A thread to discuss how Jacinda will make NZ Choice again

Thread Rating: 11 votes, 3.73 average.
(11 votes)
Results 6,626 to 6,650 of 7018

  1. Post
    Zarkov wrote:
    This is the post that relates to my comments.

    Not some other gun, not some other cartridge.

    It's not a target rifle, but you can pretend it is if it suits your argument I suppose.

    All the argument I've seen in favour of them could equally be applied to even larger calibres, so at what point does your right to own a particular weapon cease to make sense?

    But do us a favour; quit talking like you're the only guys who anything about guns, and that anyone who doesn't share your views is hysterical.

    If you want anymore info, check this thread out. Dan looks like a good guy to ask:

    https://www.nzhuntingandshooting.co....y-50bmg-28641/
    You are hysterical and your argument is dumb as shit. You posted earlier that you think people owning these things will start an arms race. lmao

    Oh and they defeat body armour......so does every hunting rifle on the market. Soft body armour doesn't stop rifle rounds. You are so clueless about this it's not funny.

    I don't know what you an frio think are going to happen with these? We know what they're capable of, no shit. Please enlighten us as to how a criminal might use this scary gun?

  2. Post
    Quasi ELVIS wrote:
    lol @ "long range target work". Show me your pest control licence.
    The idea that it's wealthy individuals doing it rather than criminals just underlines how stupid it is. Just some cool rich dudes shooting .50cal bullets at targets 2000m away for a laugh. Just for practice. Practice for what?
    Practice for their hobby or competition shooting? lmao

    They're not practicing to shoot people or animals. THIS IS ACTUALLY A SPORT.

    You seem convinced that it's all about practicing to kill things.

    You don't know what you're talking about Quasi, just stop. lol

  3. Post
    Does Quasi ELVIS always post multiquote walls of text layered in deep arrogance?

  4. Post
    WeenieBeenie wrote:
    Please enlighten us as to how a criminal might use this scary gun?
    Waco was a pretty famous use of .50 calibre. Hell, it was even one of the feeder events that got assault weapons banned in the USA for a while there.

  5. Post
    frio wrote:
    Waco was a pretty famous use of .50 calibre. Hell, it was even one of the feeder events that got assault weapons banned in the USA for a while there.
    Used by who?.....

    Not sure if I've missed something or you have.

    Edit: I found the bit you're talking about.

    That's a very extreme case. I stand by the fact that they're not remotely practical and there's hundreds of other guns on the NZ market that are more useful for committing crimes. The chances of one of them ever being used in a shootout with cops is minute.

  6. Post
    WeenieBeenie wrote:
    Used by who?.....

    Not sure if I've missed something or you have.
    The ATF knew that the Branch Davidians had a pair of .50 caliber rifles, so they asked for Bradley armored vehicles, which could resist that caliber.[115] During the siege, Koresh said that he had weapons bigger than .50 rifles and that he could destroy the Bradleys, so they were supplemented with two Abrams tanks and five M728 vehicles.[115][116] The Texas Rangers recovered at least two .50 caliber weapons from the remains of the compound.

    ...

    he ATF claims such rifles were used against ATF agents the day of the search. Several years later, the General Accounting Office, in response to a request from Henry Waxman, released a briefing paper titled "Criminal Activity Associated with .50 Caliber Semiautomatic Rifles" which repeated the ATF's claims that the Branch Davidians used .50 caliber rifles during the search.[
    In the wiki article. If someone did decide one of those was the weapon of choice, we might have a harder time calling in a Bradley or an Abrams .

  7. Post
    Sorry I edited my post. I didn't see that on my first read.

  8. Post
    Yeah, no worries. You impression isn't unfair, I just wanted to point out they have been used for crime.

    If I'd imported a Ferrari or something and petrol vehicles got banned the next day I'd be salty too, but I do think a Barrett is just a wee bit OTT.

