Breath of common sense from the Kiwis!

B

Bruce in West Oz

New member
Betcha the phonelines between Canberra and New Zealand will be running hot tonight!!

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR>Subject: NEWS - NZ study on military-style firearms
Evening Post Wellington New Zealand
29 June 2000

Military-style weapons ban would be ineffective
By CLAIRE GUYAN

Banning military-style weapons would not reduce serious firearm crimes. Instead the use of imitation firearms should be given more attention, research by Victoria University recommends. The Government is preparing to introduce a Bill to ban civilian ownership of military-style semi-automatic weapons and start a compulsory buyback of those weapons.

However, the study of 747 firearm-related offences in 1996 revealed that none involved the use of military-style weapons, while 6 percent involved toy guns. The most common weapons were handguns - featuring in 22 percent of crimes. However, it is suspected many of these may have been imitation. Reece Waiters, from the Institute of Criminology, was commissioned to do the study by the Review Of Firearms Control, chaired by Sir Thomas Thorp in 1997, which recommended the ban on military-style weapons.

Mr Walters, in a report released today, said such a ban could not be justified on the evidence. "It may be politically expedient or socially palatable to ban [military-style weapons], yet such measures are destined to
have little effect when reducing the incidence of firearm-related crime and injury." He also took issue with another review recommendation to temporarily stop people with firearm convictions holding a gun licence. His research revealed many firearms used in serious crime were stolen - potentially 52.4 percent - which meant such a ban would have little impact on crime. Instead, Mr. Walters said, the research reinforced the need to educate firearm owners to secure weapons.[/quote]

Where were these "academics" when we needed them!!??!!

B
 
Bruce, I hope it's not too late for the truth to come out and make a difference for you guys down under. I'm also praying that we can open some eyes before it't too late here.

I sometimes wonder if these people are naturally stupid or if they go to school to learn how to be stupid.
 
Where were they when you needed them? Probably the same place they are now. I think the quotation in the article says it all.

"It may be politically expedient or socially palatable to ban [military-style weapons]..."

Unfortunately those two forces often have more weight than either common sense or acting on the basis of careful research.

------------------
Jim Fox
 
My sentiments exactly, JimFox.

Don't expect reason and rationality to win out when you can still get mileage out of Dunblane.
 
I dropped 'em a favorable comment at:

editor@evpost.co.nz

I also sent them a copy of what's going on in Kalif as a contrast.

Might be a good idea to let 'em know the power of the Internet.

[This message has been edited by Oatka (edited June 30, 2000).]
 
"Bzzz. Bzzz."
"Hello"
"We're from the Aussie government. We see that you have not voluntarily complied with the compulsory military-style firearms buyback."
"Oh yeah, I got your buyback - right here!" Bang! Bang! Rat-a-tat-tat.
 
<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by mussi:
Not quite. They still permit silencers, AFAIK.[/quote]

NZ's not very free with respect to guns, but it's all right for a former British possession. You have to have a license to own or possess gun, though licenses, such as they are, are pretty much granted fairly. There is some sort of safety class one has to take, but it isn't outrageous in time or money as those things go. Lots of people have the license.

This common license allows you to buy or possess any long gun of what they call "sporting" type. They mean, no semi-autos. But bolt action, etc., is fine. There's no waiting period on purchase as I understand things.

Handguns is where it starts to get silly. You have to be a member of a "club" of some kind, and for a while. Six months, a year. Even then the thing has to have a 4" barrel.

Semi-autos, rifles or handguns, can be owned in principle but they require a special license of their own. _That_ involves the standard nonsense about "need", and also an expensive storage requirement. You have to have a large safe, or a secure room. Police are supposed to inspect it once a year.

Of course self-defense is not a reason one "needs" a gun in New Zealand. Why would anyone need a gun to protect themselves, after all?

Semi-autos are always called "military style" guns by the government. Unless you're a cop or connected you can forget about those.

I guess NZ's most like Canada among the former colonies when it comes to guns, but more laid back. I don't think they have a registry there, and it's not the sort of thing likely to generate a lot of momentum at the present time is my guess.

Whatever they do about "military style" guns would be pretty much cosmetic anyway, though, since they're effectively prohibited now as it is.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top