doublegunshop.com - home
Posted By: Gregdownunder New Zealand firearms law - 01/05/20 04:23 AM
As there appears to be some interest, I thought I would give an update on the current state of our gun laws post the Christchurch terror attack.
I apologise if this is somewhat off topic but if you have no interest please just ignore this post.

No great surprise, in the main they are an ill thought out, rushed, knee jerk reaction that tends to target the law abiding not the criminals.
We are still in a state of flux with the new laws being implemented and interpreted, and a tranche of more laws going through parliament as we speak.

OK, as we stand ATM:

“A” category licence (the majority of the shooting population) you can own and use:
Bolt action, lever, and pump centrefire rifles, internal or detachable magazine with a maximum capacity of 10 rounds.
Semi and pump shotguns, no detachable magazines and limited to 5 rounds capacity (based on chamber size)
.22’s of various actions including semi auto limited to 10 rounds.
Security: a regular gun safe or locked cabinet to deter casual burglar or children.
You must attend a firearms safety course, pass a multi question test, have next of kin and referee interviews conducted and be of generally good character.
Renewed every 10 years, no limit on numbers.


B endorsement.
Pistols of various descriptions for different shooting disciplines.
You must be a member of a registered pistol club, and maintain 12 visits a year.
You can only take said pistols from your home to the range and they must only be fired at the range.
Limited to I think 12 pistols, but exemptions can be granted.
Police arms officer will visit annually, and all B endorsed pistols are registered and checked then.
Security is much greater, police approved safes or strong rooms only.

C endorsement
Collectors, the same as B , but you do not need to be a member of a pistol club, however you cannot fire said pistols.
No limit on numbers.


P endorsed licence:
Everything that has now been banned above.
Must be disabled by removing a vital part (firing pin) and stored off premise.
You may be granted a P for some commercial pest control, otherwise if you own them under a P you cannot fire them, much like a C.
This category is new, and there is still much interpretation going on.
Security at the moment same as B and C.

D endorsement:
Dealer of firearms, can stock everything above.

As it stands registration is limited to B, C, and P, however the next tranche wants to register all firearms via an online system which you update yourself.
Not sure how that will work, and is something we are obviously appealing.
Also they are looking at 5 year licences, with tougher criteria to get one.

Anyhow, that’s a basic run down as it stands.


GDU.
Posted By: canvasback Re: New Zealand firearms law - 01/05/20 04:36 AM
It’s my understanding that with 52,000 guns turned in by the deadline, compliance is pretty low so far. What’s the expectation of the governments response to that civil disobedience?
Posted By: craigd Re: New Zealand firearms law - 01/05/20 04:46 AM
Thanks for taking the time to do the writeup. Would you have an idea what the typical cost for your "A" and "B" licenses are? What sort of time delay do you folks face when setting up the various interviews or site visits.

I ask because it seems to me that there are multiple steps in the process that can be used in various ways to make the process discouraging for the average law abiding citizen.
Posted By: keith Re: New Zealand firearms law - 01/05/20 04:49 AM
Originally Posted By: Gregdownunder



.....B endorsement.
Pistols of various descriptions for different shooting disciplines.
You must be a member of a registered pistol club, and maintain 12 visits a year.
You can only take said pistols from your home to the range and they must only be fired at the range.
Limited to I think 12 pistols, but exemptions can be granted.
Police arms officer will visit annually, and all B endorsed pistols are registered and checked then.
Security is much greater, police approved safes or strong rooms only.

C endorsement
Collectors, the same as B , but you do not need to be a member of a pistol club, however you cannot fire said pistols.
No limit on numbers.


P endorsed licence:
Everything that has now been banned above.
Must be disabled by removing a vital part (firing pin) and stored off premise.
You may be granted a P for some commercial pest control, otherwise if you own them under a P you cannot fire them, much like a C.
This category is new, and there is still much interpretation going on.
Security at the moment same as B and C.



As it stands registration is limited to B, C, and P, however the next tranche wants to register all firearms via an online system which you update yourself......



Thank you Gregdownunder. The conflict about gun laws and gun registration in New Zealand arose right after the shooting at Christchurch. I mentioned that gun registration in New Zealand obviously did nothing to prevent that massacre. Stevie SKB, the guy who uses this forum for free advertising of his businesses, jumped in to say I was wrong, and that there is/was (at that point in time) NO GUN REGISTRATION IN NEW ZEALAND.

I corrected him and reminded him that all pistols are registered, and I told him that all Military Style Semi Automatic (MSSA) firearms required a special permit, i.e., another word for registration.

To support his erroneous and false position, Stevie posted a link to a N.Y. Post article that used data from the anti-gunner Philip Alpers and his anti-gun organization GunPolicy.org

Unfortunately, this may ignite another shit-storm. Stevie will call me a liar. And then I will posts direct unedited quotes and links to old threads that prove I am not lying. Stevie's Liberal pals will then try to pile on me for bringing politics to the forum, but they will never complain when he does it. In other words... Just business as usual.

Thanks again. I wish you guys all luck in retaining whatever right or privilege to own and shoot firearms that you possibly can. Unfortunately, we have a lot of liberals here who are blind to the slippery slope of permitting anti-gunners to incrementally take away our rights and freedoms. These guys think that if we give the anti-gunners things like semi-autos, pistols, large cap magazines, etc., that they will stop there, and never threaten other firearm ownership rights. So they are dumb enough to actually support and vote for extreme anti-gun Liberal Left Democrats who infringe upon our Constitutional 2nd Amendment Rights.
Posted By: SKB Re: New Zealand firearms law - 01/05/20 07:18 AM
Thank You Gregg.

This link covers the back and forth between myself and Keith on the subject. Read through to see him repeatedly caught lying.

https://www.doublegunshop.com/forums/ubbthreads.php?ubb=showflat&Number=545822&page=1
Posted By: Gregdownunder Re: New Zealand firearms law - 01/05/20 08:23 AM
Originally Posted By: canvasback
It’s my understanding that with 52,000 guns turned in by the deadline, compliance is pretty low so far. What’s the expectation of the governments response to that civil disobedience?

While the Government is hailing it a success, the reality is yes there are tens of thousands of guns which once were above board and have now gone underground.
Most expect the police to come down hard and make a few public examples, but at the end of the day the net result is an actual increase in now illegal firearms the police have lost control over.
In other words, a failure.
Posted By: Gregdownunder Re: New Zealand firearms law - 01/05/20 08:30 AM
Originally Posted By: craigd
Thanks for taking the time to do the writeup. Would you have an idea what the typical cost for your "A" and "B" licenses are? What sort of time delay do you folks face when setting up the various interviews or site visits.

I ask because it seems to me that there are multiple steps in the process that can be used in various ways to make the process discouraging for the average law abiding citizen.

It was around $200 to apply, with a total timeframe of 6-8 months for approval to come through.
However this was heavily subsidised, with the current govt making it clear its user pays from here on in, so I expect it will get a lot more costly and complicated to obtain and keep a firearms licence.
There is also talk of a fee every time you register a new gun, which will quickly add up for us collectors.
Posted By: Gregdownunder Re: New Zealand firearms law - 01/05/20 08:55 AM
Originally Posted By: keith
Originally Posted By: Gregdownunder



.....B endorsement.
Pistols of various descriptions for different shooting disciplines.
You must be a member of a registered pistol club, and maintain 12 visits a year.
You can only take said pistols from your home to the range and they must only be fired at the range.
Limited to I think 12 pistols, but exemptions can be granted.
Police arms officer will visit annually, and all B endorsed pistols are registered and checked then.
Security is much greater, police approved safes or strong rooms only.

C endorsement
Collectors, the same as B , but you do not need to be a member of a pistol club, however you cannot fire said pistols.
No limit on numbers.


P endorsed licence:
Everything that has now been banned above.
Must be disabled by removing a vital part (firing pin) and stored off premise.
You may be granted a P for some commercial pest control, otherwise if you own them under a P you cannot fire them, much like a C.
This category is new, and there is still much interpretation going on.
Security at the moment same as B and C.



As it stands registration is limited to B, C, and P, however the next tranche wants to register all firearms via an online system which you update yourself......



Thank you Gregdownunder. The conflict about gun laws and gun registration in New Zealand arose right after the shooting at Christchurch. I mentioned that gun registration in New Zealand obviously did nothing to prevent that massacre. Stevie SKB, the guy who uses this forum for free advertising of his businesses, jumped in to say I was wrong, and that there is/was (at that point in time) NO GUN REGISTRATION IN NEW ZEALAND.

I corrected him and reminded him that all pistols are registered, and I told him that all Military Style Semi Automatic (MSSA) firearms required a special permit, i.e., another word for registration.

To support his erroneous and false position, Stevie posted a link to a N.Y. Post article that used data from the anti-gunner Philip Alpers and his anti-gun organization GunPolicy.org

Unfortunately, this may ignite another shit-storm. Stevie will call me a liar. And then I will posts direct unedited quotes and links to old threads that prove I am not lying. Stevie's Liberal pals will then try to pile on me for bringing politics to the forum, but they will never complain when he does it. In other words... Just business as usual.

Thanks again. I wish you guys all luck in retaining whatever right or privilege to own and shoot firearms that you possibly can. Unfortunately, we have a lot of liberals here who are blind to the slippery slope of permitting anti-gunners to incrementally take away our rights and freedoms. These guys think that if we give the anti-gunners things like semi-autos, pistols, large cap magazines, etc., that they will stop there, and never threaten other firearm ownership rights. So they are dumb enough to actually support and vote for extreme anti-gun Liberal Left Democrats who infringe upon our Constitutional 2nd Amendment Rights.

Thanks for your well wishes, it is certainly looking a little grim.
Our best hope at the moment is a change of govt.
Phillip Alpers is no expert on anything, he has just found a soapbox to stand on.
He was a left leaning reporter here in NZ before he left to become a self professed "expert" I'm not sure he is an actual professor either, just honorary.

Yes pistols and MSSA's were registered, of course the latter are now banned.
An interesting thing, you could own a MSSA here before under an A cat licence, but if you had a magazine over 10 rounds you needed an endorsement, effectively meaning it had to be registered.
The net effect of this was once banned, police knew who had the endorsed rifles, but no idea on those kept under an "A" licence.
You are correct the anti gun left will not stop, they will chisel away claiming this and that needs looking at, but ultimately their agenda is a disarmed public.
When the Christchurch shooting happened, the green party (who are actually in power under a coalition govt) wanted to simply ban all firearms!
Luckily even their coalition partners realised this would be a step too far, but it shows how dangerous the greens can be.
Posted By: Gregdownunder Re: New Zealand firearms law - 01/05/20 09:17 AM
You may find it interesting to know, while it generally takes some months to obtain a firearms licence, the Christchurch shooter (a foreign national) obtained one in a record 5 weeks.
Police failed to do the required background checks, never contacted next of kin, and his referees were from some online forum who had never met him!
Other than obviously the shooter himself, the police were squarely to blame for this by not following their own process.
However this has largely been covered up, and I'm not holding my breath the royal commission enquiry will enlighten the public either.
It is indeed a sad state of affairs, the shooter stated that he chose firearms over a bomb or other means of mass killing as he wanted to create maximum societal discord, something he has achieved in spades.
I do not understand why it is so hard for those in power to see the problem is the person, not the tool.
No amount of ill conceived laws impinging on the rights of the law abiding will make us any safer, when the true criminals are laughing all the way to their next crime.

GDU
Posted By: Stanton Hillis Re: New Zealand firearms law - 01/05/20 12:18 PM
Thanks for the accurate and updated information on your struggle for freedom and rights. And it is both, for without the rights, the freedom will disappear.

Your last sentence should hang over the doors of every legislative institution ......

"No amount of ill conceived laws impinging on the rights of the law abiding will make us any safer, when the true criminals are laughing all the way to their next crime."

Bet to you, SRH
Posted By: canvasback Re: New Zealand firearms law - 01/05/20 12:52 PM
Thanks Greg. Interesting. I’m in Canada and our government is trying to do something similar.
Posted By: keith Re: New Zealand firearms law - 01/05/20 12:58 PM
Originally Posted By: SKB


" I told you guns were not registered in New Zealand."

Steve



None of what you say is surprising Gregdownunder. Liberal Left Anti-gunners have been following an almost identical template wherever they get in power.

It's amusing though, that Stevie actually thinks his link and his QUOTE above supports his position after Christchurch that guns were not registered in New Zealand. And clinging to data from a well known anti-gunner like Philip Alpers and his Anti-gun organization Gunpolicy.org to support that position illustrates the root of the problem that unfortunately greased the wheels for Liberal Left Democrats to pursue the same agenda here.

As I have repeatedly said, it does our cause no good when we have guys within our ranks who support and defend anti-gunners, and who attack and denigrate our pro-gun President Donald Trump and the NRA. Equally disturbing is the fact that a number of other guys think that this sort of information has no business ever being posted on this website. Stevie's pal BrentD is apparently already starting his drive to encourage others to withhold support for this forum.

Please keep us informed of your situation in New Zealand, because our media is biased toward the anti-gunners, and we also have guys like Stevie, King, and rocky mtn bill who try to LULL us into believing that the threat to our gun rights is not really happening.

Posted By: craigd Re: New Zealand firearms law - 01/05/20 01:11 PM
Originally Posted By: Gregdownunder
....I do not understand why it is so hard for those in power to see the problem is the person, not the tool.
No amount of ill conceived laws impinging on the rights of the law abiding will make us any safer....

Importantly and clearly, this never matters.

Best of luck with your future. Thanks again for sharing agenda strategies that we’re seeing more of in the US. I’d guess that you folks have ‘collectors and shooters’ that support, without hesitation, your current policy makers.
Posted By: Ted Schefelbein Re: New Zealand firearms law - 01/05/20 03:33 PM
The first step, anywhere, is dividing owners into groups. Then, chiseling away at individual groups, one at a time. When you are thinking to yourself, “I don’t use an AR to hunt with anyway” you are already firmly in the grasp of the jaws of the trap.
They want whatever you are using to hunt with, the attempt to get someone’s AR is just a step on the way to that.

There are many who post right here who are too stupid to connect the dots.

Best,
Ted
Posted By: HomelessjOe Re: New Zealand firearms law - 01/08/20 12:40 PM
Originally Posted By: SKB
Thank You Gregg.

This link covers the back and forth between myself and Keith on the subject. Read through to see him repeatedly caught lying.

https://www.doublegunshop.com/forums/ubbthreads.php?ubb=showflat&Number=545822&page=1


I like this part where you self anal'yze Steve'O...

Originally Posted By: SKB
And such a fragile ego too. A delicate flower. You act like the beta male that you are. What a Pu$$y you are.

Steve


Posted By: SKB Re: New Zealand firearms law - 01/08/20 12:51 PM
Good morning sunshine. That was directed at beta Billie M in Pulaski. He seems more hostile than normal. Do you know why? Does he still have that yahoo email address? Best regards,
Steve
Posted By: canvasback Re: New Zealand firearms law - 01/08/20 01:56 PM
Originally Posted By: Ted Schefelbein
The first step, anywhere, is dividing owners into groups. Then, chiseling away at individual groups, one at a time. When you are thinking to yourself, “I don’t use an AR to hunt with anyway” you are already firmly in the grasp of the jaws of the trap.
They want whatever you are using to hunt with, the attempt to get someone’s AR is just a step on the way to that.

There are many who post right here who are too stupid to connect the dots.

Best,
Ted


This is so fundamentally obvious it is stunning anyone doesn't get it. Just look at the historical actions that have taken place and are taking place in other countries.....Canada for example. There is no accommodation that can be made that isn't on the road to confiscation.

