Assault rifles and military-style semi-automatics have been banned in New Zealand

[=XDC=FluphyBunny]

I have never understood how an assault rifle can be passed as legal, what is the legal purpose of owning one?

Yeah same for cars that are capable of breaking the speed limit.

 

[ianh]

Just because you can be responsible with such a thing, doesn’t mean the the aggregate of society can or will be.

That’s why it’s reasonable and sensible to prohibit certain things, like hand grenades. It’s not sensible to allow the general public to own them, because whilst most people might just use them for fun - at some point, it’s likely someone will use them to cause harm or crime. With such an object it’s very very easy to wreak havoc, so the argument for banning them ultimately outweighs the argument for allowing them.

Just like we banned the trucks, knifes and pressure cookers terrorists have used to kill over 100 people in various incidents in the UK and US, that is we SHOULD have done if we follow the logic that YOU use in the quote above.

Lets be honest, people are scared of guns and want them banned and nothing anyone will ever say or do will change that, regardless of the legal reasons we've given so many times in this thread, so why even bother having this conversation?

 

[Screeeech]

You know there absolutely no chance of hearing a reasonable argument for allowing assault rifles into the hands of the public, when comparisons are drawn against useful everyday things (such as cars) the argument is lost.

 

[SPG]

Because one day you might get sad and decide to shoot people.... with your plinking guns you might kill someone easy enough but within 3-4 reloads your on the ground with a head wound.

We do not need guns on UK streets for the general public its beyond stupid infact its beyond brexit stupid.

Just even asking that qurstion is stupid tbh.

 

[Dis86]

You know there absolutely no chance of hearing a reasonable argument for allowing assault rifles into the hands of the public, when comparisons are drawn against useful everyday things (such as cars) the argument is lost.

Again, guns are useful to some people. How many times does that have to be stated before you learn to read?

 

[Dis86]

Because one day you might get sad and decide to shoot people.... with your plinking guns you might kill someone easy enough but within 3-4 reloads your on the ground with a head wound.

We do not need guns on UK streets for the general public its beyond stupid infact its beyond brexit stupid.

Just even asking that qurstion is stupid tbh.

One day you might get sad and decide to fly a plane in to people. Drive a car in to people. Not stop your train at the signals...

Ban trains, planes and automobiles!

 

[Rich1988]

Yeah same for cars that are capable of breaking the speed limit.

which is why we will have GPS enforced speed restrictions and mandatory telematics before too long you can be sure of that

 

[Screeeech]

Just like we banned the trucks, knifes and pressure cookers terrorists have used to kill over 100 people in various incidents in the UK and US, that is we SHOULD have done if we follow the logic that YOU use in the quote above.

Of course, in your selective highlighting - you completely miss the fact that I was specifically referring to objects such as assault rifles and hand grenades in a specific context, specifically due to their ability to "wreak havoc" because when you weigh up the risks vs benefits, the risks outweigh the benefits, hence why most countries make grenades and semi-automatic assault rifles illegal.

Embarking on a strawman argument, with some weird logic that apparently means we should also ban trucks and pressure cookers, gets you absolutely nowhere.

 

[Screeeech]

Again, guns are useful to some people. How many times does that have to be stated before you learn to read?

I think you need to read, I've never said that guns are not useful, indeed I don't think all guns should be banned, if the specific controls are in place, I have absolutely no problem with bolt-action rifles, shotguns and other firearms. The opinions I have are framed in the context of the title of the thread, which relates to semi-automatic assault rilfes, which I think should be absolutely prohibited to everybody but the military and armed police.

I'll also point out I'm a member of a US gun club, and shoot all the time.

 

[Dis86]

hence why most countries make grenades and semi-automatic assault rifles illegal.

I'm not sure that's true. Could you provide evidence?

 

[dowie]

You know there absolutely no chance of hearing a reasonable argument for allowing assault rifles into the hands of the public, when comparisons are drawn against useful everyday things (such as cars) the argument is lost.

Exactly, this was pointed out earlier but people are still popping up with the “but what about cars” argument...

 

[Dis86]

I think you need to read, I've never said that guns are not useful, indeed I don't think all guns should be banned, if the specific controls are in place, I have absolutely no problem with bolt-action rifles, shotguns and other firearms. The opinions I have are framed in the context of the title of the thread, which relates to semi-automatic assault rilfes.

You said when comparisons are drawn against useful things. That implies guns are not useful.

 

[Screeeech]

You said when comparisons are drawn against useful things. That implies guns are not useful.

I mean you're just trolling - it's clear what I meant,

 

[Dis86]

I mean you're just trolling - it's clear what I meant,

Then why didn't you write what you mean? Because what youve written means something completely different.

 

[stockhausen]

Lets be honest, people are scared of guns . . .

I don't think that people are scared of guns so much as the loonies who want to use them to kill others.

If only one could reliably distinguish between the crazed homicidal maniacs and the people who are scared of wildlife and paper targets . . .

 

[Lord-Jaffa]

Pretty much the exact response I expected.

Because nobody can do it - nobody can successfully advance an argument, that explains why it’s sensible to allow members of the general public to own assault rifles.

Deflection is the best you can do.

Since they never had an issue with them before a non citizen abused the current laws, modified weapons illegally, then committed an illegal act for his own mental reasons. Wouldn't the appropriate response have been to limit gun licenses to citizens of NZ only? Perhaps with mental health checks alongside?

 

[Deluxe1]

Appropriate and sensible responses never happen in situations like this.

 

[BowdonUK]

Banning guns won't stop bad people getting a gun. This guy would have still got a gun even if they were banned.

Look at the gun regulations in this country, especially with handguns, yet still people are holding up shops and killing each other with handguns.

The problem with banning things is you take them out of regulation. It's better for guns to be legal and regulated.

 

[Pants]

Banning guns won't stop bad people getting a gun. This guy would have still got a gun even if they were banned.

Look at the gun regulations in this country, especially with handguns, yet still people are holding up shops and killing each other with handguns.

The problem with banning things is you take them out of regulation. It's better for guns to be legal and regulated.

Gun crime and mass shootings aren't a big problem in the UK so you are kind of running your own point.

 

[SPG]

Or you could just upset the few who want a gun and allowing the majority not have to worry about being shot and just worry about cars, trains or planes or some other nutcases toolkit without all the admininstration costs of looking after guns.

People are stupid, which makes guns stupid.