another shot in the guts. All survived. Terrible statistics for 4.5 million people for 13 years wouldn't you say.
The simple fact is that we don't need to have firearms for self defence because no one threatens us. The last home invasion where someone was killed happened over 20 years ago. That's the point that some of you guys don't seem to understand.
News flash, you just had over 40 people killed! So YES, you do obviously need guns for self-defense!
Had any of them been armed and willing fight back, those numbers would have been greatly reduced!
You ignore the fact that guns don't kill anyone. Evil people kill. There are untold numbers of people who prevented attacks because they had the means to protect themselves, a loved one or a total stranger. Thank god for America's 2nd Amendment Right to Bear Arms. Too bad none of those killed in New Zealand had that same right!
It was extremely rare incident so no one expected it and didn't feel the need to arm themselves. Especially here in NZ which WAS considered one of the safest places in the world. Firearm deaths per capita in the U.S. far outnumber any other western nation. Why do you think that is? Could it be because of your 2nd Amendment Right to Bear Arms?
Originally Posted by Adamjp
I think the point that Zeissman is trying to get across is that NZ has been, and will continue to be a relatively safe place where there is no need to go about armed or to hold a gun for protection against an undefined threat.
Well said and dead right.
I could only guess where you pull your stats! Suicides, gangbangers shooting each other, accidentals, etc. etc. are all conveniently thrown in to skew the numbers to fit the narrative of the left wingers. Without the 2nd Amendment, our government would be changed into a socialist cesspool and all the great things about the US and it's influence of on the world (that includes you) would go to hell in short order!
I'm glad you made it through the US, unscathed, from all of our wild west shootings...but it's like anywhere else in the world: you better know where you feet are taking you, because there is plenty of bad spots to avoid, regardless of the continent you are currently perched upon.
New Zealand is one of my top 3 places to visit for a length of stay before I leave this earth and that hasn't changed. Don't let your politicians take away your torches & pitch forks for fighting off the nighttime beasties, especially when the politicians themselves are the biggest beasties you'll likely encounter! I think I'll keep the 2nd Amendment and risk the wild west, thank you!
Firearm deaths per capita in the U.S. far outnumber any other western nation. Why do you think that is? Could it be because of your 2nd Amendment Right to Bear Arms?
The problem in America with gun violence isn't a problem of our ethnically European population. It's a non-White problem, mostly Blacks who (even though they make up only 15% of the population) account for a whopping half of our murder and violent crime rate annually (the majority of the remainder is accounted for by our Mestizo population). Statistics on American violent crime that only account for White Americans look like those of Denmark, Belgium, Norway, etc..
You simply don't understand. The 2nd Amendment Right to Bear Arms.
You'd rather a hot head pull a gun (like they just did and kill 40+ people) instead of allowing responsible people the ability to protect themselves. I choose to protect myself and loved ones instead of being a helpless sheep hoping it doesn't happen.
I understand perfectly your 2nd Amendment Right to Bear Arms. I've also lived in RI and I'll wager I've seen more of the U.S. than 95% the members of the campfire.
Tell me if you will, do think the average citizen carries a gun to church in the U.S. assuming they go to one?
Originally Posted by zeissman
Originally Posted by Dixie_Rebel
You simply don't understand. The 2nd Amendment Right to Bear Arms.
You'd rather a hot head pull a gun (like they just did and kill 40+ people) instead of allowing responsible people the ability to protect themselves. I choose to protect myself and loved ones instead of being a helpless sheep hoping it doesn't happen.
I understand perfectly your 2nd Amendment Right to Bear Arms. I've also lived in RI and I'll wager I've seen more of the U.S. than 95% the members of the campfire.
Tell me if you will, do think the average citizen carries a gun to church in the U.S. assuming they go to one?
Originally Posted by zeissman
Originally Posted by Dixie_Rebel
You simply don't understand. The 2nd Amendment Right to Bear Arms.
You'd rather a hot head pull a gun (like they just did and kill 40+ people) instead of allowing responsible people the ability to protect themselves. I choose to protect myself and loved ones instead of being a helpless sheep hoping it doesn't happen.
