Home Uncategorized A CALL TO ACTION

A CALL TO ACTION

Author

Date

Category

An open letter to New Zealand

New Zealand is at a critical cross-roads. The ‘tail has been wagging the dog’ for far too long and the balance needs to be redressed with some urgency before our Democracy is gone forever. We are suffering under the dictates of a minority Government, a Prime Minister who was not elected to the post by the voting public, and who has not only pronounced socialist views but also displays a profound lack of common sense and worldly experience. Furthermore, our MMP system allows the appointment of MP’s who do not represent any electorate and exist as mere party drones, full of ‘left-field’ ideas and a distinct lack of understanding of the daily lives of NZ citizens. To cap it off, we have the Police stepping outside their normal bounds of law enforcement and actively creating legislation, further compounded by their seemingly incessant demands and statements that simply exceed their legal authority. New Zealand is not ready to become a ‘Police State’!

I have read the new Arms Amendment bill, Stuart Nash’s so-called ‘second tranche’ of firearms legislation that has just been introduced to Parliament. This bill is, without doubt, the most unconstitutional, undemocratic, repressive and dictatorial attempt at legislation ever considered in this country. This bill reflects the aims of a very small group of people (probably less than ten) within the Police, Government, and ‘academia’ who are hell-bent on a fanatical crusade to remove all firearms from private ownership. At the same time, these people are actively advocating the routine arming of the NZ Police with semi-automatic 9mm pistols and 5.56mm (.223) AR15 rifles. This small group of zealots seems to have no qualms regarding the Police use of extreme ‘Gestapo like’ tactics in enforcing their objectives upon the 250,000 law-abiding licensed firearms owners of New Zealand. Clearly, this group seeks a divided nation of obedient, unarmed ‘serfs’, ruled by a small ‘elite’ hiding behind a wall of well-armed thugs masquerading as the NZ Police.

This small group is presenting this charade to the public of New Zealand under the guise of ‘public safety’. The reality is that the public has never been at any risk from the ordinary licensed firearms owners. Sadly, there have been a couple of prominent examples of deliberate attacks on innocent people (Gray and Tarrant) but both of these have been perpetrated by people who were permitted to obtain, and retain, firearms licences despite warning signs that should have been acted upon by the Police, as required by the law of the day. It should also be noted that both these psychopaths deliberately set out to break the law. Legislation that blames the equipment, vilifies and penalises a large and innocent sector of the law-abiding community, is nothing more than a dishonest ‘smoke and mirrors’ attempt to hide the true facts and failings of a government department, a tactic reminiscent of Europe in the 1930’s. The small number of criminals who illegally possess firearms are also of no significant threat to the public, and generally confine their misuse of them to ‘tribal-like’ disputes between rival gangs and drug dealers. Ironically, it seems that it is the Police themselves who pose the largest threat from firearms to public safety with deaths and injuries to innocent bystanders and damage to property, a threat that is only going to increase as the Police resort to general arming. I do not wish to denigrate the daily efforts of our front-line Police, but put the blame firmly at the door of Police National Headquarters where the insufficient funding, and consequent inadequate training, has been the cause of the many firearms ‘incidents’ by Police staff. One training day per year (or less in some cases) with very limited ammunition is not a safe grounding for the public carriage of loaded firearms. Having personally witnessed the poor level of marksmanship and safe firearms handling by members of the Police on several occasions, I have grave fears for public safety if the general arming of the Police occurs.

Historically, firearms have been an integral part of New Zealand society since the first settlers, whalers and sealers arrived here in in the early 1800’s. They were a tool for harvesting food and providing defence, giving rise to the country’s first organised sport, rifle shooting, which was widely supported by the people and Government. Nowadays, shooting is a popular and healthy sport with many Olympic and Commonwealth Games medals to its credit, a food-gathering tool for many, and a necessary part of our agricultural and conservation sectors. The proud prowess of our armed forces in the international conflicts of the past 120 years is largely due to the shooting heritage of New Zealand.

