United States & Gun Control discussion.

[pardus]

Yes but what you said was "semi autos" and you can have semi auto non E Cats on your A Cat. We both know the laws are rubbish let's just leave it there.

Yes and you addressed that in your first post and I said Id follow that up, then you added a bunch of other stuff that needed to be addressed because it's bollocks. Shit isn't going to be left alone because you dont want to talk about it on this site, accuracy is important regardless of feelings, yours and mine included.

 

[Salt USMC]

UNITED STATES and gun control discussion
Wankers!

 

[SpitfireV]

s20 (2) Arms Act.

The holding of a firearms licence shall not in itself entitle any person to have a pistol or a military style semi-automatic firearm or a restricted weapon in that person's possession.

So we go to the interpretation.

military style semi-automatic firearm means a firearm (other than a pistol) that is—

• (a)a semi-automatic firearm having 1 or more of the following features:
  
  • (i)a folding or telescopic butt:
    
  • (ii)a magazine designed to hold 0.22-inch rimfire cartridges that—
    
    • (A)is capable of holding more than 15 cartridges; or
      
    • (B)is detachable, and by its appearance indicates that it is capable of holding more than 15 cartridges:
      
  • (iii)a magazine (other than one designed to hold 0.22-inch rimfire cartridges) that—
    
    • (A)is capable of holding more than 7 cartridges; or
      
    • (B)is detachable, and by its appearance indicates that it is capable of holding more than 10 cartridges:
      
  • (iv)bayonet lugs:
    
  • (v)a flash suppressor:
    
  • (vi)a component of a kind defined or described by an order under section 74A as a pistol grip for the purposes of this definition; or
    

• (b)a semi-automatic firearm of a make and model declared by an order under section 74A to be a military style semi-automatic firearm for the purposes of this Act; or
  

• (c)a semi-automatic firearm of a description declared by an order under section 74A to be a military style semi-automatic firearm for the purposes of this Act; or
  

• (d)a semi-automatic firearm that has a feature of a kind defined or described in an order under section 74A as a feature of military style semi-automatic firearms for the purposes of this Act
  

part—

• (a)in relation to a pistol, restricted weapon, or military style semi-automatic firearm, includes any thing, such as a butt, stock, magazine, silencer, or sight, which, while not essential for the discharge by a pistol, restricted weapon, or military style semi-automatic firearm of any shot, bullet, missile, or other projectile, is designed or intended to be an integral part of a pistol, restricted weapon, or military style semi-automatic firearm; and
  

• (b)in relation to any other firearm, means the action for that firearm
  

So we can see that a firearms licence holder with a semi auto that does not have the features listed above can be owned on an A Cat licence. This means that your initial statement of:

I originally come from a country where you must now justify why you need a semi auto rifle, if you say self defense you'll be automatically disqualified and may never be allowed to own a firearm of any description again, if your answer is hunting it will be declared an invalid reason.

The fact is, is that when you apply for your initial licence they do not ask you about semi autos because that licence covers such a wide variety of types. They do ask intention but it is not in respect of any particular type of firearm. Hence your statement that hunting is an invalid reason is incorrect because hunting is in fact a valid reason for your A Cat licence. As you can own semi autos on said A Cat licence your statement that you now need to justify having a semi auto is incorrect unless specifically talking about the E Cat MSSAs which you were not. "Want" is also a valid reason to apply for said endorsement as under s29 (2)(b) Applications for Endorsements In Respect of Pistols and Restricted Weapons if you are a collector or want to collect:

Any person, being an applicant for a firearms licence or a holder of a firearms licence, may apply at an Arms Office to a member of the Police for an endorsement permitting that person to have possession of a pistol or a restricted weapon (other than an anti-personnel mine or a cluster munition) in his capacity as—

• (a)a member of an incorporated pistol shooting club for the time being recognised by the Commissioner for the purposes of this section; or
  

• (b)a bona fide collector of firearms; or
  

• (c)a person to whom the pistol or restricted weapon has special significance as an heirloom or memento; or
  

• (d)the Director or Curator of a bona fide museum; or
  

• (e)an approved employee or approved member of any body, being—
  
  • (i)a broadcaster within the meaning of the Broadcasting Act 1989; or
    
  • (ii)a bona fide theatre company or society or cinematic or television film production company or video recording production company; or
    

• (f)a licensed dealer or an agent or employee of a licensed dealer; or
  

• (g)a person of a class specified for the purposes of this section by regulations made under this Act.
  
  
  
  

Hence, suck on my baaaaalls Mainlander.

 

[SpitfireV]

UNITED STATES and gun control discussion
Wankers!

We own your country now. Prepare for HM to sit on your colonial faces!

 

[pardus]

Thanks for the clarification on the A vs E cat.