First comes licensing, then comes registration and that is followed by confiscation. They may attempt to do it inside of two years or they may take 50 years to try it do it. But that's what's happening.

The remarkable thing is that the same people who think only the government should have guns are the first to complain about LEO's overstepping their mandate.
Posted By: keith Re: New Zealand firearms law - 01/08/20 05:51 PM
Originally Posted By: Ted Schefelbein
The first step, anywhere, is dividing owners into groups. Then, chiseling away at individual groups, one at a time. When you are thinking to yourself, “I don’t use an AR to hunt with anyway” you are already firmly in the grasp of the jaws of the trap.
They want whatever you are using to hunt with, the attempt to get someone’s AR is just a step on the way to that.

There are many who post right here who are too stupid to connect the dots.

Best,
Ted



SKB Stevie is one of those delicate flowers who isn't one bit concerned about anti-gunner's assaults on AR-15's and other Military Style Semi-Automatics (MSSA). When the ban in New Zealand was imminent right after the Christchurch shootings, Stevie posted the following link which had data from Philip Alpers and GunPolicy.org to support his false assertion that guns were not registered in New Zealand:

https://nypost.com/2019/03/15/new-zealand-re-examining-its-gun-laws-after-mosque-shooting/

As we have seen here, it is the registration which Stevie claimed didn't exist that makes it easy for the government to confiscate those firearms, or prosecute owners who do not comply.

Originally Posted By: SKB


" I told you guns were not registered in New Zealand."

Steve



But what would we expect from someone who spent so much time bashing the NRA and Donald Trump in 2016? I wouldn't be at all surprised to see him soon attempt to disrupt this discussion with more of his cowardly doxxing threats or YouTube music videos. His free advertising of his gunsmithing and gun import businesses are in every post he makes.... contrary to Dave's wishes. But Liberals feel entitled to take.

Whoever heard of a gunsmith that posts false data from known anti-gun organizations which calls for Universal Registration??? Talk about too stupid to connect the dots!
Posted By: craigd Re: New Zealand firearms law - 01/08/20 07:08 PM
Originally Posted By: canvasback
....First comes licensing, then comes registration and that is followed by confiscation. They may attempt to do it inside of two years or they may take 50 years to try it do it. But that's what's happening.....

I’d add in regulation, through arbitrarily increasing fees and hoops to jump through, they’re sapping the will and conditioning the future to look elsewhere. Grandfathering is also something to be aware of, short term appeasing in exchange for future criminalization based on a birthday. Registration, it has the look to me like blue states are leading the charge towards a back door data base.
Posted By: canvasback Re: New Zealand firearms law - 01/08/20 08:55 PM
Craig, good point about grandfathering and regulations. Grandfathering appeases the Fudds quite nicely yet long term accomplishes the antis goals. It also devastates value.

I view the regulatory hoops they force us to jump through slightly differently. They are designed to keep new people out. And quite effective at it.
Posted By: nca225 Re: New Zealand firearms law - 01/10/20 06:29 PM
Originally Posted By: canvasback
Originally Posted By: Ted Schefelbein
The first step, anywhere, is dividing owners into groups. Then, chiseling away at individual groups, one at a time. When you are thinking to yourself, “I don’t use an AR to hunt with anyway” you are already firmly in the grasp of the jaws of the trap.
They want whatever you are using to hunt with, the attempt to get someone’s AR is just a step on the way to that.

There are many who post right here who are too stupid to connect the dots.

Best,
Ted


This is so fundamentally obvious it is stunning anyone doesn't get it. Just look at the historical actions that have taken place and are taking place in other countries.....Canada for example. There is no accommodation that can be made that isn't on the road to confiscation.

First comes licensing, then comes registration and that is followed by confiscation. They may attempt to do it inside of two years or they may take 50 years to try it do it. But that's what's happening.

The remarkable thing is that the same people who think only the government should have guns are the first to complain about LEO's overstepping their mandate.


Splitting people into groups to divide them...Kinda like right from this playbook huh?

Originally Posted By: canvasback
Originally Posted By: keith
Now here's a question for you ed.. And rocky mtn bill, and our other libtards:

What do you think would save the most lives and have the greatest effect on reducing violent crime???

A) Passing a law which would stop old guys like you from owning AR-15's

B) Passing laws which allow cops to stop and frisk gang-bangers and young black and Hispanic males between ages 16 and 40.

We already know that Stop and Frisk would have a greater benefit on violent crime reduction. It was proven to work in New York City and other places. But the same Liberals who want stricter gun laws that affect law abiding citizens scream bloody murder about violating the Constitutional rights of minorities by enacting Stop and Frisk.

It really isn't about saving lives then. It's about taking away our 2nd Amendment Rights and our guns.


Up here in Toronto they call it carding. After the black community with their liberal white enablers demonized it as racist, the Metro Toronto Police vowed to stop doing it. Since they stopped, gang violence and shootings have skyrocketed. So predictable. So dumb. So woke.
Posted By: craigd Re: New Zealand firearms law - 01/10/20 07:12 PM
Yes....It’s my understanding that New Zealand has some world class trout fishing.
Posted By: canvasback Re: New Zealand firearms law - 01/10/20 07:48 PM
Originally Posted By: nca225
Originally Posted By: canvasback
Originally Posted By: Ted Schefelbein
The first step, anywhere, is dividing owners into groups. Then, chiseling away at individual groups, one at a time. When you are thinking to yourself, “I don’t use an AR to hunt with anyway” you are already firmly in the grasp of the jaws of the trap.
They want whatever you are using to hunt with, the attempt to get someone’s AR is just a step on the way to that.

There are many who post right here who are too stupid to connect the dots.

Best,
Ted


This is so fundamentally obvious it is stunning anyone doesn't get it. Just look at the historical actions that have taken place and are taking place in other countries.....Canada for example. There is no accommodation that can be made that isn't on the road to confiscation.

First comes licensing, then comes registration and that is followed by confiscation. They may attempt to do it inside of two years or they may take 50 years to try it do it. But that's what's happening.

The remarkable thing is that the same people who think only the government should have guns are the first to complain about LEO's overstepping their mandate.


Splitting people into groups to divide them...Kinda like right from this playbook huh?

Originally Posted By: canvasback
Originally Posted By: keith
Now here's a question for you ed.. And rocky mtn bill, and our other libtards:

What do you think would save the most lives and have the greatest effect on reducing violent crime???

A) Passing a law which would stop old guys like you from owning AR-15's

B) Passing laws which allow cops to stop and frisk gang-bangers and young black and Hispanic males between ages 16 and 40.

We already know that Stop and Frisk would have a greater benefit on violent crime reduction. It was proven to work in New York City and other places. But the same Liberals who want stricter gun laws that affect law abiding citizens scream bloody murder about violating the Constitutional rights of minorities by enacting Stop and Frisk.

It really isn't about saving lives then. It's about taking away our 2nd Amendment Rights and our guns.


Up here in Toronto they call it carding. After the black community with their liberal white enablers demonized it as racist, the Metro Toronto Police vowed to stop doing it. Since they stopped, gang violence and shootings have skyrocketed. So predictable. So dumb. So woke.


Yeah sure. That's it. Directly comparable. Law abiding legal gun owners and gang members.

Good try nca.
Posted By: nca225 Re: New Zealand firearms law - 01/10/20 09:26 PM
Well CB, it still is dividing people into groups. And what was the criteria for being labeled a gang member? Membership card or color of their skin?

Not trying to be a pain, just pointing out that dividing people into groups doesn't seem to be only in the purview of the opposition.

And how does 2nd amendment purity testing prevent splitting gun owners into groups?
Posted By: canvasback Re: New Zealand firearms law - 01/10/20 09:36 PM
This is so obvious.

One group is law abiding and acting in a legal manner having complied with the rules.

The other group, by their behavior and appearance, aligns themselves with gangs. They exhibit suspicious behavior....the equivalent to a drunk driver weaving down the road. Why shouldn't they be checked out?

Despite the bad rap the word has received.....there is some value in certain "prejudices". From the concept of "pre judging". Looks like a fish, smells like a fish. Good chance it is a fish.
Posted By: nca225 Re: New Zealand firearms law - 01/10/20 10:16 PM
I think what is obvious is that splitting people into groups is human nature, right or wrong. Can't really chalk it up to just a strategy from the opposition if its human nature and something we all engage in. And please don't mistake me, I wasn't trying to call you out on something, other than a pot calling the kettle black.
Posted By: Ted Schefelbein Re: New Zealand firearms law - 01/11/20 02:24 AM
I think it is obvious that splitting people into groups to deny them God given rights is fundamentally wrong. You don’t want to exercise the right, that is your business. But, you, like it or not, should have nothing to say or do about mine.


Best,
Ted
Posted By: canvasback Re: New Zealand firearms law - 01/11/20 04:20 AM
Nca, there is no pot and kettle here. Just a dope trying to score points by making a logical leap that doesn’t work. Sorry buddy. Better luck next time.
Posted By: JDH Re: New Zealand firearms law - 01/11/20 04:40 AM
I don't know much about politics or policies in New Zealand, but,I know Virginia is what you get when you elect Democrats.
Posted By: craigd Re: New Zealand firearms law - 01/11/20 05:14 AM
Originally Posted By: nca225
....And how does 2nd amendment purity testing prevent splitting gun owners into groups?

Who cares, with friends like you who needs.... The 2nd purity test ensures, a strong economy, international respect, the concept of sovereign borders, consequences for breaking the law not for using a plastic straw, not being a puppet of soros, not having to pretend to agree with aoc, not having to pretend ilhan's a US citizen.

In the dead of winter, only a 2nd purity policy maker will ensure your right to babble on like a summer's eve.
Posted By: lonesome roads Re: New Zealand firearms law - 01/11/20 05:40 AM
Originally Posted By: craigd

In the dead of winter, only a 2nd purity policy maker will ensure your right to babble on like a summer's eve.


Gotta give you credit. That was a good one.


_________________________
See, political threads can be fun too.
Posted By: keith Re: New Zealand firearms law - 01/11/20 06:38 AM
Originally Posted By: nca225

And how does 2nd amendment purity testing prevent splitting gun owners into groups?


It doesn't.... And it shouldn't.

I've been arguing for several years that having people who support anti-gun Liberal Left Democrats in our midst is counterproductive. It is stupid. It is like bringing termites into a wood frame house or hiring a known pedophile to babysit your children.

The foolishness of not recognizing the threat to the 2nd Amendment by gun owners like nca225, rocky mtn bill, King Brown, etc. cannot be overstated. Alarm bells should go off in every law abiding gun owner's head when they see that Liberals are always more concerned about the Constitutional rights of gang-bangers and criminals than they are about law abiding citizens who exercise their right to own and shoot firearms. These Libtards actually support infringements of our gun rights.

Pretending they are on our side or that they will be any help to us is just plain dumb.
Posted By: nca225 Re: New Zealand firearms law - 01/11/20 01:43 PM
Originally Posted By: canvasback
Nca, there is no pot and kettle here. Just a dope trying to score points by making a logical leap that doesn’t work. Sorry buddy. Better luck next time.


My apologies Cback, I had thought by addressing you respectfully, you might have avoided name calling and making it personal. I'm disappointed to see that I was wrong. Nonetheless, no need to respond in kind.

However, having conceded that I made a "logical leap", your conclusion that it doesn't work isn't supported, by either how you prefaced the comment or by the facts highlighted in your back and forth with Ted and keith; dividing people into groups, just as you were complaining about being done to gun owners.

Hence the pot and the kettle.

If you wish to avoid being culpable of the same behavior your complaining of, I suggest that the first step is to recognize that your engaging in it as well and look for common ground to connect, as opposed to divide.
Posted By: nca225 Re: New Zealand firearms law - 01/11/20 01:46 PM
Originally Posted By: lonesome roads
Originally Posted By: craigd

In the dead of winter, only a 2nd purity policy maker will ensure your right to babble on like a summer's eve.


Gotta give you credit. That was a good one.



_________________________
See, political threads can be fun too.



Insofar as it just being a crowd pleaser, I'd say considering his audience your right. Red meat for the clamoring, But as per usual, its substance was more or less tofu.
Posted By: nca225 Re: New Zealand firearms law - 01/11/20 01:50 PM
Originally Posted By: keith
Alarm bells should go off in every law abiding gun owner's head when they see that Liberals are always more concerned about the Constitutional rights of gang-bangers and criminals than they are about law abiding citizens who exercise their right to own and shoot firearms.


Cherry picking who has constitutional rights and who does not is not indicative of a country based on liberty and the rule of law.

It is indicative of a totalinarian regime....

Like the nazi's.

Who would have figured coming from you?

Posted By: lonesome roads Re: New Zealand firearms law - 01/11/20 02:26 PM
Originally Posted By: nca225
Originally Posted By: lonesome roads
Originally Posted By: craigd

In the dead of winter, only a 2nd purity policy maker will ensure your right to babble on like a summer's eve.


Gotta give you credit. That was a good one.



_________________________
See, political threads can be fun too.



Insofar as it just being a crowd pleaser, I'd say considering his audience your right. Red meat for the clamoring, But as per usual, its substance was more or less tofu.


You write like an old, fat, gay white man that knows little about hockey.


__________________________
Your edit was to change you’re to your?
Posted By: Ted Schefelbein Re: New Zealand firearms law - 01/11/20 02:30 PM
Originally Posted By: nca225
Originally Posted By: keith
Alarm bells should go off in every law abiding gun owner's head when they see that Liberals are always more concerned about the Constitutional rights of gang-bangers and criminals than they are about law abiding citizens who exercise their right to own and shoot firearms.


Cherry picking who has constitutional rights and who does not is not indicative of a country based on liberty and the rule of law.

It is indicative of a totalinarian regime....

Like the nazi's.

Who would have figured coming from you?




No it isn’t. If you are a convicted criminal, you give up rights that those who aren’t criminals do not. That is a hallmark of civilized society. Some civilized societies will allow you some of those back after certain conditions are met.
The presumes you are in a society that allows for individual rights. Most, don’t.


Best,
Ted
Posted By: keith Re: New Zealand firearms law - 01/11/20 02:36 PM
In a world dictated by logic, reason, and intelligence... It should go without saying that the Constitutional rights of law abiding citizens would be given greater respect and consideration than a population subset which has been proven beyond doubt to be more engaged in crime and felonious activities.

But we are dealing with Libtards... people like nca225 who are devoid of logic, reason, and intelligence. So here we have the opportunity to observe a complete idiot who sees Nazi behavior in treating criminals like criminals... while supporting those who infringe upon the Constitutional rights of law abiding citizens.
Posted By: nca225 Re: New Zealand firearms law - 01/11/20 02:57 PM
Originally Posted By: Ted Schefelbein
Originally Posted By: nca225
Originally Posted By: keith
Alarm bells should go off in every law abiding gun owner's head when they see that Liberals are always more concerned about the Constitutional rights of gang-bangers and criminals than they are about law abiding citizens who exercise their right to own and shoot firearms.


Cherry picking who has constitutional rights and who does not is not indicative of a country based on liberty and the rule of law.

It is indicative of a totalinarian regime....

Like the nazi's.

Who would have figured coming from you?




No it isn’t. If you are a convicted criminal, you give up rights that those who aren’t criminals do not. That is a hallmark of civilized society. Some civilized societies will allow you some of those back after certain conditions are met.
The presumes you are in a society that allows for individual rights. Most, don’t.


