Latest News |
SSANZ - Sporting Shooters NZ
Guns and Crime
Check this out and see how it complies with conventional wisdom. How many recent victims of moron/scum brutality in NZ would be unharmed today if they just might have been carrying?
From gunlaws.com, January 2012
After several decades of experience with CCW permits and discreet carry, police nationwide understand and operate just fine within a framework of millions of people travelling armed. Slow waiters are all still alive. Dodge City has no blood in its streets. Stop signs don't have stacks of road-rage victims. Something else has happened.
As the numbers of people carrying arms for crime control increases assaultive crime has decreased. The media generally calls this “a surprising decrease in crime that has the experts baffled.” All these good people are walking around armed, expressly to forestall crime, and the media can’t understand why crime has dropped.
Maybe a chart will help. The blue line represents the number of people with CCW permits, increasing constantly over time. The red line is violent crime, dropping while more guns are in people's hands. The correlation is dead obvious. The idea that more guns lead to more crime is again proven false. In fact, it is the opposite of reality. This is what we're dealing with in the struggle to protect rights -- a large body of people, driven largely by the media, whose perception of reality is exactly opposite of what it actually is. More guns means less crime, because guns save lives. Guns protect you. Guns are good.
Last Updated (Sunday, 15 January 2012 10:59)
December 2011 Newsletter
SSANZ December 2011 Newsletter
1) ELECTION 2011- Another good result for law-abiding gun owners.
Our latest MMP election has once again delivered well on its promise that all the various groups that make up NZ society are represented in Parliament. There are very many of us who still remember the last few “first past the post” elections. A time when both National and Labour - the only real options available - were for the sake of political expediency able to ignore the legitimate aspirations and rights of law-abiding gun owners. Ignoring them to the point of competing with each other to propose and then try to pass ever- tougher and more restrictive “feelgood” legislation. When viewed from that historical perspective one can only wonder at how much ordinary firearms owners and hunters simply fighting for their rights as an identifiable voting block have achieved. Every MMP election since 1996 has, albeit slowly, delivered to law-abiding firearms owners more voting choice and more political influence. Each MMP election has seen our voice grow stronger, to the point where legal ownership and use of firearms is once again seen as a legitimate, useful and mainstream activity. This election has delivered us even more options and opportunities. The ACT party has clearly been punished for its internal power struggles yet remains a force in parliament. While much smaller, it is of critical importance to firearms owners. It has long been a strong advocate for the fundamental civil right of self defence. It is also a champion of the principle that only those laws that work well and infringe the rights of the law-abiding ordinary citizen the least deserve to be on the statute books. Most gun laws fail this most elementary test of good law-making in a democracy. ACT’s MP John Banks has had previous experience with police policymakers after Aramoana. The clear failure of the resulting 1992 Arms Amendment Bill to deliver on the promises police made to him may well now deliver advantages to us when its equally poorly thought out and even more undemocratic replacement (the Arms Amendment Bill 2011) goes before Parliament. Peter Dunne of United Future is also an ally, with United Future having been instrumental in setting up the Game Animal Council to prevent the eradication of such animals by DoC. United Future are also keen to ensure DoC recognise recreational hunters and fishers as a key stakeholder group. They also have a policy of banning the use of 1080.These two parties, even though they currently only have one MP each, are vital to our long term success. National, having achieved a historic election success, are in a quandary. John Key and his personal popularity is their one and only hand, and they know that in three years time much of this will have disappeared as tough yet necessary fiscal measures are implemented. Furthermore, this election has at long last killed off the belief Among senior National Party officials that it is possible to win a parliamentary majority under MMP and that coalitions and alliances are therefore somehow a “second -best” option for gaining power. It is unlikely therefore that even with its present popularity National will want to get seriously off side with the very large block of potential voters that firearm owners now represent. Under these circumstances it may well be that the Arms Amendment Bill 2011 could be blocked or at the very least subjected to proper scrutiny. Not only from a fiscal and regulatory burden perspective but also from the perspective of exactly what proof police have that these restrictive new laws will work at all. Then there are also parties who, while they will be in opposition for the next three years, are still important to us, both now and in the future. NZ First, like ACT and United Future, has a long track record of being supportive of firearms owners and hunters. We need to remember that one of their previous MPs (Ron Mark) was especially effective. NZ First have stated they intend to be a brake on Nationals legislative efforts and this once again may well be critical in fighting Arms Amendment Bill 2011. Both the Mana party and Maori party anchor their political philosophy around the Treaty of Waitangi. Since it would have been unthinkable for any of the chiefs who signed the treaty to have knowingly signed away their ability to both protect and hunt to feed their people, it is unlikely that any Maori-based political party would weaken either the right of self-defence, or the ability to legally own firearms. We must not forget the NZ Labour party either. Following their historic defeat, Labour will do more than just replace their present leadership. They will almost certainly subject all their previous ideology to internal review. This is especially important now there is growing evidence gun laws cost both lives and votes and increase crime. What Labour’s new leadership need to finally understand is that the real purpose of gun control was never to control crime but to disarm and weaken the working class and fledgling trade Union movement of a century ago. In short, gun control was introduced to control and counter the very people who fought for and founded the Labour movement in the 1920s. Labour’s obsessive support for such laws does therefore appear irrational and one has to wonder which bit of “Own goal” Labour still do not understand? Finally, the new boy on the block, Colin Craig’s newly formed Conservative party is a political party clearly snapping at the heels of ACT, United Future and NZ First. Even though they do not have any MPs at present, with 2.76% of the party vote on their first attempt they clearly resonate with many voters. They deserve constructive input and assistance from firearms owners and firearms organisations so that their gun laws, hunting and wildlife policies and law and order policies are properly thought out and not simply a recycling of what has already failed. To achieve this, everybody needs to help. Our advice to all firearms owner and hunters is to join SSANZ today and then get actively involved with political parties over the next 3 years. Last Updated (Sunday, 15 January 2012 11:04) |