I understand perfectly your 2nd Amendment Right to Bear Arms. I've also lived in RI and I'll wager I've seen more of the U.S. than 95% the members of the campfire.
Tell me if you will, do think the average citizen carries a gun to church in the U.S. assuming they go to one?
Originally Posted by zeissman
Originally Posted by Dixie_Rebel
You simply don't understand. The 2nd Amendment Right to Bear Arms.
You'd rather a hot head pull a gun (like they just did and kill 40+ people) instead of allowing responsible people the ability to protect themselves. I choose to protect myself and loved ones instead of being a helpless sheep hoping it doesn't happen.
I understand perfectly your 2nd Amendment Right to Bear Arms. I've also lived in RI and I'll wager I've seen more of the U.S. than 95% the members of the campfire.
Tell me if you will, do think the average citizen carries a gun to church in the U.S. assuming they go to one?
Originally Posted by zeissman
Originally Posted by Dixie_Rebel
You simply don't understand. The 2nd Amendment Right to Bear Arms.
You'd rather a hot head pull a gun (like they just did and kill 40+ people) instead of allowing responsible people the ability to protect themselves. I choose to protect myself and loved ones instead of being a helpless sheep hoping it doesn't happen.
I understand perfectly your 2nd Amendment Right to Bear Arms. I've also lived in RI and I'll wager I've seen more of the U.S. than 95% the members of the campfire.
Tell me if you will, do think the average citizen carries a gun to church in the U.S. assuming they go to one?
Originally Posted by zeissman
Originally Posted by Dixie_Rebel
You simply don't understand. The 2nd Amendment Right to Bear Arms.
You'd rather a hot head pull a gun (like they just did and kill 40+ people) instead of allowing responsible people the ability to protect themselves. I choose to protect myself and loved ones instead of being a helpless sheep hoping it doesn't happen.
I understand perfectly your 2nd Amendment Right to Bear Arms. I've also lived in RI and I'll wager I've seen more of the U.S. than 95% the members of the campfire.
Tell me if you will, do think the average citizen carries a gun to church in the U.S. assuming they go to one?
Yes, I carry in church. Because I have the right to defend myself. In fact, I was asked to carry by the pastor!
You simply don't understand. The 2nd Amendment Right to Bear Arms.
You'd rather a hot head pull a gun (like they just did and kill 40+ people) instead of allowing responsible people the ability to protect themselves. I choose to protect myself and loved ones instead of being a helpless sheep hoping it doesn't happen.
I understand perfectly your 2nd Amendment Right to Bear Arms. I've also lived in RI and I'll wager I've seen more of the U.S. than 95% the members of the campfire.
Tell me if you will, do think the average citizen carries a gun to church in the U.S. assuming they go to one?
Originally Posted by zeissman
Originally Posted by Dixie_Rebel
You simply don't understand. The 2nd Amendment Right to Bear Arms.
You'd rather a hot head pull a gun (like they just did and kill 40+ people) instead of allowing responsible people the ability to protect themselves. I choose to protect myself and loved ones instead of being a helpless sheep hoping it doesn't happen.
I understand perfectly your 2nd Amendment Right to Bear Arms. I've also lived in RI and I'll wager I've seen more of the U.S. than 95% the members of the campfire.
Tell me if you will, do think the average citizen carries a gun to church in the U.S. assuming they go to one?
Originally Posted by zeissman
Originally Posted by Dixie_Rebel
You simply don't understand. The 2nd Amendment Right to Bear Arms.
You'd rather a hot head pull a gun (like they just did and kill 40+ people) instead of allowing responsible people the ability to protect themselves. I choose to protect myself and loved ones instead of being a helpless sheep hoping it doesn't happen.
I understand perfectly your 2nd Amendment Right to Bear Arms. I've also lived in RI and I'll wager I've seen more of the U.S. than 95% the members of the campfire.
Tell me if you will, do think the average citizen carries a gun to church in the U.S. assuming they go to one?