Best,
Ted


You are confused Ted, Criminals do not give up their rights. They are disabused of certain rights through the process of law.

So with that in consideration, I fixed up what I think you were trying to say.

"That's exactly right. If you are a convicted criminal, you were subject to the due process and the rule of law and disabused of certain rights that those who aren’t criminals retain. The rights bestowed by and the laws of a society must be applied equally to everybody. This is a hallmark of civilized society. Some civilized societies will allow you some of those back after certain conditions are met, such as ours.

The presumes you are in a society that allows for individual rights. Most, don’t."

Glad I could help!
Posted By: keith Re: New Zealand firearms law - 01/11/20 03:18 PM
In the world of complete idiots like nca225, law abiding gun owners are disabused of certain rights by the process of electing and supporting anti-gun Liberal Left Democrats.

This should help to demonstrate the sheer lunacy of thinking that it is good or helpful to welcome those who stab us in the backs into our fold.
Posted By: nca225 Re: New Zealand firearms law - 01/11/20 03:21 PM
Originally Posted By: keith
In a world dictated by logic, reason, and intelligence... It should go without saying that the Constitutional rights of law abiding citizens would be given greater respect and consideration than a population subset which has been proven beyond doubt to be more engaged in crime and felonious activities.


This sounds a lot like Goebbels.

When you say "population subset", is that just a nice way of saying black people?

You should try to become more versed of the origins of criminality. Start here, but your gonna have to download the articles. My altruism ends at having to pay a fee to educate the ignorant.

https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1300/J134v09n03_03?journalCode=wpov20
Posted By: Ted Schefelbein Re: New Zealand firearms law - 01/11/20 03:28 PM
Again, you are wrong. It doesn’t mean Black, White, Hispanic, Asian, it means convicted people. Any of the above, found guilty, in a court of law.

You arguments continue to be unprovable talking points, literally out of left field.

Best,
Ted
Posted By: keith Re: New Zealand firearms law - 01/11/20 03:28 PM
It sounds like Goebbels to you because you are a complete idiot nca225. The Liberal Left Democrats that you and other Libtards support have been infringing upon the rights of a certain population subset known as law abiding citizens for decades.

Because they own firearms, they have been presumed guilty without due process, and anti-gun Democrats seek to deprive them of their property and their Constitutional Rights and freedoms.

Yet you and other Libtards still blindly support those actions, even though they exactly emulate those of Nazis, and other totalitarian regimes who disarmed their citizens.

Posted By: craigd Re: New Zealand firearms law - 01/11/20 03:33 PM
Originally Posted By: nca225
....Insofar as it just being a crowd pleaser, I'd say considering his audience your right. Red meat for the clamoring, But as per usual, its substance was more or less tofu.

Awe heck, I notice you are being so civil to cback. You're a different person than I thought you were. Maybe, I should put aside my prejudices and appreciate the non gmo vegan smoothie recipe exchange. Take a deep breath, those two fellows in the prius holding up the sugar cream with sprinkles latte line are just as entitled to be there as you.

Crowd pleaser, why can't I rise to your level? Would you happen to have any thing approaching the substance of a decent twenty ounce rare steak?
Posted By: Ted Schefelbein Re: New Zealand firearms law - 01/11/20 03:40 PM
Hard to type with the tears rolling from my eyes from laughing so hard. Thanks, Craig!

Best,
Ted
Posted By: nca225 Re: New Zealand firearms law - 01/11/20 04:12 PM
Originally Posted By: Ted Schefelbein
Again, you are wrong. It doesn’t mean Black, White, Hispanic, Asian, it means convicted people. Any of the above, found guilty, in a court of law.

You arguments continue to be unprovable talking points, literally out of left field.

Best,
Ted


Oh, my bad. I guess the term "gang bangers" used previously to describe criminals is an all inclusive reference. No dog whistle there....
Posted By: nca225 Re: New Zealand firearms law - 01/11/20 04:23 PM
Originally Posted By: craigd
Originally Posted By: nca225
....Insofar as it just being a crowd pleaser, I'd say considering his audience your right. Red meat for the clamoring, But as per usual, its substance was more or less tofu.

Awe heck, I notice you are being so civil to cback. You're a different person than I thought you were. Maybe, I should put aside my prejudices and appreciate the non gmo vegan smoothie recipe exchange. Take a deep breath, those two fellows in the prius holding up the sugar cream with sprinkles latte line are just as entitled to be there as you.

Crowd pleaser, why can't I rise to your level? Would you happen to have any thing approaching the substance of a decent twenty ounce rare steak?


More red meat garnished with references to homosexuality. Just so you know, I am entertained by your desperation to please a small crowd. Please keep it up. I'm bored today.
Posted By: keith Re: New Zealand firearms law - 01/11/20 04:26 PM
So nca225, it appears you take it as a personal dog whistle when someone refers to homosexuals and transgenders? And with good reason!

There is no getting past the fact that you and other Libtards support anti-gun Liberal Left Democrats who infringe upon the 2nd Amendment Rights of law abiding citizens... presuming them guilty without due process, and working relentlessly to deprive them of their firearms... just like the Nazi's did.

But maybe you think running from that fact and trying to change the subject will make your hypocrisy and ignorance just go away.
Posted By: craigd Re: New Zealand firearms law - 01/11/20 04:47 PM
Originally Posted By: nca225
...I guess the term "gang bangers" used previously to describe criminals is an all inclusive reference. No dog whistle there....

Here's a little fried food for thought. If you're honest, you profile criminals and criminal behavior, inclusively. If you're salivating for master's dog whistle, you're entitled to an occasional scooby snack.

Question. If you don't like the way laws are written, where's your witt and passion to get them changed so that they can be enforced in a way that makes you feel good?
Posted By: Ted Schefelbein Re: New Zealand firearms law - 01/11/20 04:56 PM
Originally Posted By: nca225
Originally Posted By: Ted Schefelbein
Again, you are wrong. It doesn’t mean Black, White, Hispanic, Asian, it means convicted people. Any of the above, found guilty, in a court of law.

You arguments continue to be unprovable talking points, literally out of left field.

Best,
Ted


Oh, my bad. I guess the term "gang bangers" used previously to describe criminals is an all inclusive reference. No dog whistle there....



Come to Minneapolis, and learn that there are many flavors of race in the gangs as there are genders in your rainbow. Black, Asian, Somali, and Hispanic are the flavors of the day, but, that could change. A little hint for you, the Black and Somalian gangs have a vicious hatred for each other that is hard to imagine. Who would have thunk it?
Avoid the crossfire. That is what we do.

You want white gangs, you will find them on motorcycles, typically. They are here, too.

If anything, you have just proven that you associate a term with blacks. Bad boy.

Best,
Ted
Posted By: lonesome roads Re: New Zealand firearms law - 01/11/20 05:16 PM
Originally Posted By: Ted Schefelbein
You want white gangs, you will find them on motorcycles, typically.

Best,
Ted


Let me guess. Harleys.

I wish Honda would bring this to the States.

https://youtu.be/SV8ViqTBwOE

You meet the nicest people on a Honda.


__________________________
And you slag Detroit?
Posted By: SKB Re: New Zealand firearms law - 01/11/20 05:20 PM
Originally Posted By: lonesome roads
Originally Posted By: Ted Schefelbein
You want white gangs, you will find them on motorcycles, typically.

Best,
Ted


Let me guess. Harleys.

I wish Honda would bring this to the States.

https://youtu.be/SV8ViqTBwOE

You meet the nicest people on a Honda.

I like these things, no need for speed for me and very similar to the Triumph I had in college.


https://www.royalenfield.com/us/en/motorcycles/bullet-500/

__________________________
And you slag Detroit?
Posted By: lonesome roads Re: New Zealand firearms law - 01/11/20 05:32 PM
I like them too, but if I was going the parallel twin route I’d just spend the extra money and get the Triumph.

Like the CB1100ex and the Kawi Z900rs...just too much bike now.
CB650r is close but no cigar.


__________________________
Random, I know, but I chillin’ on a rainy Saturday (just glad it isn’t snow)
https://youtu.be/cMx0xKxRRiw
Posted By: Ted Schefelbein Re: New Zealand firearms law - 01/11/20 06:24 PM
You don’t always find the motorcycle gangers on Harley’s. You did, at one time.
That has changed.
The Hells Outcasts were founded in St. Paul. Until they were mostly busted a decade or so ago, the El Forsteros were the bad guys we saw the most of.

I rode a 1995 750 GSXR to both coasts. I also did the same thing on a 1991 FJ 1200, a bike I’d still own if I knew then what I know now. I rode the FJ to Monterey to partake in Keith Code’s California Superbike School. School bikes were Suzuki 600 Katanas with the back brake disconnected.


I haven’t had a bike since my kid was born. Might need a chiropractor to get me off a gixer, if I rode for a day, now. Doesn’t mean I wouldn’t like to try, chasing the sunset across the plains, one more time.


Best,
Ted
_________________________________
There ain’t no plains in Detroit.
Posted By: canvasback Re: New Zealand firearms law - 01/12/20 01:39 PM
Originally Posted By: nca225
Originally Posted By: canvasback
Nca, there is no pot and kettle here. Just a dope trying to score points by making a logical leap that doesn’t work. Sorry buddy. Better luck next time.


My apologies Cback, I had thought by addressing you respectfully, you might have avoided name calling and making it personal. I'm disappointed to see that I was wrong. Nonetheless, no need to respond in kind.

However, having conceded that I made a "logical leap", your conclusion that it doesn't work isn't supported, by either how you prefaced the comment or by the facts highlighted in your back and forth with Ted and keith; dividing people into groups, just as you were complaining about being done to gun owners.

Hence the pot and the kettle.

If you wish to avoid being culpable of the same behavior your complaining of, I suggest that the first step is to recognize that your engaging in it as well and look for common ground to connect, as opposed to divide.








Wow, look at the mess you get into when I go away for 24 hours. Name calling? Sorry I hurt your feelings with the word "dope". But your posts are dopey. Your efforts at entrapment are dopey. Others might use far more pejorative terms. I prefer dope and dopey because...well.....they are fairly benign. I call my 15 yo son a dope when he does something dopey. He's a teenager. Lots of dopey stuff going on. I call my girlfriend a dope when she does something dopey. Neither get upset. Usually they recognize their own dopiness and we laugh about it.

But your dopiness goes beyond your current efforts at "gotcha" journalism. It's that you even post here at all.

You sit quietly in the weeds until something political strikes your fancy and then you post something, thinking you've nailed someone. Me, Keith, Ted, jOe.....whoever. No questions about doubles. No pics of your hunting exploits. No thoughtful answers to other's questions. Simply shit disturbing.

Much as I may disagree with Keith about his tactics, and surely even a contrarian like you would have to agree that Keith and I are clearly not "aligned" when it comes to tactics, at least Keith contributes to the knowledge base here. His posts on double gun subjects are as thorough as are his posts deriding you. One of his regular targets, SKB, is clearly a skilled smith and regularly shares information here. While I clearly have a lot to learn when compared to those two gentlemen, I ask questions here. I contribute what little I can. You? You shit disturb. That's all.

So what's your point? That you disagree with the rest of us? We got that. You may win an argument sometime? Maybe, but not here. Really nca, why are you here? It's an existential question you should give some thought to. Because your answer can go one of two way. It can be that you like to invite abuse. If that is it, I think it would be wise to seek counseling. Or it may be that you think your argumentative leftist bleatings will sway some here. In which case I still think you should seek counseling.

I advised you years ago to seek common ground. To refrain from intemperate outbursts. You decided to reject that advice and follow your own path.

We reap what we sow. My guess is there are a few people here that most of the rest of the board wouldn't cross the street to have a cup of coffee with. Judging by the reaction to my posts over the years, I think I could travel to just about any state in the Union and meet a friend from Doublegun. That's why I am here. To enjoy the company and learn about doubles.

I've found my common ground.

Edit to add: For the sake of accuracy, please note that while there was a "back and forth" between myself and Ted and Craig at various points in this thread....there was no back and forth between Keith and me. I made my comments and Keith made his.
Posted By: SKB Re: New Zealand firearms law - 01/12/20 01:56 PM
Originally Posted By: Ted Schefelbein
You don’t always find the motorcycle gangers on Harley’s. You did, at one time.
That has changed.
The Hells Outcasts were founded in St. Paul. Until they were mostly busted a decade or so ago, the El Forsteros were the bad guys we saw the most of.



I hear the Serbian hackers are bad in the greater Pulaski metro area wink
Posted By: Ted Schefelbein Re: New Zealand firearms law - 01/12/20 02:16 PM
Funny you should say that. There was a honky tonk, Povlitski’s, right down the road, that was frequented by an afore mentioned 1% organization. Only gang colors I ever saw at that establishment, and I don’t know if that is something that was worked out with ownership, or not-I spent plenty of time in the joint.
The Feds actually came to town and I never saw an El Forsdero again. But this area has a lot of 1% organizations in it, and they don’t seem to make the headlines with any regularity.
The dudes all look old, and rough. Wouldn’t you think everybody has to grow up at some point?

Best,
Ted
Posted By: craigd Re: New Zealand firearms law - 01/12/20 03:15 PM
Originally Posted By: canvasback
....Or it may be that you think your argumentative leftist bleatings will sway some here. In which case I still think you should seek counseling.

I advised you years ago to seek common ground. To refrain from intemperate outbursts. You decided to reject that....

I suspect that it doesn’t make much sense to try reasoning with lefties. Their purpose might be looked at not from their point of view, but only for understanding what it takes to win an election.
Posted By: Lloyd3 Re: New Zealand firearms law - 01/12/20 06:28 PM
James: Profound words for nca225. We very-much do reap what we sow. Come to Denver sometime and I'll prove you right.
Posted By: Geo. Newbern Re: New Zealand firearms law - 01/12/20 06:34 PM
NCA doesn't agree with most of us here. He insists upon his right to do that. He is 100% unsuccessful in his attempt to sway anyone's opinions here.

However, he believes he is in a majority position in the USA. Some cite "polls" to "prove" that. Numerically, our President came in second in the last election.

Thank Heavens the democratic party is doing all it can do to boost President Trump's numbers and guarantee his reelection this year. I say let NCA do his thing because he's helping...Geo

Damn, I posted in a political discussion!
Posted By: canvasback Re: New Zealand firearms law - 01/12/20 06:37 PM
Lloyd, I have come to the conclusion that my favorite part of hunting is the adventures I can embark upon, in the name of hunting. The people I can meet. The friends I can make. The countryside I can walk across. At 61 I am healthy and mobile and intend to spend at least the next 10 years traveling somewhere each fall and catching up with old friends I'm meeting for the first time. Darn sure I'll see you in CO or LOTW with Ted sometime in the not too distant future. laugh
Posted By: canvasback Re: New Zealand firearms law - 01/12/20 06:42 PM
Back to the topic:

Greg, I just read this:

https://thebfd.co.nz/2020/01/breaking-the-raids-have-begun-all-for-a-22-bunny-gun/


Does this seem accurate? Is it what you know to be happening? So easy to get false info these days.




Quote:
On Thursday evening, I was just finishing up dinner with my two oldest kids. My wife was feeling unwell and feeding our four-week-old baby in bed. I had just gotten the icecream out for the kids when the doorbell rang.

I opened the door to see a number of police officers outside. They served me with a search warrant under Section 6 of the Search and Surveillance Act 2012. Half a dozen armed police officers swarmed in the front door (holstered sidearms only) as several more ran around the sides of the house. They later called for more backup as the house was larger than your average state-house drug lab. I got the impression that they’d never had to raid a middle-class suburban house like mine before. Everyone on the property was detained, read their rights, and questioned separately. I opted to call a lawyer who advised me to refuse to answer any questions.