  9. Post
    kierbear wrote:
    s'funny 'cause i didn't know NZ had a surplus of gunnuts who thought their right to shoot guns was more important than me and everybody else in society's wellbeing until one of 'em murdered 51 people.
    Quasi ELVIS wrote:
    lol @ "long range target work". Show me your pest control licence.
    The idea that it's wealthy individuals doing it rather than criminals just underlines how stupid it is. Just some cool rich dudes shooting .50cal bullets at targets 2000m away for a laugh. Just for practice. Practice for what?


    I quoted your post so it just had the sarcastic part because that's the bit that made sense.



    Burning houses down makes some people happy. That doesn't mean it's helpful.


    We're talking about people like you trying to pretend you need to shoot bullets that can travel 2000m and penetrate engine blocks for "target practice" or "hunting". You know just as well as I do why you'd choose ammo like that instead of something to suit the purpose of what you're supposed to be using it for.


    That's a very American idea, we don't have a nonsense constitution like them.


    That's not even true, the NZ Police got way more hardcore at one point, they've got a full time military style squad now since that dickhead in Aramoana: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special_Tactics_Group


    It was 2000m before, so half the distance? Who's lying again?


    Precision is popular because it's a legit skill instead of a wanker contest. A civilian trying to shoot something 2000m away with a .50cal is a dipshit fantasizing about killing Hitler.


    Because they were made in the first world war specifically to kill humans. I'd be interested in them as antiques but I wouldn't spend my weekends trying to maximize accuracy, it'd be like practicing with a guillotine and telling everyone it's for hunting.


    Charming. My best friend has an M4-Carbine and a Glock that he routinely points and occasionally shoots people with and I would trust him with my life.

    Also being thrown in a cell for a few hours for being an irritating 18 year old isn't the same as being a criminal, they just drop the meaningless charge and tell you to **** off once they think you've learned your lesson.


    Me? Buy one that's designed for target practice or killing deer if that's what you're going to use it for. A target gun can be really light. A deer pwning gun only needs one shot. If you're one of the very few that need to shoot goats out of a helicopter then you need something more aggressive.
    A lot of guns are designed specifically for killing people. If you buy one and try to convince everyone it's just for shooting paper targets then you're an idiot.


    Trying to blow Police cars up and trying to put it down your pants to rob a bank are the best ideas you could think of? How about shooting the cops in the chest and pointing it at the bank teller while you rob them? Suddenly got a bit more criminally practical didn't it? You may as well have said it's impossible to rob a bank with a gun because you put the end of it too far up your ass. You're being willfully obtuse to try and push your point.


    Buy a small caliber if that's all you want to do with it. Why Dafuq do you need a .50 cal to shoot a target on a range?. It's like buying your grandmother a v8 to do the shopping.









    You gun guys are the ones living in some kind of fantasy world, talking about long range target shooting when the real reason you like them is because they give you a hard on. If you were able to be honest with yourselves you'd quickly start making more sense and the blatant bullshit about shooting .50cals into a paper target on a 100m range would disappear very quickly.
    Jesus you went full retard.

    1 long range target shooting had nothing to do with pest control do stop trying to muddy the waters with bullshit.
    2. I didn't bring up anything about engine blocks and really its isn't relevant. Do you actually have a point? Given that many hunting rifles are capable of this.
    3. Some examples of public ranges in excess of 1000m. Yes there are longer. Agsin you fail to make a point and I haven't mentioned any private ranges, so piss off with your suggestions that I lied.
    4. Do you recognize that long range shooting is a thing, and then contradict your own position. You seem somewhat confused.
    5. Irrelevant comment about your interests. Dont care.
    6. Agsin, your own confused opinion and wrong assumptions. Are you trying to make a point about what you think firearms are used for,?
    7. Fantasy arguments about 50 cals that have never happened here? Is there a point?
    8. Given your lack of knowledge about firearms and incoherent arguments with incorrect assumptions, nobody cares what you think about why people should have to justify ownership of legally held firearms that have never been a problem here.
    9. Aaand, the old chestnut of questioning people's mental state. Yawn, typical anti hoplophobia. Get some fresh material