Originally Posted by zeissman
Originally Posted by Dixie_Rebel
You simply don't understand. The 2nd Amendment Right to Bear Arms.
You'd rather a hot head pull a gun (like they just did and kill 40+ people) instead of allowing responsible people the ability to protect themselves. I choose to protect myself and loved ones instead of being a helpless sheep hoping it doesn't happen.
I understand perfectly your 2nd Amendment Right to Bear Arms. I've also lived in RI and I'll wager I've seen more of the U.S. than 95% the members of the campfire.
Tell me if you will, do think the average citizen carries a gun to church in the U.S. assuming they go to one?
Originally Posted by zeissman
Originally Posted by Dixie_Rebel
You simply don't understand. The 2nd Amendment Right to Bear Arms.
You'd rather a hot head pull a gun (like they just did and kill 40+ people) instead of allowing responsible people the ability to protect themselves. I choose to protect myself and loved ones instead of being a helpless sheep hoping it doesn't happen.
I understand perfectly your 2nd Amendment Right to Bear Arms. I've also lived in RI and I'll wager I've seen more of the U.S. than 95% the members of the campfire.
Tell me if you will, do think the average citizen carries a gun to church in the U.S. assuming they go to one?
Originally Posted by zeissman
Originally Posted by Dixie_Rebel
You simply don't understand. The 2nd Amendment Right to Bear Arms.
You'd rather a hot head pull a gun (like they just did and kill 40+ people) instead of allowing responsible people the ability to protect themselves. I choose to protect myself and loved ones instead of being a helpless sheep hoping it doesn't happen.
I understand perfectly your 2nd Amendment Right to Bear Arms. I've also lived in RI and I'll wager I've seen more of the U.S. than 95% the members of the campfire.
Tell me if you will, do think the average citizen carries a gun to church in the U.S. assuming they go to one?
Yes, I carry in church. Because I have the right to defend myself. In fact, I was asked to carry by the pastor!
As do I, my wife in the choir...and as our pastor does..in the pulpit.
I think the point that Zeissman is trying to get across is that NZ has been, and will continue to be a relatively safe place where there is no need to go about armed or to hold a gun for protection against an undefined threat.
One reason for this is the lack of guns in the general population when compared to America.
50 people killed in NZ is a terrible thing to happen. The last one was 1990, then 2019 - 29 years between mass shooting events.
50 people killed is a fraction of the gun deaths in the US each year where 29 months between mass shooting events is unlikely.
Think about relative safety and need for guns to 'protect' yourself. Perhaps other countries have a better attitude than some, perhaps they still have some sense of 'community' instead of their citizens constantly looking to their individual 'rights' rather than their collective responsibilities?
Originally Posted by 12344mag
Originally Posted by zeissman
Well, all I can say is that I have a gut feeling many here do have a firearm for self defence but won't admit to it on any legal document. I may be wrong about that because we don't have the problem you guys have with criminals being armed. Some are obviously, but they tend to be gang members and drug dealers who deal with their own kind.
So you have to lie to your Government to have a fire arm for self preservation............Freedom at it highest level!!
Still no answer on that gun control question?
You sir, are an idiot.
Lets see how well you go holding out against just your local Sheriff's force, let alone state or federal law enforcement. This attitude of 'we will not abide government tyranny and have guns to fight it' is rubbish. A small professionally trained team will overcome a large, disorganised and untrained force any given night. You and your militia buddies are disorganised rabble.
My visits to NZ suggest it is a very free and egalitarian part of the world to live in. Perhaps you should get out of the lower 48 a bit?
So, you think our founding father were fools, creating the 2A, they made a mistake and its time to abolish it for the betterment of all? Now this is it, the world is a violent place, guns or not. maybe bloody wars have been fought and billions have died without the help of guns, Humans are very creative, they will find another way to get evil done and you all we will guns were still legal for all.
