Results 226 to 250 of 297

  1. Post
    SL1CKSTA - if a gun is illegal to possess without a firearms licence, then a home-made gun is a shit solution. You're still a criminal for possessing one, good luck 3D printing the ammunition, and you'll get reported if you ever go to the range.

    Also, AFAIK it's very expensive to be able to print a barrel that can withstand the pressures of a firearm - needs a metal sintering printer IIRC, so good luck buying ballistically decent barrels without ending up on a watchlist - "hey, I need a machined tube with a 1 in 9 inch rifling for my... ...windmill?"

    I look forward to shit barrels and receivers blowing up in the faces of people fighting the man with their 3D printer.

  2. Post
    Edward Diego wrote:
    SL1CKSTA - if a gun is illegal to possess without a firearms licence, then a home-made gun is a shit solution. You're still a criminal for possessing one, good luck 3D printing the ammunition, and you'll get reported if you ever go to the range.

    Also, AFAIK it's very expensive to be able to print a barrel that can withstand the pressures of a firearm - needs a metal sintering printer IIRC, so good luck buying ballistically decent barrels without ending up on a watchlist - "hey, I need a machined tube with a 1 in 9 inch rifling for my... ...windmill?"

    I look forward to shit barrels and receivers blowing up in the faces of people fighting the man with their 3D printer.
    Might want to read the previous posts I will quote you a few to get started but making quality accurate machined barrels is easy can be done for $100.

    I don't know how familiar you are with ECM but the basics are it stands for Electro-Chemical Machining, and while that might sound complex its not. I will avoid talking about the industrial aspects as its not relevant.
    All you do is take a bench power supply and a 3d printed jig put copper wiring in the grooves of the jig, attach one lead from the bench power supply to the copper wiring in the jig get a bit of hard steel pressure tube close to the diameter required, run it through water with salt added and presto you start cutting the steel so rifling grooves are easy.
    Its easy to work out the time required too as there is an equation in a spreadsheet.
    If you can change a tyre and use a 3d printer you can do this.


    ECM is extremely accurate because of how predictable it is you can essentially describe the equation as infinite with the limiting factor being the human with the stop watch timing it, you can use hydraulic pressure tube its very hard and strong steel ecm is not limited by the hardness only the conductivity and so long as you know the steel you are getting its easy to work out.

    Side note from memory with a pressure calculator with hydraulic tube at 16mm and an ecm barrel works out at the same levels of a factory barrel.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electrochemical_machining

    As for ammunition reloading is a thing and there is talk of a new smokeless powder replacement that is stable to manufacture.
    But even without that ammo is easy to get the harder part was the gun.

    Also to your last point
    No one has ever had any injury from that happening because the people who design these are not idiots.

    Name:  uIxzNy7VrLXFlo578YEe7nZb.jpg
Views: 186
Size:  606.4 KB

  3. Post
    dickytim wrote:
    Not going to quote it as it was too long, but it looks like you took away from the article something completely different than I did, you assumed an investigation that took place 3 months after the fact could come up with reliable facts, and you took as gospel that the home owner wasn't armed, when it was stated that it was only a possibility.

    Answer me this, when was the last Police shooting in New Zealand that was not justified? Why are you bringing in American policing, at that a single case, which anyone can see it not the best comparison to our own country.
    David Cerven in August 2015 was definitely not justified. He was unarmed and the police shot him from a distance where they could have and should have waited for the negotiator to arrive. Instead they fired eight times, hitting him twice(great shooting). They should have been prosecuted for that, but they weren't. I'm sure the Police Association had a hand in that. There just isn't any accountability at all. Name the last police officer charged, let alone convicted, for a bad shooting here. I doubt you'll find one, and there have been multiple bad shootings, in particular Halatau Naitoko, the innocent 17-year-old courier driver the Armed Offenders Squad killed on the North-Western Motorway in 2009. They are supposedly the NZ Police's best marksmen and they can't even avoid killing innocent bystanders. Any other citizen would be in jail for a shooting like that, but the officer in that case wasn't even fired, let alone charged. He even got permanent name suppression, so we only know him as Officer 84. He belongs in prison for what he did.

  4. Post
    suntoucher wrote:
    That verifies what I said. They're freaking out over 100 guns.

    100. Some people in America have 100 guns on their own. That's a massive reduction in supply.

    If 100 guns went missing in America they'd call that Tuesday and move on with their lives.
    They're freaking out over 130 guns because they all ended up in the hands of criminals and have been used in numerous crimes since. Not only that, but if those 130 got through unnoticed, how many more did as well?
    The point I was making was how easy it is for criminals to get guns in Australia, despite their strict laws that are supposedly going to keep New Zealand safe. The politicians knew full well these laws weren't going to stop criminals before they passed them, but they didn't care because disarming law-abiding citizens serves their agenda better.