This new bill opens with the statement that the ownership of firearms is a ‘privilege’. Not only is this in complete opposition to the established practices of the past 200 years of NZ history, it is also a denial of one of the basic rights of NZ citizens as written in the Bill of Rights Act 1688 NZ, a cornerstone of our legislation and democratic system. This Bill of Rights Act contains the basic rights that we all enjoy and take for granted, such as freedom of speech, freedom of religion, freedom of travel, the power to vote, trial by jury, etc. etc. If the Government attempts to negate one of these rights then all are in jeopardy!

The distinct lack of opposition to the first 2019 Arms Amendment Act, and the complete lack of understanding of the ramifications of what has already been foolishly rushed through without consultation, has been widely noted by the voting public, including a large number of non-shooting citizens. Indeed, the first round of legislation is not only misunderstood by the public but also the general Police, and, notably, the Minister of Police himself! I have seen letters by him that prove he either does not fully comprehend the law, or chooses to misrepresent the truth to a fellow MP. Our members of Parliament need to consider their future and act only in the interests of democracy, not mindlessly following misguided policies.

Make no mistake! Do not be swayed by the Government claims that this bill is for ‘public safety’ as the contents of it do nothing other than infringe the rights of the people, and do not address the criminal misuse of firearms. The NZ Public are not, and never have been, in any danger from the 250,000 licenced firearms owners of New Zealand. The greatest danger to the public, and the future of democracy and freedom in New Zealand, would be to allow this bill to proceed into law. The alternative will prove to be disastrous!

I challenge the news media, politicians, and my fellow Kiwis to examine the claims in this letter with an open mind. For too long we have been subjected to a diet of lies, misinformation and pure propaganda. The real facts need to be seen and understood before it is too late!

I stand ready to debate, and expand upon, my comments above with politicians and news media in a public forum at any time.

Rodney M Woods
Otago

Previous articleActions have Consequences
Next articleHave Your Say

34 COMMENTS

  1. I am a non gun owner, as a kid I fired a few shots with a .22 but other than one winged seagull that I still feel a bit bad about I have never shot anything dead. I have been out pig hunting, with my camera enjoying the tramping over ranges with an object in sight.
    I am in full support of the writer and the facts as outlined. I see my fellow New Zealanders falling over themselves from their urban castles to support and agree with what is going on having no or little regard to the consequences of this as world history is reenacted on our corner of the stage.
    I will any support any politician or political party that comes out and agreed with the principles raised.

    0

    0

  2. That was a very well written article and I concur with every point in it. I also do not a gun now although I was a keen hunter in my youth.

    I think that the opening paragraph is a very powerful and succinct summary of where we are as a country and reading it should send a chill dowm every New Zealander’s spine. Especially as we see almost zero opposition from National to this flagrant gang of wreckers who have taken over our country.

    For me, one of the most powerful revelations was when our senior police officer personally made a statement to the effect that the PM’s soyboy wasn’t being investigated – at the same time that it was being revealed that the woman consorts with drug dealers and criminals in her social life. This was an amazing display of a depth of corruption that hitherto was unseen in New Zealand.

    0

    0

      • I was at the meeting in Te Awamutu of angry gun owners when they confronted Chris Bishop. He reported back to Wellington on the vitriol for the National party’s support back to Wellington. National got it wrong believing everyone in NZ was so traumatised by that silly little Aussie terrorist that law abiding Kiwis who had held gun licences for long periods of time and required their firearms for valid and authentic reasons would happily hand in their guns. Yes the terrorism was horrendous but taking antique firearms that have been handed down for generations and destroying them is a cynical thing for any government to do and not trusting your licensed law-abiding gun owners who require their firearms for pest control or sporting events when criminal gangs are being left untouched is stupid and shortsighted.

        0

        0

        • National got it wrong believing everyone in NZ was so traumatised by that silly little Aussie terrorist

          I’ve had discussions with Chris Bishop before and I have a lot of respect for the man. His work in his electorate is an example to all MPs and I think, given time, he’d make a Prime Minister I’d be proud to have. He is a political animal though and he knows public sentiment very well and is strongly involved with law around firearms, etc.

          I don’t buy for a moment that National got it wrong. Most of us here were telling them and the country that it was a wrong decision. There was a lot of opposition to it. More to the point, just thinking through the reaction you can see it is the wrong thing to do. That was well documented at the time.