The warrant claimed they had reason to believe I was in possession of a prohibited magazine fitted to a “.22RL lever-action rifle. Blued metal, brown wooden stock.” The officer told me I had posted about it online, which I had—in my public written submission against the Firearms Amendment Act passed last year. That submission was shared on several blogs and social media. I had used the firearm as an example to prove the legislation was not targeting “military-style assault weapons” as the media, prime minister, and her cabinet repeated ad nauseum. The vast majority of firearms affected by the legislation were just like mine.


The BFD Norinco .22 lr lever action (copy of a Winchester)
I thought nothing more of my little example to the select committee. It was no longer in my possession when the police raided my house. They departed empty-handed after turning the place inside out for ninety minutes and left me with my firearms and a visibly shaken wife who broke down in tears. Thankfully, the kids didn’t quite get what was going on—but I realised after that they had gone to bed without icecream.

I’ve been vocal about the amnesty being a disaster, and the police were rather open about the failure of the whole process. Maybe if they stopped raiding innocent people’s houses there might have been some more good will? They implied that they’d keep having to raid the houses of people I knew until the firearm turned up. This is for an A-Category firearm, which I have no reason to believe is fitted with a prohibited magazine! Are these the kind of intimidation tactics now the norm in New Zealand? Are we going to accept this in a first-world democracy?

This is for a lever-action .22LR that’s designed to hit paper or be used to hunt bunnies. What happened to going after the “weapons designed to kill people” as the police minister Stuart Nash has claimed?

The implications of this are rather stunning. I took the photo and publicised the details about this firearm as part of the select committee process. This good-faith evidence was used by the police as a justification for their raid. Do we now live in a country where public evidence given to a select committee will be used against you to suit the political purposes of the police?

Anyone who’s publicly talked about or posted a picture of their grandfather’s little .22LR pump/lever action can get raided, as these rifles all had 10+ capacity prior to the draconian new rules. Admitting you had one a year ago is reason enough to warrant a raid on your property today.

I suppose it’s no coincidence that I pointed out in an article last month just how bad the numbers are when it comes to compliance. When I said that New Zealand gun owners aren’t “rolling over for anybody”, this is not quite what I had in mind—again, why raid the guy publicly pointing out the truth?

I’ve been vocal about my opposition to many of this government’s policies. I live a very conservative life and hold traditional conservative views which I am public about. I’ve never promoted non-compliance and was rather shocked by how low the numbers really were. This left me wondering: was this a politically motivated action by someone high-up in the bureaucracy ordered to make examples?

Editor’s Summary:

Approximately twelve armed police raided the author’s property
No name was on the warrant
The police used the author’s select committee submission as evidence
The police suggested that if the author didn’t talk to the police there would be more raids
The firearm in question was a Norinco .22 lr lever action (copy of a Winchester) ie NOT a semi-automatic
Posted By: lonesome roads Re: New Zealand firearms law - 01/12/20 06:45 PM
Originally Posted By: Geo. Newbern


Damn, I posted in a political discussion!


When it’s a hockey thread we’ll worry.


__________________________
The honky tonks in St Paul were my natural second home
And you tip your hat to the ladies in the streets of Mankato
Posted By: craigd Re: New Zealand firearms law - 01/12/20 09:37 PM
Originally Posted By: Geo. Newbern
....However, he believes he is in a majority position in the USA. Some cite "polls" to "prove" that. Numerically, our President came in second in the last election....

....Damn, I posted in a political discussion!

Ask him Geo, does he really want to count the forty some percent on the losing end of an electoral college vote towards a mob rule total for states such as kali or new yak? Or, better yet, does he want to motivate untold numbers of apathetic right of center voters who know they’re disenfranchised based on geography? In truth, all they want with the popular vote is to get senators dumbed down to regular congressional reps. Don’t you post in all the political ones?
Posted By: Geo. Newbern Re: New Zealand firearms law - 01/12/20 09:48 PM
("Don’t you post in all the political ones?")craigd

I try not to. I have opinions though and sometimes they tend to slip out...Geo
Posted By: Ted Schefelbein Re: New Zealand firearms law - 01/13/20 12:08 AM
Originally Posted By: Geo. Newbern
("Don’t you post in all the political ones?")craigd

I try not to. I have opinions though and sometimes they tend to slip out...Geo



It’s all good....


Best,
Ted
Posted By: keith Re: New Zealand firearms law - 01/13/20 06:34 AM
Originally Posted By: canvasback
Back to the topic:

Greg, I just read this:

https://thebfd.co.nz/2020/01/breaking-the-raids-have-begun-all-for-a-22-bunny-gun/


Does this seem accurate? Is it what you know to be happening? So easy to get false info these days.....



I hope we get an answer to this question soon because it looks like SKB Stevie is returning to his usual tactic of attempting to disrupt gun rights threads.

This thread must be particularly upsetting to Stevie since he has been so invested in denying that New Zealand even had any gun registration prior to the recent new anti-gun laws and infringements.

Of course, Stevie also manages to squeeze in more free advertising and self promotion of his businesses every time he disrupts a gun rights topic. He won't tell us if he is doing free advertising over on the Upland Journal forum. I wonder why?
Posted By: SKB Re: New Zealand firearms law - 01/13/20 11:51 AM
See why keith is known as lying keith in this thread:

https://www.doublegunshop.com/forums/ubbthreads.php?ubb=showflat&Number=545822&page=1

His real name is Billie M(censored to protect those guilty of hacking) but if you want to know who the admitted hacker on our board is, just ask me. I am more than happy to give out ALL of sweet William's contact info.
Posted By: craigd Re: New Zealand firearms law - 01/13/20 02:04 PM
Originally Posted By: SKB
....in this thread....

Do you know if there's any truth to that NZ article? Are such innocuous little footprints being used to intimidate the easy pickings, only twelve officers?
Posted By: keith Re: New Zealand firearms law - 01/13/20 02:34 PM
Originally Posted By: SKB
See why keith is known as lying keith in this thread:

https://www.doublegunshop.com/forums/ubbthreads.php?ubb=showflat&Number=545822&page=1

His real name is Billie M(censored to protect those guilty of hacking) but if you want to know who the admitted hacker on our board is, just ask me. I am more than happy to give out ALL of sweet William's contact info.


That's really funny Stevie! Only you would be stupid enough to provide a link to a thread containing QUOTES of you admitting that you said that guns weren't registered in New Zealand at the time of the Christchurch shooting:

Originally Posted By: SKB


I told you guns were not registered in New Zealand.

Steve


You even posted that N.Y. Post link with data from anti-gunner Philip Alpers and GunPolicy.org to support your position.

Your continued internet doxxing threats are equally funny. They also illustrate what a low-life gutless coward you are. You and your equally spineless pals, Bob Cash and BrentD hoped that you could intimidate jOe and I, and make us leave, but it just isn't working as you all hoped, is it?

Now why don't you tell us if you are doing the same endless free advertising of your businesses over on the Upland Journal forum like you do here. And do you post picture of yourself wearing buckle strap girl's shoes like you did here in your Sight Repair thread?



Posted By: SKB Re: New Zealand firearms law - 01/13/20 02:57 PM
I read the article, how true it is I do not know. I do know the current restrictions make that lever action tube fed rim fire rifle illegal because it holds over 10 rounds. Big changes in NZ since the shooting and none for the better from what I see.
Posted By: keith Re: New Zealand firearms law - 01/13/20 03:02 PM
Originally Posted By: SKB
Big changes in NZ since the shooting and none for the better from what I see.


So Stevie, would you suggest that New Zealand shooters and gun owners should act like you and post data from known anti-gunners like Philp Alpers and GunPolicy.org... to support the notion that they really don't have anything to worry about?

Or are you just posting here because every post you make is more free advertising at Dave's expense?
Posted By: Gregdownunder Re: New Zealand firearms law - 01/13/20 09:36 PM
The article is reasonably correct, albeit written by the victim himself.
Here is a more mainstream article on the raid:
https://www.newshub.co.nz/home/politics/...disturbing.html

At least we have one politician who seems to have some common sense over the whole debacle.
Interesting to note I have not seen any similar raids on gang headquarters recently, might be easier to pick on family guys.....
Posted By: canvasback Re: New Zealand firearms law - 01/13/20 09:47 PM
Okay, next question. While you have linked me to a report of the event written by someone other than the target, how is this event actually playing across NZ. Is the victim of the raid garnering sympathy from the general public? Is the press portraying him as a right wing loon? Is the press even covering it in a meaningful way or is it a blip and then relegated to the dustbin of news stories?

This kind of regulation is about to be enacted in Canada so I have some real interest. It's not theoretical up here, the way it is in the US.

For example, our recently elected government ran on a platform of specifically banning AR-15 rifles, among others. Despite the fact they are already what we call restricted. Where their only legal use is at an approved range and where they are part of a restricted weapon registry. And all this in a country where, at last check, no one ever has been killed by an AR-15.
Posted By: craigd Re: New Zealand firearms law - 01/13/20 10:24 PM
To me, the interesting part of the story isn't so much the law or the enthusiastic enforcement. There seems to be a very low bar for what's considered evidence and the way it's collected.
Posted By: keith Re: New Zealand firearms law - 01/14/20 04:23 AM
Originally Posted By: canvasback


This kind of regulation is about to be enacted in Canada so I have some real interest. It's not theoretical up here, the way it is in the US.

For example, our recently elected government ran on a platform of specifically banning AR-15 rifles, among others.


This situation certainly is not theoretical in the U.S.

Virtually every Democrat running against our pro-2nd Amendment Donald Trump is actively calling for bans on AR-15's and other currently legal semi-automatic rifles. The majority of Democrats in Congress are also calling for the same restrictions and infringements upon law abiding citizens. They are also all pushing for Universal Firearms Registration in the guise of Universal Background Checks, which would make similar enforcement rather easy.

And sadly, we still have a number of Liberal Democrats right here on this forum who support these extreme anti-gunners, and who attempt to suppress even discussing the situation.

More than anything, they hate the very idea that anyone would point out how they are actively stabbing us in the backs, and that they are no help to the cause of gun rights.
Posted By: craigd Re: New Zealand firearms law - 01/14/20 05:08 AM
Originally Posted By: keith
....They are also all pushing for Universal Firearms Registration in the guise of Universal Background Checks, which would make similar enforcement rather easy.

And sadly, we still have a number of Liberal Democrats right here on this forum who support these extreme anti-gunners, and who attempt to suppress even discussing the situation....

Blue states seem bent on leading the way. There's chatter that Classic Guns in il is closing its doors in a few months due to regulations and fees. For the anti AR folks, Classic has been known to do some slick case colors. Part of the reg. hoops that they have to jump through is keeping a digital logbook. Maybe, intended as another tool to backdoor register, 'better' than ocasional photographing or waiting for turn in.
Posted By: Gregdownunder Re: New Zealand firearms law - 01/15/20 07:02 AM
Originally Posted By: canvasback
Okay, next question. While you have linked me to a report of the event written by someone other than the target, how is this event actually playing across NZ. Is the victim of the raid garnering sympathy from the general public? Is the press portraying him as a right wing loon? Is the press even covering it in a meaningful way or is it a blip and then relegated to the dustbin of news stories?

This kind of regulation is about to be enacted in Canada so I have some real interest. It's not theoretical up here, the way it is in the US.

For example, our recently elected government ran on a platform of specifically banning AR-15 rifles, among others. Despite the fact they are already what we call restricted. Where their only legal use is at an approved range and where they are part of a restricted weapon registry. And all this in a country where, at last check, no one ever has been killed by an AR-15.

It has not really had a high profile.
However I expect more raids to come, possibly quite a few over a short time as police want to look like they are getting tough on those that do not comply.
The main opposition party, while they were behind the initial laws, are now starting to side more with the licenced firearms owners as being unfairly targeted for something they did not do.
All I can say is I hope they win the next election this year.
The Labour/green (left)coalition not only seem hellbent on making life tough on firearms owners, but free speech also seems to be in their sights.(unless they agree with it of course!)
GDU
Posted By: keith Re: New Zealand firearms law - 01/15/20 07:41 AM
Thank you for informing us about what is going on Greg. I'm quite confident that our mainstream media will not report these things because it goes against their narrative. I wish you the best of luck in getting a change of government that is more attuned to the rights of law abiding gun owners.

It is very revealing to hear about this extreme police raid hell bent on confiscating a "Bunny Gun". We have heard the lie for years that the Liberal anti-gunners won't take our hunting guns. But the truth is they hate all guns. And I hope that you will continue to keep us informed. Maybe some people here will pay attention and your words will help us avoid going down the same path.

And interesting that you should mention the Liberal's assaults on free speech. Spend enough time here on this forum, and pay close attention to those who attempt to suppress or disrupt gun rights discussions. Hint... it ain't the Conservatives.

Posted By: old colonel Re: New Zealand firearms law - 01/15/20 03:02 PM
Originally Posted By: keith




Normally I avoid posting in these argument threads that devolve into personal attacks, however your meme caught my eye in that it is a half truth, though funny.

You humorous meme is correct that they want to painfully regulate us to death, but the actual prosecution for violation provides an incredible paradox.

That paradox is while the left seeks to outlaw and control all sorts of things their actions during their last administration showed a desire to regulate without prosecution. Take the prosecution of criminals who falsely fill out background checks and are caught by the database. One would think that should generate some prosecution for perjury or fraud, instead we see the number of prosecution for an excess of 100,000 frauds was less than 0.1%.

Did the last administration not care about the violation of already existing gun laws?

Is this because the left wants criminals to be free?

Do they want current laws to fail in order to justify more laws?

Is it that the administrative state cannot possibly regulate everything they want to and therefore depend on good citizens to just comply?

The last administration never really answered the question and it is not possible to know why for absolute fact.

I argue current law already provides sufficient regulation and they need to be properly enforced.

When I am told about the need for new regulation because the old one’s failed, I always ask why did they fail to work, if it was we did not actually enforce them then I am left with the question why will new law or regulation be any different?
Posted By: keith Re: New Zealand firearms law - 01/16/20 05:09 AM
Originally Posted By: old colonel


Did the last administration not care about the violation of already existing gun laws?

Is this because the left wants criminals to be free?

Do they want current laws to fail in order to justify more laws?

Is it that the administrative state cannot possibly regulate everything they want to and therefore depend on good citizens to just comply?


Well, we know for certain that the last administration did not care about violations of existing gun laws, because we know how few of these crimes were actually prosecuted. And we know of a couple mass murders that could have been prevented, but weren't.

And we know for sure that the Left wants criminals to be free. Hell, they even want to restore voting rights to convicted felons. This would not happen if they thought that convicted felons would vote Republican.

It's safe to assume they didn't prosecute gun crimes so they could justify further infringements upon the rights of law abiding citizens. Why, they even committed Federal felonies in Operation Fast and Furious, to create the false impression that Mexican Drug Cartels were buying semi-auto rifles from gun shops and gun shows in the U.S. This resulted in the death of a U.S. Border Patrol Agent named Brian Terry, and many more innocent people in Mexico.

