New Zealand to ban semi-automatic weapons

originally posted by: Wide-Eyes
a reply to: links234

America will not be following suit.

And why would they?

The crime rate in the UK exploded after the handgun ban.

The handgun ban would have had no impact on violent crime rates in the UK as guns were not legal to carry before the ban. They had to be kept at home in a locked firearms cabinet unless they were being transported to the range, and even then had to be secured in the vehicle, not on the person. Self defence was not a legal justification for firearms ownership in Britain.

How could the ban have impacted violent crime rates?

a reply to: Wide-Eyes

How does a rise in illegal firearms use in 2016 have anything to do with the handgun ban in 1997? The guns in the articles you cite are illegally smuggled into the country or are converted replicas or deactivated weapons. These would have been illegal pre-ban.

I agree that the ban was a knee jerk over reaction and likely had little impact on reduction of firearms related crime, however your argument is illogical.

And all it took was ONE attack.

Meanwhile...in the US.

Although, in the US, the right to bear arms is enshrined in the Constitution.

Official details are out now and a little more lenient than I was expecting
IE 22 rimfire semi-auto still legal provided the magazine capacity is max 10 rounds
Shotgun semi auto and pump or lever action still legal provided magazine is fixed tubular and capacity is max 5 rounds
All semi-auto centre fire weapons banned apart from a few special exclusions for professional shooters (eg wildlife control)
Centre fire bolt/lever/pump weapons still legal provided the magazine is max 10 rounds
Possession of any part of a banned weapon is illegal (must be handed in)

6 months amnesty to hand in banned weapons on a buyback scheme (start date not yet announced) and a raft of new laws created.

Overall, they are definitely not disarming the people, just changing what arms they may legally possess.

originally posted by: AnakinWayneII
And all it took was ONE attack.

Meanwhile...in the US.

Although, in the US, the right to bear arms is enshrined in the Constitution.

and if people have issues with that fact then they can take it up with Her Majesty the Queen and her family. Democrats have jumped on NZ actions to control guns and want it to happen here (it wont).

Our 2nd amendment is the peoples checks and balances in case the government turns on the people. Again for examples of that speak to the Royal Family in London.

a reply to: links234

They should have banned murder.
perhaps someday they will.

It's pretty funny seeing people cheer as their rights are taken away, but given the US media's glorification of the ban, it's also a reminder that, given the opportunity, those in power would do the same here. It will be interesting indeed to see where gun rights go in the world in the next 20 years or so, especially if mass shootings remain as popular.