Remember the Brits were repelled by iron smiths, farmer etc. because they had the knowledge of many guns. Do not be deceived politrickians are always with security details who carry guns, they are protected, live in a nice and safe environment. so they don't face the same challenges like the common man. they pretend that they understand how it feels when a 19year old girl is walking home from school or work and don't feel safe. all the antigun activist will change their minds if one of their family member got killed by illegals or due to the fact that they live in a state that couldn't allow them to lawfully carry weapons. Newzealand, is s small country and doesn't face the same challenges we do so its senseless to use the same ruler to measure the level of fairness for both country.
Adamjp - " I think the point that Zeissman is trying to get across is that NZ has been, and will continue to be a relatively safe place where there is no need to go about armed or to hold a gun for protection against an undefined threat.
One reason for this is the lack of guns in the general population when compared to America.
50 people killed in NZ is a terrible thing to happen. The last one was 1990, then 2019 - 29 years between mass shooting events.
50 people killed is a fraction of the gun deaths in the US each year where 29 months between mass shooting events is unlikely. ..."
How"clever" of you and Zeissman to [u]not[/u] use populations of the two countries to make your assumptions. New Zeeland has +/- 4,900,000 people living there: the United States has +/- 310,000,000 people, NOT including +/- 20,000,000 illegal aliens. It can only stand to logical reason that the United States will have more violent crime, often committed by criminals with guns, than New Zeeland.
But, on a per capita basis, what percentage of NZ residents own firearms? As many per capita as the citizens of the United States?? That would be an interesting figure to consider in your absurd assumption that NZ has little violent crime compared to the U.S., because you have such strict restrictions on firearms. I can assure you that -- although it'll never happen -- if NZ had 310,000,000 citizens plus 20,000,000 illegal aliens of all races, cultures, religions and non-religions, you'd have the same rates of violent crime we have here in the U.S.
Gun control only disarms the honest people. Criminals do not bother to obey the anti-firearms laws and it is absolute nonsense to think they do. Liberals are unable to understand this axiomatic fact.
If you're going to debate, try to debate logically.
The simple fact is that we don't need to have firearms for self defence because no one threatens us. The last home invasion where someone was killed happened over 20 years ago. That's the point that some of you guys don't seem to understand.
Sounds like paradise. I would imagine there is no need for policemen in new Zealand?
And if there is, why do you need them?
In case of American visitors
Always good to feel "at home". . In that case, how about importing a few thousand 2-legged ghetto rats from the US to make us comfy.....
Oh- you didn't mean it like that....
As to "lying to your government" - who doesn't? Somehow. Governments lie to the citizens - turnabout is fair.... Have at it!
The thing about NZ is not only is it small, but it is also about as "diverse" as the US was maybe 60 years ago - a time when the US was pretty crime-free as well. But instead of being 15% African, NZ has Maoris. The Maoris don't seem to be nearly as prone to criminality as our AAs. And of course, just as in the US, the Asian population is mostly law-abiding.
All in all, the talk I'm reading from our Kiwi friends is amazingly similar to the way Swedes put Americans down BEFORE Sweden had *any* minorities!
Traveling to NZ must be like stepping into a time machine for Americans.
Guns and gun ownership do not cause crime. Quite the reverse in fact. When Florida passed carry law, violent crime there against US citizens went down (as it has most everywhere) - that against certainly unarmed foreign visitors went up. IIRC, even burglary with homeowners present went down. Gee - I wonder why....
Switzerland comes to mind also. Few people, guns everywhere, and largely a mono-culture. Very low crime rate. Unless you count banks.....
Statistically - hardly anyone (per capita) in the US needs a gun for self defense. Until they do. That is the whole point of 2A.
My liberal brother ( the one that keeps borrowing my long guns) once made the statement to the effect that, "The only reason for a hangun is to kill people."
To which my youngest brother replied, "And if killing time comes around, I want to be sure to have one!"
Note the "if" - Not "when". Potential sure-thing victim vs not-so-much victim mindsets. Both are semi-honest people.... outside politics, anyway.
Everyone, everywhere is a potential victim; some more than others.
Just because I'm paranoid, or not paranoid, doesn't mean someone is not out to get me.
