Debate about Gun Control

[Odin]

(08-18-2016, 09:48 PM)Copperfield Wrote:

(08-18-2016, 03:45 PM)taramarie Wrote: This should be interesting to those who comment often on this topic. Here is the step by step legal  process on how to gain access to guns in New Zealand. How does it compare to the process in America?

Standard New Zealand firearms licence

Depends on which state you wish to compare it to. The US has local, county, state and federal firearm laws/ordinances to comply with.

If you are asking for opinions on New Zealand's firearm licensing law, it appears to be a giant pain in the ass. Important points of notice would be New Zealand's particular definition of sporting, which usually end up being amusing attempts by governments to divide up weapons into completely arbitrary groups while demonstrating a minimal knowledge of how those weapons actually operate. For instance, the following is an example of a "sporting shotgun" configuration:



This is a Russian made Saiga 12 shotgun. Now here is an image of my Saiga 12:



Note that functionally this is an identical firearm. The latter picture is closer to the original Saiga 12 configuration. It's a combat shotgun designed for the Russian military. The Russians were smart enough to recognize that by changing a few cosmetics, the shotgun would qualify as a "sporting" firearm. In the case of my Saiga 12, I imported it in a sporting configuration and after a few hours of work reconfigured it back to a more natural configuration along with a few modifications I wanted (and I assure you, it is totally compliant with US ATF regulation 922® and is now legally defined as an "American manufactured firearm"   ). Functionally these are the same shotguns. Legally they aren't.

I noticed New Zealand law also contains a regressive money grab (i.e. registration "fees"). Generally registration fees are a particular government's way of restricting a granted right to only wealthy citizens. In other words, those with more money are more likely to be able to afford the fees and wade through the red tape than are the less wealthy. Since it's your country, if you wish only wealthy individuals to own firearms that's your prerogative. Personally I think it's shitty for a government to grant rights based on wealth. But to each his or her own.

Also, of particular comical note is the provision that states:

You will have difficulty being deemed 'fit and proper' to possess or use firearms if you have: indicated an intent to use a firearm for self-defence.

Self-defense being a natural right of every human being, one has to wonder about the motivations of any political authority attempting to limit any right on the sole basis of "self-defense" especially when self-defense is one of the primary uses for any given firearm or any weapon. To a lesser degree the same goes for storage requirements which hinder self-defense opportunities. It sounds suspiciously like your government owns you and more importantly, they know they own you. If it makes you feel any better, that isn't uncommon in the world.

For what it's worth (and for example), last week my nightly sunset view was this:



Some of the last, actual wilderness left on earth. That's black bear and moose country. Both can be rather ornery this time of year if they are looking out for their young. That's why on trips to camp I always bring my .44 magnum and a box of ammo. It's in my pack *gasp* loaded and unlocked. Locking it up would sorta defeat the purpose; using it if, God forbid, I ever needed to.

Nice huge cigar you got there!