As far as not knowing what they plan to do in the future... you'd have to be living under a rock, or perhaps spending a great deal of time searching the internet for dirt on someone who promised to make a Memorial Thread to an anti-gun troll. How else could you miss what the Liberal Left Democrat candidates have vowed to do? How else could you miss Democrat Congressman Eric Slawell threatening to use the military to enforce new anti-gun laws? How else could you miss what is happening right now in Virginia, as the State Attorney General threatens to use the National Guard to enforce new gun control laws? How else could you miss 4 Liberal Democrat Supreme Court Justices voting against an Individual Right to Keep and Bear Arms? How else could you miss what every Democrat 2020 Presidential Candidate has promised to do?

Perhaps you feel that we should just sit quietly and wait until we have a police swat team breaking down our doors to confiscate "bunny guns" as we see happening in New Zealand???

We know... or should know... exactly what the anti-gun Democrats want. We know because they tell us on a regular basis. If any of us are stupid enough to vote for them, we deserve to lose our Constitutional Gun Rights. If any of us are dumb enough to believe that gun owners who vote for anti-gunners are on our side... we deserve to lose our 2nd Amendment Rights. If we are too stupid to see what is going on when they try to disrupt or shut down topics like this... we deserve to end up like gun owners in England, Canada, Australia, and New Zealand. Those folks didn't have a 2nd Amendment, so it was a bit easier for Liberal Left anti-gunners to take their liberties:





Posted By: pmag Re: New Zealand firearms law - 01/16/20 09:25 PM
I'm a democrat, Keith, and what I want, exactly, is for you to fall off your soap box. You fancy yourself a savior of liberty but you are just a raving bore.
Posted By: old colonel Re: New Zealand firearms law - 01/16/20 11:09 PM
Keith you are easier to hook than a hatchery trout. The questions are rhetorical, they are designed to allow the reader to think.

You seem to pontificate knowledge of all of one side’s heart. I don’t believe I can apply a one size fits all solution to motivations, although I have suspicions, some even similar to yours.

In the end I believe logic and thought, something sadly lacking in modern politics, is better.

While I oppose the expansion of the restrictions of freedom that some postulate, I prefer to start with thought rather than name calling vitriol.

I doubt my view will be adopted, however I believe I will convince more through my method than by yours. Singing to the converted is a short path.
Posted By: keith Re: New Zealand firearms law - 01/16/20 11:37 PM
Gee Gladys Kravitz, you asked some stupid questions, and I answered them, even expanding upon those answers with explanations. If you seriously expected me to answer from the perspective of supporters of Liberal anti-gun Democrats like pmag, you must be even more ignorant than I thought.

So you just go ahead and share your logic and thought with anti-gun Democrats and see how far you get. Of course, we know that you are one of the fools who thinks we should embrace the gun owners who stab us in the back via their blind support of anti-gun politicians. You absolutely despised me for posting QUOTES of your pen-pal King Brown's repeated anti 2nd Amendment rhetoric. I don't care for the silly idea that we should all be in one big tent. Do you think pmag and other Libtards here are any help to us when he is proud to vote for the Liberal Left Democrats who relentlessly assault the 2nd Amendment Rights of law abiding citizens??? Having supporters of anti-gunners in our Big Tent is about as smart as hiring a known pedophile to babysit your children.

You don't like my up front name calling... and I don't care much for your cowardly behind the scenes digging for dirt on me, and your other sneaky behind the scenes actions. You left a lot of tracks in cyberspace too. I guess we just have different tastes and virtues.

Watch out for those hatchery trout Gladys... I hear they like to eat sneaky little worms.
Posted By: old colonel Re: New Zealand firearms law - 01/17/20 12:45 AM
Keith, bless your heart.

BTW what behind the scenes digging dirt are you talking about?

A poster who bravely refuses to post under his name while spewing the insults you do is one to stand tall, though I know not where.

Your style of argument hurts your position more than it helps.
Posted By: keith Re: New Zealand firearms law - 01/17/20 01:05 AM
Please Gladys, spare us, and spare your disingenuous blessings. You know exactly who I am and exactly where I live.

There was no one else from Topeka, Kansas with your IP address doing extensive searches on me. You really are a stupid and careless little worm. That is hardly all I know. That wasn't the really gutless, cowardly, and sneaky part, was it? Your style of dishonesty hurts your your position more than it helps.
Posted By: old colonel Re: New Zealand firearms law - 01/17/20 01:21 AM
Yes I know who you are, I grant you the courtesy of not posting it. More Courtesy than you show me.

Behind the scenes is a ridiculous statement as you know the internet is public, if I wanted to verify a truth it is public.

That said Prove your statement What is my IP address? When did I search for you?
Posted By: keith Re: New Zealand firearms law - 01/17/20 01:37 AM
Now you admit that you know who I am, right after lying and saying this:

Originally Posted By: old colonel

A poster who bravely refuses to post under his name while spewing the insults you do is one to stand tall, though I know not where.


Give me a break on your courtesy bullshit. Save the lectures on Courtesy for your internet doxxing pals. You don't dictate how this plays out Gladys. Acting innocent won't help matters either. You clearly didn't think your actions through. Too bad... worm.

FYI... this exchange is over.
Posted By: old colonel Re: New Zealand firearms law - 01/17/20 02:01 AM
What lie? I asked a question, I made no assertion of fact I asked a question.

If truth is in play your statement of dishonesty is absolutely false.

As for where, I refer to the ethics of your style of argument, not your street address

You constantly calling me a coward while you insist on hiding is pathetic.

You don’t dictate either, regardless of how bitter and negative your posts maybe.
Posted By: pmag Re: New Zealand firearms law - 01/17/20 02:01 AM
Lift one foot, Keith, and get close to the edge of the soap box. Close your eyes and count to fifty.
Posted By: old colonel Re: New Zealand firearms law - 01/17/20 04:56 AM
Hey Keith where is my IP and dates of search? Demonstrate you web prowess.

Maybe I should give you a break on courtesy and deliver the same level of manners you have?

Come, deliver on you statement of an IP and date.

Most of us are not paranoid and do not bother with such coverage but you seem to.

Posted By: old colonel Re: New Zealand firearms law - 01/17/20 06:44 PM
Keith, still waiting the IP and date?

You have the courage to insult, why not the actual IP and date?
Posted By: old colonel Re: New Zealand firearms law - 01/18/20 02:26 AM
Some evidence, So much for putting proof where your mouth is.

Then again maybe you are busy under a bridge trying to find it. Funny that it appears you find researching on the internet somehow wrong or underhanded.

I have yet to see proof that I was digging up dirt on you across the internet, what dirt have I used on you?

To date I believe I have only used your words on this website in response to some of your posting

Proof? Or just more vitriol

Come on, your reputation for scouring the internet for pictures or memes to use is shown by your posts. Was that sneaking around on your part? I don’t think so, much less your filing of quotes for reuse.
Posted By: old colonel Re: New Zealand firearms law - 01/18/20 05:09 AM
Goodnight Keith
Posted By: old colonel Re: New Zealand firearms law - 01/19/20 01:51 AM
Still waiting for my IP and the date Keith.

You post a good game, cash it.

Most of us have never bothered to try to track who might want to find out about us, but you appear to. Then again maybe you are bluffing.
Posted By: keith Re: New Zealand firearms law - 01/19/20 03:34 AM
As I mentioned to Lloyd3 a couple days ago, I went flintlock deer hunting Friday, and again today. We got some fresh snow and these were the last two days of the season for the areas I hunt. I didn't shoot a deer, but it was lovely weather, and great to be out there. I located Freedom Falls and the old Rockland Furnace built in 1832. I'll post some pics soon in the " A Brief History of Gunbarrel Iron & Steel" thread

But I also did some fishing too. I caught me a little hatchery trout from Topeka. This trout was so brain damaged that it was floating upside down and barely moving its' gills. All I had was a size 7/0 treble hook. I used my deer dragging rope for a line, and a limb as a make-shift cane pole. I had no salmon eggs or bait, but this stupid little Topeka hatchery trout suddenly attacked the bare hook like a Great White Shark on a feeding frenzy. Over and over this ignorant Topeka hatchery trout bit at that huge bare treble hook.

Look at this profoundly stupid Topeka trout still biting and attacking... what a dumb ass little fish!

Apparently this ignorant and hypocritical Topeka hatchery trout is too stupid and brain damaged to recall the many times he pissed and moaned and cried and lectured about THREAD DIVERSIONS.

This idiotic little Topeka hatchery trout also seems to have forgotten that he initiated Threads about THREAD DIVERSIONS, because they were "BAD MANNERS", and harmful to the subject matter here.

I wonder what this ignorant and hypocritical Topeka trout has posted in the last two days that has anything at all to do with New Zealand Firearms Law???

Now it seems that this dumb little Topeka hatchery trout is hell bent on showing us what I have been saying all along... That he is a dishonest petty two bit hypocrite who wouldn't know manners if Emily Post was dropped on his brain damaged little pin-head from 10,000 feet.

It is highly entertaining to see this low I.Q. Topeka hatchery trout doing all this nervous tap dancing and making lame excuses for his slimy behavior..... I didn't do it... what proof do you have???... show us your hand... but even if I did do it, the internet is a public place.... besides, you searched for memes which is the same as mining for personal dirt... Blah, blah, blah... on and on... acting not like a Topeka hatchery trout, but like a sneaky cat trying to cover up shit on a marble floor.
Posted By: old colonel Re: New Zealand firearms law - 01/19/20 04:04 PM
You readily demonstrate yourself with your words.

How sad someone capable of polite thought degraded himself.

Still no IP, no date, put up or shut up.

PS bless your heart
Posted By: keith Re: New Zealand firearms law - 01/19/20 04:30 PM
Ah, the brain damaged little Topeka hatchery trout has returned to lunge at the bare 7/0 treble hook again. What a show.

And oh what a hypocritical Thread Diversion!

Look dumbass... I never said that I acquired your IP address. To admit to that would be admitting to an illegal act. If you wish to draw that conclusion from the actual words I used as chum, then you are even dumber than I thought. If you want dates of when you were doing repeated internet searches on me, just look in your search history for 2017 and 2018. You will find the dates you demand, and the search engines and vehicles you used. How I know these thing is no business of yours. I wasn't supposed to know about the extensive searching and digging that Shortshells was doing from New York before he sent intimidation mail to my house either. But I did know, before he travelled to another city to send his mail from another postmark. Slimy gutless worms are too stupid to not leave slimy trails.

I realize that you did not post any dirt on me. There are two reasons for that. Number one, there was no dirt on me for you, or Stevie SKB, or Shortshells, or any of you other gutless worms who shall remain nameless for now, to find. Number two, even if you had found some juicy dirt, I do not believe that you would have the guts to post it. I believe that you would act like the gutless worm I'm sure you are, and you would pass that information to someone else that didn't suffer from being such a ball-less puke. Just my opinion as always, based solely on what I see here.

Now my brainless little Topeka hatchery trout, are you going to keep attacking a bare hook and making all these lame-ass excuses for behavior that you dishonestly deny???... or are you going to post something pertinent about firearms laws in New Zealand?
Posted By: nca225 Re: New Zealand firearms law - 01/19/20 05:06 PM
Originally Posted By: keith
Please Gladys, spare us, and spare your disingenuous blessings. You know exactly who I am and exactly where I live.

There was no one else from Topeka, Kansas with your IP address doing extensive searches on me. You really are a stupid and careless little worm. That is hardly all I know. That wasn't the really gutless, cowardly, and sneaky part, was it? Your style of dishonesty hurts your your position more than it helps.


Originally Posted By: keith
I never said that I acquired your IP address. To admit to that would be admitting to an illegal act. If you wish to draw that conclusion from the actual words I used as chum, then you are even dumber than I thought.


Here you find yourself in a teachable moment. While it is true, that you never confessed to illegally gaining old colonel's IP address, the the statement in the first quote , "There was no one else from Topeka, Kansas with your IP address doing extensive searches on me" is what those in the legal profession, for example a district attorney, would consider circumstantial evidence.

Since, as evidenced by your denial of gaining old colonel's IP address, it seems you do not know what circumstantial evidence is, I will provide you the definition:

"Evidence that tends to prove a fact by proving other events or circumstances which afford a basis for a reasonable inference of the occurrence of the fact at issue"

see https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/circumstantial%20evidence

Now applying this definition to your statement: "There was no one else from Topeka, Kansas with your IP address" we see that while you do not confess to the crime of gaining old colonel 's my IP address, you admit to having knowledge of what it is. The fact that you admitted that you know what old colonel's IP address is in the above statement; the proven fact that you illegally gained access to it is proved circumstantially by you admitting that you know what it is. For how else could you know what it is without gaining knowledge of what it is?

Frankly, I' surprised you let your statement stand this long. You usually realize when you've admitted to something that could cause legal problems for you and go back and delete it.

Well, maybe buck fever got the best of you.

BTW, the weather was nice for walking in the woods with a flintlock the last few days, but you're in good company, I struck out too.

Posted By: old colonel Re: New Zealand firearms law - 01/19/20 05:09 PM
Calling me a coward amongst again, rather sad on your part.

Does crudely insulting people really work at convincing them of the righteousness of you cause?

Originally Posted By: keith

... and I don't care much for your cowardly behind the scenes digging for dirt on me, and your other sneaky behind the scenes actions. You left a lot of tracks in cyberspace too.....
.


You still have not proven digging dirt or behind the scenes actions

Since you can’t prove you have my IP as you obviously cannot or will not prove it by posting it along with date(s) (All of an entire year is a hell of a bracket) we can explore something else for now.

Tell us about all the converts to the anti gun control cause you have converted through you vitriolic style of argument on this board?

If there are any former anti gun liberals on this board who have seen the light through Keith’s penetrating arguments feel free to tell us of your conversion and please include which argument Keith posted that won you over.
Posted By: rocky mtn bill Re: New Zealand firearms law - 01/19/20 05:33 PM
Keith and jOe, may be slow in responding.They're off to Virginia to celebrate Martin King Jr. Day. Both are feeling sad though because they've been prevented from bringing their AR-15s. However, both have chosen to bring their fire hoses and their German shepherds. Let's all wish them well and hope they've had a chance meet up for a vegan lunch and and a visit to the local library and art museum
Posted By: keith Re: New Zealand firearms law - 01/19/20 05:42 PM
Well, now we have two brain-damaged hatchery trout who wish to lunge and attack the bare 7/0 treble hook, and also put words in my mouth.

And look! The totally illiterate transgender trout thinks she is a lawyer now.

Since there is no-one that could top the transgender hatchery trout nca225 when it comes to posting absolute filth here, doesn't it seem rather strange and hypocritical that the brain damaged little Topeka has never said one word about nca225's incivility or lack of manners?

I enjoyed your tap dancing and lame excuses for behaviors that you deny Gladys Kravitz. What a revealing show! Although I already told you all you need to know, I might consider answering some of your stupid questions when you tell us why you felt it was so important to try to prevent me from posting QUOTES from an anti-2nd Amendment troll. Please take your head out of your ass so we understand any further off-topic Thread Diversions.

EDIT: Now Gladys and nca225 have been joined by an ignorant Montana hatchery trout. This one is so stupid that he complains about Trump violating the Constitution, while blindly supporting anti-gunners who work to gut the 2nd Amendment Rights of law abiding citizens.
Posted By: nca225 Re: New Zealand firearms law - 01/19/20 05:53 PM
Originally Posted By: rocky mtn bill
Keith and jOe, may be slow in responding.They're off to Virginia to celebrate Martin King Jr. Day. Both are feeling sad though because they've been prevented from bringing their AR-15s. However, both have chosen to bring their fire hoses and their German shepherds. Let's all wish them well and hope they've had a chance meet up for a vegan lunch and and a visit to the local library and art museum


True, true. But I'm guessing one of those six neo nazi's from The Base that were arrested by the FBI was keith & jOe's ride. They might have to take a bus now, and much to their disappointment, buses are not segregated anymore. Enjoy the trip fellas!