A cop 10 or 15 minutes away isn't going to do a damned bit of good either, until (maybe) after the fact, nor is an over-all low crime rate any protection. It just allows sheep to remain sheep (sorry- I couldn't help the reference. ), and the jackels an easy time.
People in most countries do not realize how thin law enforcement is in most of the US, urban and rural. Police reaction times of fifteen min. is considered good in most jurisdictions, rural areas are much worse. Many counties are huge and deputies on duty can be as few as one or two at night. Since most violent crimes are over in a few minutes or even seconds being unarmed borders on negligence.
Most people in the US don't either. Many villages in Alaska have NO LE on hand. Some have an unarmed "Public Safety Officer". Or at least that was the case. After one was shot and killed, I believe they are now "allowed" to go officially armed.
State Toopers have to be brought in (usuallty air- sometimes boat or snow machine) from larger towns to investigate (reported) crime - and if the weather acts up, that could take a couple days, not "just" 15 minutes... A single trooper may have an area larger than some entire states to cover, with dozens or hundreds of roadless miles between population centers. But not that many people.
And communication even within the LE can get interesting. Several years ago, 2 troopers were shot/killed in Tanana, a small Yukon River village. Nearest trooper station (Headquarters) was Fairbanks, a couple hundred miles away. For the first couple hours, a woman in Tanana was texting updates to her sister in Kotzebue (a coworker of my wife), who was then passing it on to the Fairbanks ST office. We had two ST stationed in Kotzebue at the time, but Hdqtrs had to be in the loop. I don't know if the Kotz guys were in the loop, or even in town.
At any rate, the lines of communication got shortened after a time, but it still took several hours for other troopers to fly into Tanana from Fairbanks.
Lets see how well you go holding out against just your local Sheriff's force, let alone state or federal law enforcement. This attitude of 'we will not abide government tyranny and have guns to fight it' is rubbish. A small professionally trained team will overcome a large, disorganised and untrained force any given night. You and your militia buddies are disorganised rabble.
My visits to NZ suggest it is a very free and egalitarian part of the world to live in. Perhaps you should get out of the lower 48 a bit?
The only idiots I see are the ones posting saying their world isn't changing with their influx of muslims.
I know several on my local Sheriff's office, I've seen how they shoot, only 2 or 3 are gonna be any sort of problem..............Besides I don't expect my local Sheriff Dept to be any sort of a problem at all.
I don't have any Militia buddies, I don't even think I know anyone in the Michigan Militia.
People in most countries do not realize how thin law enforcement is in most of the US, urban and rural. Police reaction times of fifteen min. is considered good in most jurisdictions, rural areas are much worse. Many counties are huge and deputies on duty can be as few as one or two at night. Since most violent crimes are over in a few minutes or even seconds being unarmed borders on negligence.
By the response to the New Zealand shooter I would say the response time was a little slow there as well.
The thing about NZ is not only is it small, but it is also about as "diverse" as the US was maybe 60 years ago - a time when the US was pretty crime-free as well. But instead of being 15% African, NZ has Maoris. The Maoris don't seem to be nearly as prone to criminality as our AAs. And of course, just as in the US, the Asian population is mostly law-abiding.
All in all, the talk I'm reading from our Kiwi friends is amazingly similar to the way Swedes put Americans down BEFORE Sweden had *any* minorities!
Traveling to NZ must be like stepping into a time machine for Americans.
The simple truth is that blacks are responsible for a hugely disproportionate percentage of crime in the US, and nobody will even admit it, let alone do something about it. It makes the rest of us look bad, because they drive gun crimes up a LOT. The rest of the world thinks were a bunch of gunslingers. The millions involved in shooting sports, with a very low accident rate, defies that implication.
The simple truth is that blacks are responsible for a hugely disproportionate percentage of crime in the US, and nobody will even admit it, let alone do something about it.
All the statistics I see point to that. I wonder what the gun death stats would look like if you removed gun deaths from just blacks and suicides. My bet is it would be dramatic.