When I made my statement about about semi's I was referring to E cat (military style semi auto) though I didn't state that, which was my error.
Which invalidates your hunting reason crowing, and I will state again "because I want one" is not a valid reason to have an E cat license. You must have a valid reason in the eyes of the law such as you posted.

Above all that, remember I'm a Mainlander, not a pigislander meaning I will always be right and you'll always be a cunt.

Thanks for looking up the act.

s20 (2) Arms Act.



So we go to the interpretation.



So we can see that a firearms licence holder with a semi auto that does not have the features listed above can be owned on an A Cat licence. This means that your initial statement of:



The fact is, is that when you apply for your initial licence they do not ask you about semi autos because that licence covers such a wide variety of types. They do ask intention but it is not in respect of any particular type of firearm. Hence your statement that hunting is an invalid reason is incorrect because hunting is in fact a valid reason for your A Cat licence. As you can own semi autos on said A Cat licence your statement that you now need to justify having a semi auto is incorrect unless specifically talking about the E Cat MSSAs which you were not. "Want" is also a valid reason to apply for said endorsement as under s29 (2)(b) Applications for Endorsements In Respect of Pistols and Restricted Weapons if you are a collector or want to collect:



Hence, suck on my baaaaalls Mainlander.

 

[SpitfireV]

I know mate, I know. I think it's my middle name in fact.

 

[pardus]

I know mate, I know. I think it's my middle name in fact.

I can't drink that anymore...

 

[pardus]

I edited my original post to add "military style" which fixes the last 20 posts in this thread lol

 

[SpitfireV]

I can't drink that anymore...

Fuckin' fussy cunt LOL.

(Summit is OK, the Gold Medal I can't either).

I edited my original post to add "military style" which fixes the last 20 posts in this thread lol

Cunnnnt.

 

[policemedic]

My analysis of the learned discussion of New Zealand firearms law is that it's fucked up to have to ask the police for permission to have a gun.

I like civilians owning guns; it tends to make my job easier.

 

[SpitfireV]

Meh, I look at it like a plane or a car personally. I don't have an issue with licencing but some of the laws thereafter are pretty fucked.

 

[pardus]

My analysis of the learned discussion of New Zealand firearms law is that it's fucked up to have to ask the police for permission to have a gun.

I like civilians owning guns; it tends to make my job easier.

It is made very clear that a firearms license is a privilege and not a right.

Guns are seen by "society" as being bad, to the point that gun clubs/right's activists etc... have adopted anti gun rights views in a desperate attempt to be allowed to own and use anything at all.

 

[CQB]

It seems even tighter than here ,and that's saying quite a lot.

 

[pardus]

It seems even tighter than here ,and that's saying quite a lot.

You are banned from semi autos 100% though right?

 

[CQB]

Pistol grip is the thing I think you're referring to. They're tightly controlled esp. the importation of same but you can have a semi w/o a pistol grip IMO & be ok. I'd have to find chapter & verse to be accurate but generally it's strict, with background checks to get a license and wotnot but not to the degree of strangulation. To hunt there's a whole new regime come into place, which I'm looking into ATM.
The National Parks & Wildlife Service (NPWS) have instigated an eradication programme of feral animals. Y'know we're lousy with them, goats, pigs, foxes, feral cats & dogs, camels & brumbies. There's a lot out there & the NPWS are looking for volunteers, but I digress.
Gun crime has been on a downhill path for about 10 years in NSW but still is in the public eye due to ME crime gangs who brass up each others houses. They bring in measures which seem to affect the average user, not the dickheads.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gun_politics_in_Australia

OK found it, Wiki I know but pretty good look at the differet categories. Cat C is the answer you're after.

 

[Brill]

It is made very clear that a firearms license is a privilege and not a right.

Someone has to look out for the personal welfare of the sheep in NZ!

 

[Brill]

Live in DC and want to buy a gun? Easy! Go through any DC FFL. (There aren't any.)

http://p.washingtontimes.com/news/2014/feb/19/dc-mom-takes-gun-case-to-supreme-court/

 

[0699]

No and your argument is terrible. It doesn't make any sense.

I am not sure how to answer that. Owning a firearm carries more responsibility than going to church.

Edit: racing kitty said it better than me.

I'm not arguing, I'm asking a question you didn't answer. Instead you changed the subject. Sounds very familiar...

EDIT: I just want to know what side of the line you stand on.

 

[Marine0311]

Should there be required training before I give a speech in public, or join a church?

Serious question. Why should the execution of one right require training, but not others?

No.

This right carries more responsibility than the others.

 

[Marine0311]

I'm not arguing, I'm asking a question you didn't answer. Instead you changed the subject. Sounds very familiar...

EDIT: I just want to know what side of the line you stand on

I answered again above as I can't seem to muti quote.

I don't know what you mean by "sounds very......"?

What side do I stand on? If I did not answer your question again to your satisfaction let me know and I will answer again in a different way.