Nice to see kieth didn't actually did not dispute the knowledge he gained from my prior post. When you're right, you're right.
Posted By: old colonel Re: New Zealand firearms law - 01/19/20 06:00 PM
So where are the converts ?

How many of the unconverted joined you here on the board?

What good does your style of posting actually do?
Posted By: rocky mtn bill Re: New Zealand firearms law - 01/19/20 07:10 PM
What Keith accomplishes is to give Craig a nudge to jump in. Between them they stimulate jOe to scuttle out with a racist snarl. If the three of them were a tractor, they couldn't pull the button off an outhouse door.
Posted By: BrentD Re: New Zealand firearms law - 01/19/20 07:37 PM
Originally Posted By: rocky mtn bill
What Keith accomplishes is to give Craig a nudge to jump in. Between them they stimulate jOe to scuttle out with a racist snarl. If the three of them were a tractor, they couldn't pull the button off an outhouse door.


Got that right.
Posted By: old colonel Re: New Zealand firearms law - 01/19/20 08:16 PM
Anybody out there a former pro gun anti gun control converted to pro gun control here?

What is the efficacy of all the vitriol by either side of the discussion?
Posted By: keith Re: New Zealand firearms law - 01/19/20 09:37 PM
Originally Posted By: nca225


Nice to see kieth didn't actually did not dispute the knowledge he gained from my prior post. When you're right, you're right.


There was no knowledge in your prior post Nancy-boy. I thought that point should have been abundantly clear.

Let me put it a different way. You are full of shit. Pretty much the same old same old from you.

I don't know why the brainless little Topeka hatchery trout is attempting to continue with his hypocritical Thread Diversions. I just cannot bring myself to be concerned about turning off anyone on the fence about our gun rights, if it means acting nice to a sneaky and disingenuous piece of crap like Gladys.

That problem pales in comparison to the silly idea that we should embrace idiotic gun owners like nca225, pmag, and rocky mtn bill... who actually vote for the anti-gun Liberal Left Democrats that want to take away our gun rights.

Why do you suppose someone who professed to be so disgusted with Thread Diversions keeps acting like a complete idiot who is concerned not in the least with the actual thread topic?
Posted By: nca225 Re: New Zealand firearms law - 01/19/20 11:29 PM
I don't know keith, you'll just have to hope that old colonel might one day wish to share his thoughts with you. In the interim, you might want to be more carful how you toss out veiled threats that you are somehow wired into member's personal computers, as you have indeed admitted to illegal activity when making those veiled threats.

Or then again don't. You can have all the rope you want.
Posted By: old colonel Re: New Zealand firearms law - 01/19/20 11:38 PM
Keith, As usual you read and remember what you want. I long ago gave up on pleading for manners and the elimination of diversions.

You appear to have never cared about diversions.

I am disgusted by the atmosphere created by your posts, as well as the posts of many who react to you.

The disgusting nature of your insults is not matched in volume or intensity by any other single poster.

Your posts convert no one, anymore than the posts you supposedly react to. You posts often start and or feed needless fires on the board.

If I choose to go after your words I am free to, I am under no obligation to not treat you as you do others, much less myself.

Funny that you appear to track those who are curious about who and what you actually are, guilt or paranoia. I cannot say.

Continue hiding, continue posting as you do, and expect push back for your disgusting style. It is a sad reflection you cast.
Posted By: keith Re: New Zealand firearms law - 01/20/20 05:00 AM
Originally Posted By: nca225
I don't know keith, you'll just have to hope that old colonel might one day wish to share his thoughts with you....


That can never ever happen Nancy-boy, because that would require Gladys Kravitz to have a brain.

The sad fact that Gladyz is pretty much brain-dead explains why you two are obviously such kindred spirits. You might share one viable neuron between yourselves. It would also explain why you and Gladys so frequently see things in my words that are not even there.

My disdain for both of you is there, just so you glean something factual from this THREAD DIVERSION that came from the ignorant and apparently illiterate little Topeka hatchery trout. So is my disgust with your joint dishonesty and your hypocrisy. If that makes Gladys feel bad, or insulted, or angry, or sad, then I feel great. There is little here that gives me more pleasure than getting under the skin of a slimy invertebrate like him. They say that stress is a killer. Since my posts seem to cause Gladys stress, hope springs eternal. The other day, when I said that the Preacher wasn't the most dishonest person here... guess who I was thinking of.
Posted By: old colonel Re: New Zealand firearms law - 01/20/20 03:14 PM
Keith, a tale told full of sound and fury.

Still no converts noted, your insults and attacks say more about you than they do those you insult.  Altogether a rather sad commentary.

Full of accusations without proof of any actual effects, where is My IP, the dates a two year window.  You may have well have said the 21st century.

Where is the proof of my behind the scenes dirt digging or coordinations?

Where are your successful converts for which valiantly attack from you cherished hid?

You claim the righteousness of a comic con superhero; while you vilify in supposed support of the board rules which you regularly violate.

Your posts are those of a paper tiger. All while feigning triumph under the weight of a hill of dung.  

You abuse, you defame, you harass, with vulgar and hateful posts.  The shame is on you.

The atmosphere of this board is demeaned by your negative insult ridden attack postings.

Sad as you are actually a knowledgeable double gun guy capable of intelligent postings.
Posted By: nca225 Re: New Zealand firearms law - 01/20/20 03:26 PM
Originally Posted By: keith
The other day, when I said that the Preacher wasn't the most dishonest person here... guess who I was thinking of.


Hmmm, King? I'm pretty sure of your nearly 10,000 posts, 8,000 of them you were impugning King's honesty. But hey, I guess old men make an easy target for you. Or maybe its your other frequent targets, such as SKB, or rmb, or Brent or Bob, or Dr. Wonko, or is it CB? I remember you calling him a liar for one reason or another because he called you out on your generally poor disposition and character flaws, and you didn't like that he held himself out as your friend while doing so. I think you called him dishonest for that too. Hey with friends like that trying to help you, who needs enemies?

Even though I do like guessing games, I'm just not sure on this one, there are sooooo many people that draw your ire for what ever little reason or slight you perceive against you.

Although I'm pretty confident you don't mean me. You have in the past gone out of your way to point out that I have been honest about my positions on gun control.

Thinking about it some more, you can't mean me, your MO is to reproduce some post and spin it it to your perception that there was some dishonesty afoot. To my recollection, you have never reproduced one of my posts for that reason. That being said you have reproduced one of my posts, just for the sole reason to gain some pity for yourself. A post that to this day I still find endlessly entertaining. You know which one I'm talking about.
Posted By: craigd Re: New Zealand firearms law - 01/20/20 04:00 PM
Originally Posted By: old colonel
....Still no converts noted....

This point seems important to you, do you have a recipe for gaining converts? What if, somehow or another, the point is to expose that you can not convert someone who has the agenda to fundamentally change the US? Since keith has previously posted, is my note far enough removed so that I'm not his puppet? You know, because in this environment of decorum, it's directly related to New Zealand.
Posted By: old colonel Re: New Zealand firearms law - 01/20/20 04:08 PM
I do not accuse anyone of being puppets and I am not bothered by intelligent thought. My point is the extremist postings of attacks and insults is worthless. They have no hope of changing anyone’s mind.

In fact they drive intelligent discussion away as many simply do not want to wallow in the discord.

I oppose expanding gun control. I won’t lay out the arguments now, but I have in the past. I am passionately against the modern Democrat party in so many ways it would take an encyclopedia to list them. That said I do not believe the berating of those who disagree with me helps.

I am sick of some of the stuff I see posted here and as those who post have the right to speak so do I.

PS. The board rules are far closer to my interpretation than the defamation and insult I oppose.
Posted By: keith Re: New Zealand firearms law - 01/21/20 06:31 AM
Originally Posted By: nca225
Originally Posted By: keith
The other day, when I said that the Preacher wasn't the most dishonest person here... guess who I was thinking of.


Hmmm, King? I'm pretty sure of your nearly 10,000 posts, 8,000 of them you were impugning King's honesty. But hey, I guess old men make an easy target for you. Or maybe its your other frequent targets, such as SKB, or rmb, or Brent or Bob, or Dr. Wonko, or is it CB? I remember you calling him a liar for one reason or another because he called you out on your generally poor disposition and character flaws, and you didn't like that he held himself out as your friend while doing so. I think you called him dishonest for that too. Hey with friends like that trying to help you, who needs enemies?


We don't have to look far at all to see dishonesty from you Nancy-boy. Gladys Kravitz would be repeatedly calling for proof that around 8000 of my nearly 10,000 posts were "impugning King's honesty."

I'll only ask for such proof once, because I have asked you similar questions about your many lies repeatedly, and all we see is you trying to change the subject, or slipping away like the coward you are. Remember the repeated question about your lies that Trump didn't respect the Constitution, while you and the other Libtards here support and defend the Liberal left Democrats who work to take the 2nd Amendment Rights of law abiding U.S. Citizens?

Of those other Libtards that you refer to as my targets, I seldom refer to any of them as being dishonest without QUOTING them to show exactly what they posted that is false or hypocritical, or both. Yet offering that level of proof... their own words... drives tight-assed pinhead hypocrites like Gladys crazy.

Then there's that unfortunate situation with CB. Now there's another lie from you. You are very good at QUOTING me and twisting my posts when you want to tar me as a Nazi, for example. You even paraphrased my comment; "With friends like that.... who needs enemies?"

You know damn well what transpired. He was using the IGNORE function to IGNORE my posts, and roundly castigating me because he didn't care for my methods of handling anti-gun trolls and Libtards, and slimy liars.... you know, gutless worms like you and Gladys Kravitz. He attempted to ridicule me publicly, twice, which is something a true friend would never do under any circumstances. But a short time before that, and while at the same time IGNORING my posts... he emailed me to ask me if I would be interested in doing some slow rust bluing for him using the methods and rusting formula given to me by PA24, Doug Woodin.

You remember Doug, don't you Nancy-Boy? Doug knew you were filthy slime too. Anyway, I knew that CB was IGNORING me, so I just acted like I never saw his email, and didn't respond. I felt that was extremely two-faced behavior. I never called him dishonest that I recall. I privately informed him that our friendship was over, and he took it all public again. I then did say a lot of other things, and when I revealed what he had done, he avoided this forum for quite some time. He knows he should not have behaved like that. We can still agree on the Liberal threat to gun rights, how full of shit you are, and the many failures of Liberalism, but a friendship died. Leave it to you to dredge it up by lying about the circumstances.

I did think it was hilarious that he also snubbed the work of the free advertising gunsmith SKB, who he had told us was one of his best friends here. He chose me to do the work on his barrels rather than his good friend Stevie... even though he was doing things that were disloyal and unfriendly to me. He would not have done that if he thought that Stevie could do as good a job as me.

I really don't have to lie about the dishonest and hypocritical Libtards here, because the truth is so much more hurtful to them.

So when do you plan on posting your full name and address, to satisfy the likes of the Preacher, Stevie, SKB, or Gladys Kravitz, the brain-damaged Topeka hatchery trout?

I can answer that one. When hell freezes over. It would terrify you to enter the same zip code as me, and you know it.

And can you guess how Gladys Kravitz has again proved to us what an extreme hypocrite and complete idiot she is yesterday?
Posted By: old colonel Re: New Zealand firearms law - 01/21/20 09:20 AM
Originally Posted By: FAQ What are the rules of conduct for the forum?
Considering the real-time nature of this message board, it is impossible for us to review messages or confirm the validity of information posted. Please remember that we do not actively monitor the contents of posted messages and are not responsible for any messages posted. We do not vouch for or warrant the accuracy, completeness or usefulness of any message, and are not responsible for the contents of any message. The messages express the views of the author of the message, not necessarily the views of this BB or any entity associated with this BB. Any user who feels that a posted message is objectionable is encouraged to contact us immediately by email. We have the ability to remove objectionable messages and we will make every effort to do so, within a reasonable time frame, if we determine that removal is necessary. This is a manual process, however, so please realize that we may not be able to remove or edit particular messages immediately. You agree, through your use of this service, that you will not use this BB to post any material which is knowingly false and/or defamatory, inaccurate, abusive, vulgar, hateful, harassing, obscene, profane, sexually oriented, threatening, invasive of a person's privacy, or otherwise violative of any law. You agree not to post any copyrighted material unless the copyrighted material is owned by you. Although we do not and cannot review the messages posted and are not responsible for the content of any of these messages, we reserve the right to delete any message for any reason whatsoever. You remain solely responsible for the content of your messages, and you agree to indemnify and hold us harmless with respect to any claim based upon transmission of your message array(s).We reserve the right to reveal your identity array (or whatever information we know about you) in the event of a complaint or legal action arising from any message posted by you. Participation is at your own risk and judgment.


Many violate these rules in word and or spirit. Keith you are by no means unique. However you do lead the pack.

A simple text search of our website shows what kind of posts you often make.

Just a sampling of your words:

Originally Posted By: keith
……Here's some true facts for you. You can save them and reprint them as many times as you wish. I hate anyone who undermines my Constitutional Rights, and especially our 2nd Amendment which is so much a part of my life. They are no better than an ISIS terrorist to me. If they died, the world would be a better place……Call me out whenever you like…


Originally Posted By: keith
....I personally don't ever use the IGNORE feature on anyone, ……. I have more fun pissing them off than I ever would ignoring them...

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
You appear gender fixated at times:

Originally Posted By: keith
…all of the F.A.G.'s (Fake Ass Gentlemen) ….


Originally Posted By: keith
…….If there ever was a photo sub-forum here, would you feel that ____ should or shouldn't include pics of himself wearing buckle strap girls shoes? Personally, I think he should keep his cross-dressing in his own closet. If ____ ever posted pics of his girly shoes….
.

Originally Posted By: keith
….There was no knowledge in your prior post Nancy-boy….
.

Originally Posted By: keith
….Since you often do the same exact thing post Nancy-boy….
.

Originally Posted By: keith
….I have a better idea Nancy-boy….
.

Originally Posted By: keith
….Finally, Nancy-boy has someone….
.

Originally Posted By: keith
….Did you happen to teach Nancy-boy ____ how to do it…..
.

Originally Posted By: keith
….you just don’t want to go near my other question, do you Nancy Boy?...[censored] ____ bailed out….
.

Originally Posted By: keith
…Since there is no-one that could top the transgender hatchery trout _____ when it comes to posting absolute filth here….
.

Originally Posted By: keith
….And look! The totally illiterate transgender trout thinks she is a lawyer now….
.

Originally Posted By: keith
….Then we have _____ and his little transgender pal ….
.

Originally Posted By: keith
….I can’t figure out why your little transgender friend ….
.

Originally Posted By: keith
….Another set of lies about what happened during our trading of insults transgender coward ….
.

Originally Posted By: keith
…It is most interesting that a number of the F.A.G.'s (Fake-Ass-Gentlemen) here….
.

Originally Posted By: keith
…..Sounds something like Charleton Heston overdosing on estrogen!..
.

Originally Posted By: keith
….._____, it appears you take it as a personal dog whistle when someone refers to homosexuals and transgenders? And with good reason!...
.

Originally Posted By: keith
……because they don't want everyone to know that they have less stones than school-girls…
.

Originally Posted By: keith
…. [censored] coward ….
.

Originally Posted By: keith
…..self-appointed estrogen fueled..