  10. Post
    kierbear wrote:
    s'funny 'cause i didn't know NZ had a surplus of gunnuts who thought their right to shoot guns was more important than me and everybody else in society's wellbeing until one of 'em murdered 51 people.
    frio wrote:
    Waco was a pretty famous use of .50 calibre. Hell, it was even one of the feeder events that got assault weapons banned in the USA for a while there.
    And it is irrelevant to NZ. Do you have s point? Or grasping desperately at straws?

  11. Post
    frio wrote:
    In the wiki article. If someone did decide one of those was the weapon of choice, we might have a harder time calling in a Bradley or an Abrams .
    You do realize that you'd need specific ammo for this task (armour piercing)? As far as I can tell nobody in NZ sells it and it would be classified as prohibited ammunition. I'm not sure if you're getting off in some way around this 50 cal uprising fantasy but you do need to bring it back down to earth.

    FWIW US Snipers are professionally trained, and operate as teams with some very specialist gear (your average hunting laser range finder doesn't go 2k). So this about skinhead or nazi shooting people/armoured vehicles and stupid ranges is another fantasy.

    Lots of people do participate in long range shooting (aka gong shooting). It's a legit sport, if you sit down and do the numbers of how hard it is you'll understand. I can shoot a decent .75" group at 100 yards which is considered respectful for hunters. You tend to find the grouping doesn't follow linear increases, so at 200 yards that becomes 3 inch groups and so forth. It's not something I'm into but it's something I respect.

    Oh and 50 cal rifles are really expensive, as is the ammo ($10 a round minimum)

    Oh and 50 cal AP is mostly used with M2 HMGs (which you cannot buy here) which have longer barrels than rifles.

  12. Post
    1 Nasty Kiwi wrote:
    And it is irrelevant to NZ. Do you have s point? Or grasping desperately at straws?
    "Noone would ever use a Barrett for a crime!"

    "Here is a crime in which someone used a Barrett"

    "Irrelevant!"

    :/.

  13. Post
    frio wrote:
    "Noone would ever use a Barrett for a crime!"

    "Here is a crime in which someone used a Barrett"

    "Irrelevant!"

    :/.
    Though the Branch Davidians may have owned 2 x Mk82 50 cal rifles (entirely legal btw) there was never any evidence they were used.

    So... show us that crime again?

  14. Post
    I already quoted the relevant part from the wikipedia article.

  15. Post
    frio wrote:
    I already quoted the relevant part from the wikipedia article.
    you said..

    Waco was a pretty famous use of .50 calibre.
    Which is wrong, the 50 cals were never used.

    FWIW I looked up 50 cal crimes, there's been like one or two actual uses (one was an armoured car robbery). Thats over a 20-30 period in trigger happy USA. No deaths.

  16. Post
    Again, quoted above from the Wikipedia article:

    The ATF claims such rifles were used against ATF agents the day of the search. Several years later, the General Accounting Office, in response to a request from Henry Waxman, released a briefing paper titled "Criminal Activity Associated with .50 Caliber Semiautomatic Rifles" which repeated the ATF's claims that the Branch Davidians used .50 caliber rifles during the search.
    The feds claim they were used.

    I'm not worried about someone staging a ****ing uprising, I'm just responding to the claim that no crime has ever been committed with a .50 cal with a (significant) crime that was committed with a .50 cal.

    Also, seems like more than one or two crimes to me.

  17. Post
    frio wrote:
    Again, quoted above from the Wikipedia article:



    The feds claim they were used.
    None of the police statements say that, they simply say they recovered them. And the original claim was that BD had 50 cal HMGs setup, but that never panned out either. Survivors claimed the 50 cals were never used, and they were found in the "armoury" all burned up. The claims of 50 cal use were based on what people heard, there was no actual evidence (as in big f**king holes in people or vehicles).