    If 100 guns went missing in America it would be big deal, usually because government agencies made them "go missing." In this case it was over 2,000 guns. This should give you some idea of the kind of tactics they use there. They purposefully let firearms fall into the hands of the Mexican drug cartels, and when those firearms are used in crimes, they use those crimes as justification to pass stricter laws in the USA. The fact that ATF had to break the existing laws to get those guns to the cartels in the first place is a minor detail to them.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ATF_gunwalking_scandal

  5. Post
    Kiwigunguy wrote:
    The politicians knew full well these laws weren't going to stop criminals before they passed them, but they didn't care because disarming law-abiding citizens serves their agenda better.
    You are not wrong

  6. Post
    Sounds about right, given our circumstances today..

  7. Post
    Anyone know if they are buying back ammo?

  8. Post
    They're not.

  9. Post
    They need a national ammo dump day

    Sort of glad I sold my semi due to needing mexico funds before this shit show.

  10. Post
    SL1CKSTA wrote:
    Might want to read the previous posts I will quote you a few to get started but making quality accurate machined barrels is easy can be done for $100.
    A quick google shows these ECM barrels to be far from quality accurate.

  11. Post
    Vulcan wrote:
    A quick google shows these ECM barrels to be far from quality accurate.
    What are you expecting they get similar groupings to glock barrels
    https://imgur.com/a/ncSy1MG

  12. Post
    Oh look, another poll that gets deleted when the vote doesn't go their way..

  13. Post
    I mean, it says it ends in 4hrs. Could have the poll just run its course?

  14. Post
    Rii wrote:
    I mean, it says it ends in 4hrs. Could have the poll just run its course?
    True, that could be the case. But they also did delete their Jacinta running for PM poll from their website a couple weeks ago when it didn't favour her odds.

  15. Post
    So apart from "you can't tell me what to do" what is a legitimate concern with registering the guns with the police?

    This seems to be a completely rational thing to do and to be honest it is insane it is not required already.

    I don't agree with the whole buy back, and blanket banning of MSSA weapons based on one incident, but requiring registration seems a no brainer for any reasonable member of society, as does the rest of the proposals, criminal convictions for violence, non-residents etc. all seems to be completely reasonable.

    - - - Updated - - -

    Pxndx wrote:
    Oh look, another poll that gets deleted when the vote doesn't go their way..

    wow, you only have 3G where you are, you poor bastard!

  16. Post
    dickytim wrote:
    So apart from "you can't tell me what to do" what is a legitimate concern with registering the guns with the police?

    This seems to be a completely rational thing to do and to be honest it is insane it is not required already.

    I don't agree with the whole buy back, and blanket banning of MSSA weapons based on one incident, but requiring registration seems a no brainer for any reasonable member of society, as does the rest of the proposals, criminal convictions for violence, non-residents etc. all seems to be completely reasonable.

    - - - Updated - - -




    wow, you only have 3G where you are, you poor bastard!
    The main reasons I can think of are as follows:
    (1) The main purpose of registration, and the only thing it's really good at, is facilitating more mass confiscation. Once there's a registry, all gun owners are at the mercy of the current government. It is very easy for the government to decide on a whim that they don't like some other type of gun, and send the cops after anyone who has one. We've seen that happen in the UK, Australia, Canada, and now here with the registered MSSAs. The lack of registration here is the only protection that gun owners have from that sort of mass confiscation.
    (2) Gun registries are known for massive cost overruns. The government always promises a small cost initially, but that quickly goes down the drain. Once the true cost is apparent, the government simply stands their ground and refuses to end the program. That's how Canada ended up with their billion-dollar 15-year disaster. The police themselves even admitted the registry was of very limited usefulness to them, as they still had to work on the assumption that criminals had unregistered firearms(which was true). They probably could have ended homelessness or provided free higher education for that amount of money, but that would have been too sensible.
    (3) Gun registries are known for having high error rates. This makes the data not very useful for police as they can't know for sure if it's even correct. This also creates the risk of guns being mistakenly registered to people who don't have them, as routinely occurs here and in Australia. This can result in serious trouble for those people when they are unable to produce the firearms that were mistakenly registered to them, and which they either no longer have or never had to begin with. It is very easy to be accused of having a gun illegally and very difficult to prove that you don't. Under NZ gun laws you're guilty until proven innocent, so you'd be screwed. The guilty until proven innocent thing is actually real, by the way, and applies only to the gun laws; how that hasn't been struck down as illegal yet is a mystery. They call it "reverse onus of proof", as that sounds nicer than "guilty until proven innocent."There's no way that would stand up to legal scrutiny anywhere else.
    (4) The gun registry would be at risk of a data breach. Numerous government websites and databases have already been subject to hacks or leaks, and if the gun registry data got out it would be a disaster of epic proportions. Criminals would know exactly who owned what guns and where, and they would undoubtedly target them for burglaries and home invasions. What's worse is that they would know to either bring the correct tools to breach a safe or to take weapons and force the homeowner to open the safe for them. Thus, the security that currently stops opportunistic thieves would no longer offer much protection. The only way for a gun owner to be safe in the event of a data breach would be to move house, and either fail to update their address(illegal) or hope to God there wasn't another data breach.
    (5) Gun registries typically get very poor compliance rates. The Canadian registry lasted 15 years and never got more than 33% compliance. That meant it was expensive and inconvenient to gun owners, and didn't affect criminals at all. The higher costs also prevented lower income people from even getting firearms in the first place, which is exactly what the government here is trying to do by increasing fees. Many gun laws throughout history have been aimed at disarming lower income people, and governments have found that it is much easier to make guns unaffordable to the common people than it is to ban them outright. The first gun laws in the US were intended to prevent former slaves from owning guns; when laws targeting blacks became untenable, they switched to targeting lower income people with the Gun Control Act of 1968, which is still around to this day.