Originally Posted By: keith
….by all of the F.A.G.s (fake ass gentlemen)…. I freely admit to being rude to those who work to undermine our gun rights via their words and actions….


Originally Posted By: keith
I'd like to see _________ demonstrate his dissatisfaction with the way Dave runs his website by doing one of those estrogen fueled "I'm Done" thin-skinned-crybaby farewell threads as we have seen in the past. ….


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Then there is your fecal fixations

Originally Posted By: keith
…….You are full of shit. Pretty much the same old same old from you…..
.

Originally Posted By: keith
…..I had no intention of ever being nice to a spineless piece of shit….
.

Originally Posted By: keith
…..lost his shit again….
.

Originally Posted By: keith
…..I don’t give a shit what you think….
.

Originally Posted By: keith
….the same little turd….


Originally Posted By: keith
…. piece of shit coward ….
.

Originally Posted By: keith
..you are so full of shit that your eyes are brown..


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Intelligence appears important to you:

Originally Posted By: keith
…..Thanks so much DUMBASS….
.

Originally Posted By: keith
…..DUMBASS ___’s #post
.

Originally Posted By: keith
..Here's stupid’s reply:….


Originally Posted By: keith
..I'll bet that the moron above….


Originally Posted By: keith
..you really are stupid and myopic….


Originally Posted By: keith
…..Here's another Fudd Libtard…


Originally Posted By: keith
…..you will always hold the title of "Village Idiot" here….


Originally Posted By: keith
…You are so f***king stupid….


Originally Posted By: keith
…tight-assed hypocritical pinhead…..


Originally Posted By: keith
…Hey brainchild……..


Originally Posted By: keith
..like an illiterate negro sharecropper.


Originally Posted By: keith
…..Mental illness can hardly explain the kind of dishonesty you exhibit here King. You can keep right on posting denials King, hoping people will forget what you posted in the past. I will keep right on reminding them with your own words, that we have anti-2nd Amendment Trolls right here undermining our rights and stabbing us in the back…..


Originally Posted By: keith
...That about sums up your mindset King. You are sick. You are a mentally ill anti-gun Troll in total denial of facts, clear words, and clear meaning, as patiently and repeatedly explained by the very Framers who wrote those words. And you are dishonest to the core of your being.....

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Who can forget this example of real hate?

Originally Posted By: keith
.....Please don't make us wait much longer to post your anti-gun legacy in the "Silent Doubles" memorial forum. Please hurry. Don't you want to see if you can abuse your poor dog Jake in the afterlife?...


Originally Posted By: keith
…..The final say will be my memorial tribute to you and all of your anti-gun sentiments in Silent Doubles. You deserve it King. You earned it...


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Courage or lack of it seems important to you and is often a focus:

Originally Posted By: keith
…You are too cowardly and too disingenuous to admit when you have lied or when you have been wrong about me….….


Originally Posted By: keith
…...who is being the disingenuous coward here…...


Originally Posted By: keith
…...You have the same gutless personality...
.

Originally Posted By: keith
…..He lost his shit and engaged in cowardly and decidedly uncivil behavior...


Originally Posted By: keith
…..That pretty much makes you a lot like him, and just as cowardly....


Originally Posted By: keith
…..tripartite of sleaze and cowardice...


Originally Posted By: keith
…..your repeated cowardly running and fleeing...


Originally Posted By: keith
…..you run like a coward...


Originally Posted By: keith
…..your cowardly doxxing would not turn out as you envisioned...


Originally Posted By: keith
…..What are you so afraid of coward...


Originally Posted By: keith
…..you run away from it like a coward...


Originally Posted By: keith
…..Tell us some more lies coward...


Originally Posted By: keith
…..telling us you are not a coward...


Originally Posted By: keith
…..who must run like a coward...


Originally Posted By: keith
…..then runaway like the dishonest coward you are...


Originally Posted By: keith
…. transgender coward ….
.

Originally Posted By: keith
…. [censored] coward ….
.

Originally Posted By: keith
…. filthy coward ….
.

Originally Posted By: keith
…. spineless coward ….
.

Originally Posted By: keith
…. piece of shit coward ….
.

Originally Posted By: keith
…. Like the dishonest coward you are ….
.

Originally Posted By: keith
…. You ran away from them like the coward you are ….
.

Originally Posted By: keith
…. Maybe you are simply a coward ….
.

Originally Posted By: keith
…..It's because you are nothing but a LYING dishonest piece of shit. And a gutless coward too... we must not forget that you are a gutless coward who needs to lie....


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From a poster who expects others to respect his privacy and hides his true identity or jokingly assumes someone else’s identity

Originally Posted By: keith
….Wow. Your keyboard courage is impressive…
.
Posted By: canvasback Re: New Zealand firearms law - 01/21/20 11:49 AM
Wow Keith. I contacted you only a “short time before” I “publicly ridiculed” you?

What a pile of bullshit.

The only person here who regularly publicly ridicules you.........IS YOU. You make a fool of yourself regularly.

I suppose you used the vague phrase “short time” to give your bullshit some leeway.

I contacted you about bluing “a short time” after Doug died. I “publicly ridiculed” you a short time ago. Doug did not pass a “short time” ago. See how that works?

And quit clinging to Doug’s skirts. It’s disgusting the way you bring him up all the time when he’s not here to defend himself.
Posted By: keith Re: New Zealand firearms law - 01/21/20 11:24 PM
Um, no James... I do not see how that works. I tried to be as civil as I could when responded to Nancy-boy's bullshit. I could have reverted to calling you a two-faced Canadian weasel. But I felt there was no need to go there to counter Nancy's crap. I really don't see how some bullshit about semantics makes a bit of difference in what transpired between us as you proceeded in manner that I do not believe you would find acceptable if the tables were turned.

I don't cling to Doug's skirt,and there was nothing in my statement that Doug would need or want to defend. So just stop being a disingenuous drama queen already.

The point in time when you contacted me about doing some rust bluing for you was quite a while after Doug had passed... relatively speaking, since he has only been gone a few years. The point in time when you emailed me coincided exactly with a point in time when you were IGNORING my posts. I recall that perfectly because I decided to respond to you via Doublegunshop PM rather than my email. However, I couldn't PM you because I got the notification that I could not PM this user because he is IGNORING YOUR POSTS. That was when I learned that you were doing this. Even at that, I still didn't wish to terminate what had been a pretty decent internet friendship.

So I just decided to just say nothing, and not reply to your request, to see how things played out. By then, you were becoming much more friendly sympathetic to the Libtards... something that I'm certain would have been very disappointing to Doug. Again, I said nothing, as I don't get to choose your friends. If you think telling that truth is somehow disrespectful to him, I guess we'll just agree to disagree. I spoke and corresponded with Doug more than enough to confidently state that I knew how he felt about the Libtards here. Some of the people you chose as preferred new friends were precisely the reason he quit posting here. I could just imagine his response to the post where you informed us that one of your best friends here was Stevie SKB... along with King and other Libs that weren't ever going to be on Doug's Top Ten Great Guys List. I know he would have been shocked at your transformation... to put it mildly.

It wasn't long after that when you really started becoming more and more critical of me. I checked again and saw that you still had me on IGNORE. I thought, this clown is acting like BrentD and the other turds that claim to ignore someone, yet still respond to them. Things quickly escalated, and your attacks got so intense that jOe responded with his advice to me: "WITH FRIENDS LIKE THAT, WHO NEEDS ENEMIES."

Of course, part of the problem was your obsession with jOe, and your perception that I was 100% wrong to defend anything he posted. That intense obsession with jOe was on full display yesterday when you were far more critical of jOe and his comments about gays than you were about the absolute filth directed toward craigd by nca225. Your new Libtard friends certainly taught you how to play the selective civility game.

You want to talk about being hoist upon your own petard??? What a joke!

Back to the realization that things were no longer friendly between us, I then emailed you about your actions, preferring to discuss your issues with me privately... like a friend would and should do. You gave a reply that I felt was rather lame. I replied to that, in point by point detail, and you didn't bother with a response. Then you soon posted another personal attack here. That was enough for me. I still attempted to keep it private, and I sent you the PM where I told you to go f**k yourself, and formally ended what I once foolishly thought was a friendship.

Being the drama queen you are, you posted that PM from me, and had your melt-down. I replied with what had transpired that proved to me that you were a two-faced Canadian weasel.

Is this coming back to you now? I still have the email where you asked me to blue barrels for you. I still have the PM where I told you to go f**k yourself. I'd have to look to see if your Thread where you posted my PM still exists, or if it has been deleted. I haven't bothered looking because it really isn't important to me. Over is over, although I find it strangely interesting that your only responses to things I have posted since then have been several times that you QUOTED me on gun rights, the economy, Trump vs. Liberals, etc., and said that you agreed with what I had posted. But I know all I need to know about you as a person and as a so-called friend. And I also know that when I laid it all out for you, you dropped out of the thread you had initiated, and kept a low profile for some time afterwards. You never would have backed down in a million years if you thought your behavior was admirable and justified, or the way you would want to be treated by a friend.
Posted By: keith Re: New Zealand firearms law - 01/22/20 05:55 AM
Gladys Kravitz, I really enjoyed your extensive compilation.

I'd say that I'm proud of your efforts, but I really don't think you are smart enough to do this by yourself. I believe that you had help from someone who would rather hide behind the scenes and keep a low profile, as you and the Preacher did during last January's Winter Offensive. Every battle involves planning, don't they? But it doesn't help when there are agents that intercept the plans for the attack. It's called counter-intelligence... when there is actually intelligence to counter.

I couldn't help noticing that you carefully edited out the names of the slimy turds I was directing those comments to. Truth be told, I believe a good many of them were directed toward a certain tight-assed hypocritical crybaby pinhead who calls himself old colonel... aka Gladys Kravitz. I hope they make you cry yourself to sleep every night, and eat you alive every day.

We know that all the rest were directed toward really fine quality gentlemen and invaluable members... right????

Uh, no... actually, they were directed toward the most disgusting and dishonest liberal worms here.

Explain this Gladys... None were directed toward Stan. Not even one was directed toward Ted. There were no nasties for jOe. Not a one for Miller. You won't find any that were directed toward KY jon. Nor was craigd a recipient of derision or insults (from me, at least)... nor a whole lot of other guys who aren't creepy lying sneaky, conniving, gutless worms who engage in repeated attempts to intimidate me or have me banned.

If you seriously think I'm going to ever be nice to a worm like you, or that you can change me or stop me, then you are dumber than I thought. And Gladys, that is being so ignorant, your I.Q would have to be in negative numbers. If you think I am going to be nice and polite and mannerly to the pure slimeballs here who post filthy things about my family, or lie to me, or lie about me, or conspire to engage in doxxing, threats, intimidation... those who call me on the phone screaming vulgar threats, call me everything but a white English gentleman, attempt to jeopardize my employment etc., while pretending that I am the root of all evil here... Then you have have proven and justified every negative thing I have ever said about your lying hypocritical idiotic self.

And you should also think twice about the absurd idea that I would ever respect the total and complete idiots who claim to be supportive of gun rights, while jeopardizing our gun rights every time they go into a voting booth, They do so by their unabashed support for anti-gunners. You are still incensed about the idea of a Memorial for your pen-pal King with a reprint of his extreme anti-gun rhetoric and QUOTES of his own words. . But King himself recently told us he was still proud of his words and his support for anti-gun Liberals.

The real motivation for your obsession with me is perfectly clear. You are willing to do anything you can, including an unhealthy investment of time and money to silence me, and hide the fact that these pukes are literally stabbing law abiding gun owners and citizens in the back. You claim to be a Conservative and a supporter of gun rights, but your actions here have once again revealed the truth about you.

Look assh0le... if you were really and sincerely interested in manners, civility, decorum, or following Dave's rules... you would have gone off the rails over the absolute filth that your transgender little friend nca225 directed toward craigd yesterday.

You read it, and so did buzz.

Originally Posted By: buzz
Originally Posted By: nca225
Originally Posted By: craigd

Only conversation Steve, but sure folks judge without knowing what's in the heart. How else would you know my pals are racists?


You know thrifty, if you didn't have keith's pubic hairs scratching your eyes all the time, you might actually know the answer to that by looking at what they have wrote instead.

Edited to add. I'm sorry, that was agenda driven and uncivil of me. My bad.
This is the filthiest post I think I’ve ever seen on this forum. A bit more than uncivil imho. You should be ashamed.


Perhaps you think that behavior and personal attack on a decent man will convert folks and make this a kinder and better forum??? Perhaps you will tell us that filth is your idea of staying withing Dave's rules? Perhaps you and BrentD will tell us that this is good manners? Perhaps you and SKB and canvasback will tell us that this is mannerly, intelligent, and less homophobic than jOe saying he doesn't think God created or approves of gays?

When pigs fly.

craigd is about as civil and non-confrontational as you can get. I am sure he is as straight as a laser beam in his sexuality, and is a good family man with a wife and kids. craigd has been taking a lot of heat lately as being some puppet or parrot who is influenced or controlled by me. Nothing could be further from the truth. craigd is a completely independent thinker. If I have a problem with craigd, (and I do) it is that I feel he is too nice and too kind to the liars and hypocrites here. But I don't expect or think I could ever change him. He will always be his own man.

craigd's style is as different as night and day from me. He regularly nails the disgusting lot of you Libtards with a special brand of subtle sarcasm. Many of us get a real laugh at the subtle digs and swipes he takes at you. The problem I have with that is that many of you, such as rocky mtn bill and nca225, are just too stupid to even comprehend the subtle b1tch-slaps he gives you. His lessons are wasted on students that have no brains. If I had any influence on craigd at all, I would advise him to disrespect you all as much as you disrespect him, instead of letting it roll off his back. I treat you as I do because being nice toward you plays into your hypocrite's game.

That said Gladys Kravitz, if you really felt the way you say you do about manners and decorum and civility, you would be posting a long collection of QUOTES of gutter filth, name calling, insults, personal attacks, dishonesty, attacks on religion and God, etc. from nca225. There is no shortage of it... if you mean what you say.

But you haven't, and you won't. Neither will SKB. There will be no calls from either you or the Preacher for him to stop posting filth while using an anonymous screen name. There will be no concerted effort by all of you to search for dirt and engage in doxxing of nca225. And BrentD will not hold up nca225's filth as a reason to withhold support for this forum, or as a reason to suggest a boycott and a mass migration to Upland Journal. rocky mtn bill saw that filth and is silent. Dr. Wanker has applauded nca225's behavior here. I have no doubt that nca225 gets advice and consent from some Liberal cowards who operate from the shadows here. The Preacher will not launch a personal attack thread or give his psychoanalysis, or even invoke his God or religion, even though nca225 regularly has disgusting things to say about his Lord, his Bible, and his Christian beliefs.

nca225's latest filth could not have been posted at a better time. The disgusting words nca225 posted here yesterday are nothing new, and hardly unexpected. For once, I am happy to see it because the collective and relative non-response from you and your friends was a priceless illustration of the truth about all of you Liberal liars.

You would be hard pressed to find a bigger collection of liars, frauds, and hypocrites anywhere on the internet, as the crowd of pukes you are a part of. And out of the whole disgusting sickening lot of you... Gladys, you are the most slimy piece of shit of all.

So save that for your collection you sick little worm.
Posted By: HomelessjOe Re: New Zealand firearms law - 01/22/20 01:16 PM
Keith it's a gay day.

You sure drug a lot of them out of the closet...

Old Kernul should be ashamed of himself.