    The counterclaim is the antigun groups jumped on the opportunity to try and get certain firearms banned (just like we see in NZ).

  18. Post
    frio wrote:
    "Noone would ever use a Barrett for a crime!"

    "Here is a crime in which someone used a Barrett"

    "Irrelevant!"

    :/.
    Ok, more lies and manipulation then?
    1. I never specified barrett. That's just a company.
    2. Irrelevant because ITS NOT NEW ZEALAND.

    Try a little honesty

  19. Post
    frio wrote:
    Again, quoted above from the Wikipedia article:



    The feds claim they were used.

    I'm not worried about someone staging a ****ing uprising, I'm just responding to the claim that no crime has ever been committed with a .50 cal with a (significant) crime that was committed with a .50 cal.

    Also, seems like more than one or two crimes to me.
    Nah, you're deliberately switching terms of reference between nz and the US when it suits you. I'm not. Stop manipulating the frame of reference. This is NZ.

  20. Post
    Vulcan wrote:
    None of the police statements say that, they simply say they recovered them. And the original claim was that BD had 50 cal HMGs setup, but that never panned out either. Survivors claimed the 50 cals were never used, and they were found in the "armoury" all burned up. The claims of 50 cal use were based on what people heard, there was no actual evidence (as in big f**king holes in people or vehicles).

    The counterclaim is the antigun groups jumped on the opportunity to try and get certain firearms banned (just like we see in NZ).
    Righto mate. Waco was all a big conspiracy.

    Perhaps a better angle of argument for you would be that the gun smuggling, kiddy fiddling ****ers were armed to the teeth and the use of the Barrett is vaguely irrelevant in the context, which is pretty much true. They were just the cherry on top of literally hundreds of guns in an act of mass violence that saw 70 odd people burn to death.

  21. Post
    1 Nasty Kiwi wrote:
    Nah, you're deliberately switching terms of reference between nz and the US when it suits you. I'm not. Stop manipulating the frame of reference. This is NZ.
    You could also argue no crime was ever committed with the guns used in the Mosque before either. Why is the specificity of NZ relevant in this discussion? Noone's ever committed a crime with an RPG here either but if they were legal I'd want those gone all the same.

  22. Post
    frio there are actual crimes recorded with 50 cals being used, of those crimes most are simply illegal possession. One or two are discharges, none are deaths. This is in the USA, where in 2013 92 people were killed by guns per day, and over a period of 20 years not one of them died to a 50 cal.

    Just admit you're drawing a very very long bow on this.

  23. Post
    Vulcan wrote:
    frio there are actual crimes recorded with 50 cals being used, of those crimes most are simply illegal possession. One or two are discharges, none are deaths. This is in the USA, where in 2013 92 people were killed by guns per day, and over a period of 20 years not one of them died to a 50 cal.

    Just admit you're drawing a very very long bow on this.
    Dude, I'm not claiming the guns are some uber-useful ultra tool that every criminal salivates over for how utlimately practical and perfect they are.

    I'm responding to the claim that "no crime has ever been committed with a .50 calibre" with crimes that they've been used in. That's literally the extent of my claim. I don't particularly care if it was just the once in the you know, massive ****ing siege that they needed a pair of Abrams for, or if it was some dude discharging it into another dude by mistake. I'll absolutely cop to the majority of that page being illegal possession/used in a threatening manner, that's a totally fair observation too.

  24. Post
    kierbear wrote:
    s'funny 'cause i didn't know NZ had a surplus of gunnuts who thought their right to shoot guns was more important than me and everybody else in society's wellbeing until one of 'em murdered 51 people.
    Wasn't that an Australian?

  25. Post
    frio wrote:
    Dude, I'm not claiming the guns are some uber-useful ultra tool that every criminal salivates over for how utlimately practical and perfect they are.
    and most crims are using sawn off shotguns and 22s in NZ.