    That's just a few reasons. I'm sure there are more that I've missed, but those are a good start. Gun registries sound good on paper, but when you do the research they just don't stack up.

  17. Post
    the whole "registration is a tool for mass confiscation" thing is dumb as soon as you recognise that cars are registered and nobody defies car registration on the basis that "THEY MIGHT CONFISCATE MY CAR"

  18. Post
    lol if there's going to be mass confiscation it would be done lawfully, are you saying you'd rather not do this so that you can break the law?

  19. Post
    kierbear wrote:
    the whole "registration is a tool for mass confiscation" thing is dumb as soon as you recognise that cars are registered and nobody defies car registration on the basis that "THEY MIGHT CONFISCATE MY CAR"
    There's no history of mass confiscation of cars, so that fear would be unfounded.
    There is, however, a significant history of mass confiscation of firearms, such as what is happening right now. It's hard to call that fear unfounded.

    Also, heaps of people drive around in unregistered cars. It's probably not for the same reason, but it still happens on a significant scale.

  20. Post
    ClavulanateV2 wrote:
    lol if there's going to be mass confiscation it would be done lawfully, are you saying you'd rather not do this so that you can break the law?
    There's nothing lawful about the mass confiscation of private property.
    We certainly shouldn't be doing anything to help facilitate more of it.
    When there isn't a registry, people at least have the option to keep what belongs to them until a future government repeals the laws. The fact that they still have the guns makes it more likely that the laws will be repealed.

  21. Post
    So you believe the police would just come take your guns unlawfully?

    As for keeping your guns until the law changes, how about you stop giving law abiding gun owners a bad name and hand in what is now illegal. Yes it sucks and it was sad to see my AR go but life goes on, the law is the law.

  22. Post
    ClavulanateV2 wrote:
    So you believe the police would just come take your guns unlawfully?

    As for keeping your guns until the law changes, how about you stop giving law abiding gun owners a bad name and hand in what is now illegal. Yes it sucks and it was sad to see my AR go but life goes on, the law is the law.
    What I'm saying is that there is no lawful reason to confiscate firearms from someone who hasn't committed a crime.

    You shouldn't just resign yourself to whatever bad gun laws come along.
    Taking that stance greatly lowers the chance of getting them repealed.
    If the laws are bad, fight them to the end.
    If the laws are good, support them to the end.
    The last thing we need is more fatalistic gun owners.
    We've got more than enough of them already.

  23. Post
    kierbear wrote:
    the whole "registration is a tool for mass confiscation" thing is dumb as soon as you recognise that cars are registered and nobody defies car registration on the basis that "THEY MIGHT CONFISCATE MY CAR"
    Wow! this is a first, I actually agree with you and your sentiment!

  24. Post
    dickytim wrote:
    Wow! this is a first, I actually agree with you and your sentiment!
    Are you intentionally oblivious to the fact that registered firearms are being confiscated on mass right now? If that can't convince you I don't know what will.

  25. Post
    Kiwigunguy wrote:
    Are you intentionally oblivious to the fact that registered firearms are being confiscated on mass right now? If that can't convince you I don't know what will.
    Lawfully.

    and I don't care that you can't play with your murder toys, your entire posting history in this thread indicates you shouldn't be owning any guns.