The thing about NZ is not only is it small, but it is also about as "diverse" as the US was maybe 60 years ago - a time when the US was pretty crime-free as well. But instead of being 15% African, NZ has Maoris. The Maoris don't seem to be nearly as prone to criminality as our AAs. And of course, just as in the US, the Asian population is mostly law-abiding.
All in all, the talk I'm reading from our Kiwi friends is amazingly similar to the way Swedes put Americans down BEFORE Sweden had *any* minorities!
Traveling to NZ must be like stepping into a time machine for Americans.
The simple truth is that blacks are responsible for a hugely disproportionate percentage of crime in the US, and nobody will even admit it, let alone do something about it. It makes the rest of us look bad, because they drive gun crimes up a LOT. The rest of the world thinks were a bunch of gunslingers. The millions involved in shooting sports, with a very low accident rate, defies that implication.
I think we have two different views of government (particularly the crown) based upon our national experiences.
We Yanks figure there is no harm in law abiding citizens being well armed. The onus to prove why a person is unfit is upon the government. Who cares if the government isn’t currently a problem they will become one and its our responsibility to stop them.
Kiwis didn’t have to throw off the crown forcibly and didn’t have big toothy mammalian predators to exterminate while settling. They’ve had relative peace amongst the citizenry largely due to its homogeneous nature.
The world is getting smaller ya might wanta reconsider...
The simple truth is that blacks are responsible for a hugely disproportionate percentage of crime in the US, and nobody will even admit it, let alone do something about it.
All the statistics I see point to that. I wonder what the gun death stats would look like if you removed gun deaths from just blacks and suicides. My bet is it would be dramatic.
No, he is not spot on. He doesn't understand or can't comprehend the lack of firearms crime here and assumes that everybody is in danger 24/7.
I have been reading your posts and as a rural Western Canadian things are similar here, we have high firearm ownership, little crime, our homes are unlocked. I don't need a firearm to protect me from an intruder, except for the Grizzlies, there are no security issues. I always have a truck gun- always. I am a card carrying Conservative, active in firearm and wildlife issues. It is not written in to our constitution but there would be a fight and we won't give these up. We never rollover. I haved travelled and rodeo'd in similar country in western USA and feel we are very similar. Yup, there should be extensive background checks for first time firearm owners , imo. New Canadians in particular. Especially, City folks...I don't understand any of them, no matter the nationality.
I could only guess where you pull your stats! Suicides, gangbangers shooting each other, accidentals, etc. etc. are all conveniently thrown in to skew the numbers to fit the narrative of the left wingers. Without the 2nd Amendment, our government would be changed into a socialist cesspool and all the great things about the US and it's influence of on the world (that includes you) would go to hell in short order!
I'm glad you made it through the US, unscathed, from all of our wild west shootings...but it's like anywhere else in the world: you better know where you feet are taking you, because there is plenty of bad spots to avoid, regardless of the continent you are currently perched upon.
New Zealand is one of my top 3 places to visit for a length of stay before I leave this earth and that hasn't changed. Don't let your politicians take away your torches & pitch forks for fighting off the nighttime beasties, especially when the politicians themselves are the biggest beasties you'll likely encounter! I think I'll keep the 2nd Amendment and risk the wild west, thank you!
Fair enough. You make some good and pertinent points. I've travelled extensively all over the world, mostly when I was younger. You're right, there's plenty of bad spots to avoid, regardless of the continent. I was robbed twice in the U.S. However, I put that down to my naivety at the time. I was just careless and too trusting.
Yup, there should be extensive background checks for first time firearm owners , imo. New Canadians in particular. Especially, City folks...I don't understand any of them, no matter the nationality.
I hear you. Most city folk are a different breed. I found the rural American and Canadians really nice, decent and friendly people. Same with the Aussies. We all have a lot in common and culture and lifestyles are virtually identical; only the accent changes.
I think we have two different views of government (particularly the crown) based upon our national experiences.
We Yanks figure there is no harm in law abiding citizens being well armed. The onus to prove why a person is unfit is upon the government. Who cares if the government isn’t currently a problem they will become one and its our responsibility to stop them.