Shame shame...
Posted By: rocky mtn bill Re: New Zealand firearms law - 01/22/20 02:54 PM
Keith, like a certain hero of his, may appear to be a loud-mouthed bully with Obsessive-Compulsive Disorder, but he is actually a very stable genius.
Posted By: canvasback Re: New Zealand firearms law - 01/22/20 03:17 PM
Ahhh, Keith. So much bullshit and spin, so little time. Besides the toxicity you spew, it’s the tediousness of your posts that had me put you on ignore. You continue to be both toxic and tedious.

So let’s get a few things straight.

You and I were never “friends”. You are someone I know on the internet. We share a political viewpoint and for that reason, communicated amicably for a number of years. For years I have been encouraging you to have and use a different tone in your attacks on those you disagree with. Privately and publicly. Nothing new there. I finally concluded last year that you have some mental issues of some sort. And I still believe that.

I had you on ignore because your posts pollute this fine site. I got tired of having them in my face whenever I visited the site. And while on the subject of the ignore feature.....what are you.......5 years old? Does flicking ignore on mean we have sworn off ever viewing posts from the offending party again? What a consistently childish position you take on that subject.

Hiding behind Doug’s skirt? Of course you do. You are the only one who ever brings his name up, always in a effort to chastise someone. I’ll repeat. It’s disgusting and you should stop using your imaginations of what a dead man might think. As I said, he can’t defend himself or disassociate himself from your filth.

As far as you being insulted because I had you on ignore, I recall us having a somewhat humorous exchange about that. I told you exactly why I put you on ignore and it was consistent with my long term view of your style of postings. Which I was always clear with you about. To act now that you were somehow wounded by that is just more spin and bullshit. And, it was a significant period of time between me asking you about the barrel bluing and you telling me to go [censored] myself. Over a year. A year in which your posts got ever more strident, ever more ridiculous.

It’s laughable how you “don’t see semantics” as mattering when defending your behavior and posts but it’s the kind of thing you try to call others out on all the time. Like the leftists you profess to hate, your hypocrisy is stunning in its boldness. I love how you describe yourself as a practicing RC. Bollocks. You have no idea what being Christian means.

Apparently the things I do and say are important to you. You save them. You analyze their hidden portents. You pull them out to lamely try to flay me with them when it suits you. You are crushed by the ending of our “friendship”. What else explains the vitriol you direct at me.

And then there is your bum buddy jOe. You shall be known by the company you keep. Low intellect. Racist. Homophobic. Mean spirited. Down right stupid. Go ahead. Take jOe’s counsel. Bwahaha.

You are a sad little man Keith. You have issues. Get help.
Posted By: Bob Cash Re: New Zealand firearms law - 01/22/20 03:42 PM
Posted By: nca225 Re: New Zealand firearms law - 01/22/20 03:48 PM
Originally Posted By: keith
You are very good at QUOTING me and twisting my posts when you want to tar me as a Nazi...


Sorry princess, I didn't tar you as a nazi. Your own words and admissions did that. Here they are again to remind you.

Here’s keith’s post # 4#9##5

Originally Posted By: keith
Jim, the old German gunsmith who lived a couple miles from my Dad once showed me some vierlings and drillings that were engraved and inlaid like this. I used to frequent his gun shop and was looking at the used gun rack one day, and he came over and said in broken English, "These guns... all junk! You want see some nice guns, I show you nice guns." He took me into his house which was attached to the shop, and it was stuffed with guns of all kinds. Many were extremely ornate, heavily engraved, and inlaid with gold, silver, and ivory.

He explained to me that he was trained as an armorer for the German Army during WWII, and that part of his his job was to destroy guns that the Nazi's confiscated from towns and villages they conquered during the Blitzkrieg. They would issue a decree to the residents that they had 24 hours to turn in their guns, and if they were caught with guns after that, they were executed.

He told me he was supposed to remove the stocks from the guns, burn the wood, and put the breech section of the barreled action in a press, and crush it so it could not be recaptured and reused. The scrap was sent to steel mills to be converted to new steel for Nazi weapons. He said, "Oh, I crush a lot of very nice guns, but really nice ones, I keep and stash when I can. Then after the war, I come to United States, and my brother smuggle them over here to me." I have no idea how they accomplished this, but he didn't just have a lot of guns. He literally had tonnage. Not all of it was as nice as your photo, but I saw stuff that rivaled anything I saw in the NRA Museum, Harold's Club Casino gun collection in Reno, or anything else I've seen.

The last time I saw these guns was in 1991 during the first Gulf War. I went to his new house he built after he retired to see if he had some Mauser parts I needed. His wife remembered me and invited me in because he wasn't feeling well. The new house was also stuffed with guns... thousands of them, in every room. Many were getting that dry rust patina that comes from neglect. It would have taken a year just to clean them all. He and his wife were cheering for Saddam Hussein as CNN reported that Iraq was firing Scud missiles into Israel. They called them "Stud Missiles" in their broken English, and saying they hoped Saddam killed all of the Jews. Once a Nazi, always a Nazi, I guess.


Seeking out and doing business with a nazi while he is concurrently cheering the death of Jews is what tarred you as a nazi.

I just added the feathers.

Cheers Sh!thead.


Posted By: nca225 Re: New Zealand firearms law - 01/22/20 04:01 PM
Originally Posted By: keith

That said Gladys Kravitz, if you really felt the way you say you do about manners and decorum and civility, you would be posting a long collection of QUOTES of gutter filth, name calling, insults, personal attacks, dishonesty, attacks on religion and God, etc. from nca225. There is no shortage of it... if you mean what you say.

But you haven't, and you won't. Neither will SKB. There will be no calls from either you or the Preacher for him to stop posting filth while using an anonymous screen name. There will be no concerted effort by all of you to search for dirt and engage in doxxing of nca225. And BrentD will not hold up nca225's filth as a reason to withhold support for this forum, or as a reason to suggest a boycott and a mass migration to Upland Journal. rocky mtn bill saw that filth and is silent. Dr. Wanker has applauded nca225's behavior here.


Sorry nobody else but your puppy dog and goat f#@king racist buddy homelessAsshole comes to defend you, but as I have painstakingly explained to you before, that is because no other members here care to be associated with a nazi piece of sh!t like you.

Try to understand.

In the interim, I'll patiently await until your puppy dog is done gratifying you and starts her barking for her master.
Posted By: HomelessjOe Re: New Zealand firearms law - 01/22/20 04:18 PM
Originally Posted By: Bob Cash

Finally bOb and I see eye to eye...Trump Trump Trump
Posted By: HomelessjOe Re: New Zealand firearms law - 01/22/20 04:22 PM
Lets see...

We have Canadian dUck a professed atheist a rocky mountain oyster and an old Kernul tag teaming.

Whoopy got you guys beat.

Combined brAin power of a pecan.
Posted By: Bob Cash Re: New Zealand firearms law - 01/22/20 04:33 PM
Posted By: canvasback Re: New Zealand firearms law - 01/22/20 04:34 PM
Originally Posted By: HomelessjOe
Lets see...

We have Canadian dUck a professed atheist a rocket mountain oyster and an old Kernul tag teaming.

Whoopy got you guys beat.

Combined brAin power of a pecan.


Oh boy jOe, you really got us good there!
Posted By: lonesome roads Re: New Zealand firearms law - 01/22/20 05:58 PM
This is all so exciting! My heart is beating so fast!

https://youtu.be/QL69yWD8UOY


___________________________
Why can’t we be friends?
https://youtu.be/FgS50Y06bnY
Posted By: keith Re: New Zealand firearms law - 01/22/20 06:42 PM
Poor James Mustela Frenata... The two faced Canadian weasel.

So sorry to tax your brain with posts so tedious that you needed to IGNORE them. We recently saw this same lame shit from the Preacher...

Since you are also mentally incapable of digesting too many things at once, I will go slowly, and just address small digestible bites of your own spin.

Take a deep breath and try to think real hard. Let me know if I need to break this down further.

OK, ready? I said it was two-faced of you to ask me to blue your barrels, while at the same time acting like you were amicable and "friendly" to me. If we can believe any of your bullshit, you actually felt much differently about me. Yet you still preferred me over your new wonderful Libtard friend Stevie Bertram SKB, when you wanted someone to do a nice job of slow rust bluing.It

You claim I had become so tedious and objectionable that you had to use the IGNORE function. Two problems with that sister....


First, like me, you had previously made the argument that we have free will, and should be able to just skip over the posts of anyone we don't care to read anymore. That is what Stan recently said he does, and that is what I do.

Second, in spite of your disingenuous claim, you still felt compelled to toggle the IGNORE function to keep right on reading the stuff that got your panties in a knot.

That is pretty much the same crap we see from BrentD on a regular basis.

That should be enough for now to counter SPIN and WEASEL WORDS from a two-faced Canadian weasel.

More to follow...
Posted By: SKB Re: New Zealand firearms law - 01/22/20 06:45 PM
Stay a while LR, no hurry.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sUML2yWVn8c
Posted By: canvasback Re: New Zealand firearms law - 01/22/20 07:09 PM
Have at it Keith. I have a life that revolves around things other than internet warrior-ing and constantly rebutting or refuting your spun version of “facts”.

You’re unhealthily obsessed with proving your points, however useless they may be. The nature of your character is evident to all. So is mine. I’m fine with how we are and will be judged.

I sometimes don’t not respond to you because of some “gotcha” post from you. I sometimes don’t respond because you are an ass. Because there is no end to your obsessive / compulsive drive to win these inane discussions. Sometimes I just get tired of your toxicity, hostility and social stupidity. jOe’s too.

As has been pointed out many times here, you are a purveyor of all that you accuse others of.....cowardice, hypocrisy, spin and lies. You start just about every toxic diversion on this board. And if it’s not you, it’s your bum buddy jOe. The reason no one complains about the Rev or SKB or RMB or the rest when one of them resorts to your tactics is they don’t start it. You do. But you are too stupid to realize that.

Spend you day dreaming up some lengthy counter argument Keith. My conservative and liberal friends and I will just be laughing sadly at your obsessive/compulsive nature.

Remind me again Keith. How many converts have you got to our side. The side that believes in the freedom to own guns and use them in a responsible manner for sporting, hunting and self defence purposes. How many Keith?

You and I may want the same things, but you are too blind to see you are an impediment to your own objectives.

Posted By: craigd Re: New Zealand firearms law - 01/22/20 07:23 PM
Originally Posted By: nca225
....nobody else but your puppy dog and goat f#@king racist buddy homelessAsshole comes to defend you....

...I'll patiently await until your puppy dog is done gratifying you and starts her barking for her master.

Woof, woof. Oh, and that was a masculine amigo bark.

I suppose it’s not easy for you to be the massengill mascot. When you roll over and champion the cause, none of your buddies want to rub your belly. Why’s that? Oh don’t worry, they still adore you. It’s just gett’in a little creepy under the big tent, eh? May your car run out of batteries, and your comfort pony stomp on your lego village.
Posted By: nca225 Re: New Zealand firearms law - 01/22/20 07:56 PM
Nice to see you come running when called!

Enjoy!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2AkLE4X-bbU
Posted By: old colonel Re: New Zealand firearms law - 01/22/20 11:53 PM
Utterly sad and pathetic
Posted By: keith Re: New Zealand firearms law - 01/23/20 06:02 AM
Well Mustela Frenata, the two faced Canadian weasel, I'm sure that you find it problematic that I should confront you when you are posting your spin and bullshit.

But I should first compliment you. You are doing a very good impression of the Preacher, with your attempts to run away from your bullshit by covering it up with accusations of OCD or mental illness or not being a good Roman Catholic.

You two disingenuous turds sure like to toss that crap around. You'd think I have a Rosary and a Knights of Columbus logo in my tagline, and continually beat my chest over my religion. That is pure horse-shit, and you both know it. Really, other than bringing it up to show I knew a little bit about adult conversion to Catholicism when your good friend King lied about the circumstances of his Father's conversion, I don't really mention it. I certainly don't try to say I am devout and ready for Sainthood.

And your last reply demonstrates the sheer hypocrisy of referring to me as obsessive-compulsive. You couldn't get through it without attacking jOe again. Why don't you go through your posts for the last couple years to see what percentage contain an attack on jOe.

You keep asking me about how many converts I have brought over to the pro-gun Conservative side with my posting style and my confronting the bullshit posted by you and your pals.

That's a really good question weasel. How many times did I ask you the same thing about your penchant for coddling and accepting Libtards and liars here? You want to talk about OCD repetitive debates and tedious arguments? How many times did you try to change their hearts or teeny-tiny idiotic minds... without moving them a nanometer.

So then, quite a few times in the past, when you would admonish me for piling on King or nca225 or Stevie SKB, or rmb, etc., I asked you the same question. I challenged you to show us even one that you ever changed. I know that question pissed you off, and I know you never once gave any reply at all.

So how about it mustela frenata... how about answering me before I answer you?

After that, I will address some more of your lies and horse-shit. Maybe we'll start with your idiotic spin on your lame-ass definition of a "friend". I know that you considered Doug a friend. So did you ever actually meet him in person? Why do you call it filth to opine that he would be aghast at your recent affiliations with some Libtards he despised? You call it my imagination, but I still have long PM exchanges with him and from him where he told me exactly how he felt about them. You know how he felt too, so your assertion that I am impugning his memory or disingenuously cling to his skirt is simply more evidence of what a petty two-faced fraud you are. Those friends you speak of should watch their backs around you.

And it still sticks in your craw that jOe saw and understood that you couldn't be trusted, and had no integrity, a long time ago. That's what makes his presence here more objectionable and threatening to you than the filth that nca225 posted about a good guy like craigd. And you say I am ridiculous and have mental issues???

I am hardly "crushed" by the ending of our so-called "friendship". Don't flatter yourself. I terminated it in no uncertain terms when I finally saw what a two-faced piece of shit you are. I have had no regrets, and never will. Rage on with your mindless fantasies, mustela frenata.

You should be able to digest a little more than the Preacher at one time, because of the demonstrated fact that you have two-faces.
Posted By: keith Re: New Zealand firearms law - 01/23/20 06:05 AM
Originally Posted By: old colonel
Utterly sad and pathetic


Yes Gladys Kravitz... you certainly are! But you forgot the part about being a sneaky hypocritical little worm. For you showed us just how much you care about decorum, manners, civility, and adherence to the rules here by your non-response to the absolute filth nca225 directed toward craigd.

You showed everyone here exactly what you are, and how much you can be trusted to tell the truth.

Do you think nca225's filth would be appropriate over on Upland Journal forum? I'm guessing you would... because otherwise, you, BrentD, the Preacher Drew, Mustela Frenata, SKB Stevie, and all the other Libtards would be demanding that Dave banish him/her, and you'd be calling for him/her to post his/her full name and address. You would all be working on a doxxing campaign to out him/her too!

You brave warriors all would feel right at home in a septic tank... on the grounds of a mental hospital.
Posted By: Konor3inch Re: New Zealand firearms law - 01/23/20 09:43 AM
Has this forum become just a battle ground for half a dozen bitter ,angry individuals. For your own well being I’d recommend calling it quits. You’ve insulted each other so much it’s going round in circles and the venom in your posts must be having a detrimental affect on everyone involved. I think we all know ad nauseum how you feel about each other but is this behaviour considered appropriate anywhere?
If you are wanting to establish a pecking order could it not be reached through informative double gun posts that we could enjoy.
Naive ? Probably but this bickering is obviously upsetting to all parties,and doesn’t reflect the common bond that experience in the field and on the range should.
I’d like to see the bigger man or men draw a line under it and move on.
© The DoubleGun BBS @ doublegunshop.com