Kiwis didn’t have to throw off the crown forcibly and didn’t have big toothy mammalian predators to exterminate while settling. They’ve had relative peace amongst the citizenry largely due to its homogeneous nature.
The world is getting smaller ya might wanta reconsider...
You make perfect sense. The gun owners here aren't about to roll over easily though. The problem here currently after the mosque shooting is the almost hysterical, non firearm public and media, mostly urbanites who consider gun owners as crazy lunatics anyway. Semi-autos must be banned they chant. 99% of them wouldn't know one from a bolt action or an air rifle. Complete and utter ignorance.
I'm well aware of the high black crime ratio in the U.S. that makes stats look worse than they otherwise would. When I was twice robbed in the states both perps were black. Hey, I'm not supposed to say that though as it's not PC - yeah, right.
I couldn't care any less as to the state of the state of New Zealand.
That figures.
Why? Do you want someone outside your family telling what to do? As far as the 'feelings' aspect of it, I'll go to a candlelight vigil. That seems to be the cure all for everything with emotional types.
I couldn't care any less as to the state of the state of New Zealand.
That figures.
I am completely opposite, this is so tragic and any suggestion otherwise is heartless, it must be assessed. I don't agree that it should be done strictly by a urban, antiseptic panel. Rural folks see firearms as an essential tool, a endlessly interesting one...but a tool, I have a shop full of tools, tools that make other tools. We have to make every opportunity to reach this to the office workers, lawyers, clerks or ? that populate these cities. Like I said earlier, with the immigration we see these days , any potential first time owner should be thoroughly vetted....before they get here( and after) . It is doable,imo.
I couldn't care any less as to the state of the state of New Zealand.
That figures.
I am completely opposite, this is so tragic and any suggestion otherwise is heartless, it must be assessed. I don't agree that it should be done strictly by a urban, antiseptic panel. Rural folks see firearms as an essential tool, a endlessly interesting one...but a tool, I have a shop full of tools, tools that make other tools. We have to make every opportunity to reach this to the office workers, lawyers, clerks or ? that populate these cities. Like I said earlier, with the immigration we see these days , any potential first time owner should be thoroughly vetted....before they get here( and after) . It is doable,imo.
So people are heartless if they don't want to involve themselves with another country's politics?
I couldn't care any less as to the state of the state of New Zealand.
That figures.
Why? Do you want someone outside your family telling what to do? As far as the 'feelings' aspect of it, I'll go to a candlelight vigil. That seems to be the cure all for everything with emotional types.
Ha, ha, you've got a good sense of humor there Steelhead. I agree about the emotional types and I'm getting mighty sick of the fawning media here and others who wouldn't have given a muslim or most other people a hello a week or two back.
I couldn't care any less as to the state of the state of New Zealand.
That figures.
I am completely opposite, this is so tragic and any suggestion otherwise is heartless, it must be assessed. I don't agree that it should be done strictly by a urban, antiseptic panel. Rural folks see firearms as an essential tool, a endlessly interesting one...but a tool, I have a shop full of tools, tools that make other tools. We have to make every opportunity to reach this to the office workers, lawyers, clerks or ? that populate these cities. Like I said earlier, with the immigration we see these days , any potential first time owner should be thoroughly vetted....before they get here( and after) . It is doable,imo.
So people are heartless if they don't want to involve themselves with another country's politics?
Steelhead, this is an international issue and thread. It is too easy to brush it off these days...pretty sure you are not heartless. I stand corrected.
The simple fact is that we don't need to have firearms for self defence because no one threatens us. The last home invasion where someone was killed happened over 20 years ago. That's the point that some of you guys don't seem to understand.
.
Sounds like paradise. I would imagine there is no need for policemen in new Zealand?
And if there is, why do you need them?
Well they evidently do need policemen to oppress the subjects. It appears there are no Citizens in New Zealand. Just subjects of the crown.
Seems most Americans today forget that our conservative forbears mostly disarmed the United States during the late 19th and early 20th centuries. In the common sense, common man view it was decided that, by and large, citizens had no need to be armed in day to day living.
Look back to 1975 and see how many Americans had the lawful right to carry a concealed handgun in major American cities. And granted, a lot of the U.S. allowed open carry but that liberty was seldom practical and even more seldom exercised.
The U.S. and New Zealand. Different folks, different paths...
If we could return America to it's 1965 ways how many would choose to do so? I might...
New Zealand will no doubt act emotionally, crunch down even harder with more stringent gun laws.
They'll never get rid of all guns, no matter how hard they try: law breakers will break laws and will have what they want.
That will just create more soft targets, won't solve a thing.
Given the fact that you can't eliminate all guns, that some will always be in the hands of those who would do crazy stuff, then the only reasonable alternative is to harden soft targets.
How that is done depends on what they choose to do. Soft targets will always be soft targets, an opportunity for mass murder.
Hardened targets bite back. A perp may shoot one or two, not 50 with time to reload, go back for more ammo, etc.
NZ needs to hire a consultant from Israel to show them what they need to do. But, they first need to have the will. Doubtful.
It’s called virtue signalling and is very popular with the progressives in the US and Europe
These types deep down are devoid of any real compassion or charity for their fellow citizens unless it can benefit them in some way.
Good luck with your gun control your strict or formerly strict immigration and the fact that you live on a remote island has allowed your population to remain extremely naive
Beautiful country though I must say
Originally Posted by zeissman
Originally Posted by Steelhead
Originally Posted by zeissman
Originally Posted by Steelhead
I couldn't care any less as to the state of the state of New Zealand.
That figures.
Why? Do you want someone outside your family telling what to do? As far as the 'feelings' aspect of it, I'll go to a candlelight vigil. That seems to be the cure all for everything with emotional types.
Ha, ha, you've got a good sense of humor there Steelhead. I agree about the emotional types and I'm getting mighty sick of the fawning media here and others who wouldn't have given a muslim or most other people a hello a week or two back.
The simple fact is that we don't need to have firearms for self defence because no one threatens us. The last home invasion where someone was killed happened over 20 years ago. That's the point that some of you guys don't seem to understand.
What happens when someone like Hitler, Stalin or Obama lies their way into office and you need firearms to defend your liberty? We learned this lesson when we were ruled by King George and our privately owned firearms allowed us to defeat tyranny.
What happens when someone like Hitler, Stalin or Obama lies their way into office and you need firearms to defend your liberty? We learned this lesson when we were ruled by King George and our privately owned firearms allowed us to defeat tyranny.
We're not completely stupid. They wouldn't get past first base.
It’s called virtue signalling and is very popular with the progressives in the US and Europe
These types deep down are devoid of any real compassion or charity for their fellow citizens unless it can benefit them in some way.
Good luck with your gun control your strict or formerly strict immigration and the fact that you live on a remote island has allowed your population to remain extremely naive
Beautiful country though I must say
Originally Posted by zeissman
Originally Posted by Steelhead
Originally Posted by zeissman
Originally Posted by Steelhead
I couldn't care any less as to the state of the state of New Zealand.
That figures.
Why? Do you want someone outside your family telling what to do? As far as the 'feelings' aspect of it, I'll go to a candlelight vigil. That seems to be the cure all for everything with emotional types.
Ha, ha, you've got a good sense of humor there Steelhead. I agree about the emotional types and I'm getting mighty sick of the fawning media here and others who wouldn't have given a muslim or most other people a hello a week or two back.
It's called being more concerned with your country, period. I don't care what lawmakers do 12,000 miles away. I have bigger fish to fry.
Carry your denial self on over to bestgore.com, go to page two or three to see the light, it's even bright enough for a blind man such as yourself to see AND hear.
What happens when someone like Hitler, Stalin or Obama lies their way into office and you need firearms to defend your liberty? We learned this lesson when we were ruled by King George and our privately owned firearms allowed us to defeat tyranny.
We're not completely stupid. They wouldn't get past first base.
![[Linked Image]](https://i.imgur.com/WWJUWJT.jpg)