          I do buy that National decided to go with Labour to avoid any negative backlash from lefties and the media. They wanted to avoid the stigma of alt-right supremacy and tossed their principles and New Zealand under the bus for politics.

          0

          0

          • Chris Bishop may be a good electorate MP by I went to a talk by him a little before 15 March on gun law. He was asked about Peters and said you cannot believe any promises he makes on gun law. After 15 March you could not believe promised he made that night.

            At T A he claimed National could do nothing to allow more time for submissions. He got called out on that as National laughed at the stunt the government pulled on Seymour and went along with it.

            I am a lot happier with Brett Hudson who replaced him.

            0

            0

        • Waikatogirl…..I think that you are correct when you say National got it wrong in that they misjudged the views of right thinking ( as opposed to wrong thinking) Kiwi’s on this.

          I got an unsolicited email a couple of months back from Anne Tolley’s office asking me what I thought about the legalising of cannabis. I spent a good hour or so replying as to what I thought about the idea, using anecdotal evidence from some 35 years experience on the subject.

          Despite never owning or needing to own a semi automatic rifle, I then gave my two cents worth about National supporting the knee jerk firearms legislation.

          For my time and effort, I never got an acknowledgement that they had even received my email, but I am sure Ms Tolley would have taken it on board how us in the real world feel about it.

          0

          0

    • Not only that, waikatogirl, but the pathetic little weasel Bridges and his ‘opposition’ party didn’t even raise an eyebrow when the Marxists quickly moved to confiscate gun owners’ property did they?

      This country is going down the path of Chile in the early 70s. A hitherto beautiful safe progressive capitalist democracy taken over by Marxists with barely a whimper of opposition from a people who have no voice.

      Unlike Chile, though, we have no army. So, with a rigged voting system, a regressive ecoMarxist government, an indigenous population hellbent on looting our hard earned wealth and our land and no political opposition we’re fucked. Until the Chinese step in and establish order – which may take 15 or 20 years.

      0

      0

      • I agree with both of you Pascal and Dave Mann. Chris Bishop is a political animal and was aware of public sentiment in Wellington and no doubt from emails from around the country. Having actually witnessed the meeting in Te Awamutu of angry hunters, the farmers who came out of the hills and into town from the very rural west coast of NZ to have their say, and other industries affected. I question that Chris Bishop was fully aware of the vitriol that would be expressed. He was not aware of the level of hatred and fury the National party’s decision to stand with Labour on their gun laws would bring. Once the crowd was mollified and some ground rules to allow him to even speak were set Chris Bishop was able to take copious notes and assured the crowd he would take their concerns back to Wellington. Chuck, Rachael and Holysheet can also attest as were also present. Chuck of course, will not say anything against his beloved National these days. ?

        0

        0

        • Thanks WG. I don’t doubt that National has changed their mind after seeing the level of opposition to something.

          I’m only questioning why they didn’t have their thinking caps on and not go with it in the start when all indications were that it was a disproportionate, nigh on illegal grab of private property as a virtue signalling Ardern tries to disarm the population.

          David Seymour is the one and only politician to have gotten it right.

          0

          0

          • Chris Bishop said National MP’s were all required to follow the party’s decision. I guess the “party” misread the mood of the people.

            0

            0

  3. This article is not only about firearms, but more importantly it is about the lack of democracy in the way these laws were and are being changed. Thousands of submissions sent in but only three days allowed for the Select Committee process. A farce. Never before has such a revision in NZ law been made like this. It is happening again with the second law changes. Another quick process, not the normal six months for Select Committee hearings. I believe a future Government needs to repeal all these laws and start again, democratically this time. Too late for the destroyed firearms however, but decency would be served.

    0

    0

    • So true Gorse. The fascistic gun buy back is just a symptom of the worst electoral system anywhere – MMP. We changed TO MMP, largely because Labour won a couple of thousand more than National in a couple of elections, yet won far few seats leading to a National government.

      Yet here we are with a Prime Minister who scored slightly over one third of the votes, leading a party that collected 200,000 fewer votes than National.

      So to address a disparity of a couple of thousand votes, we’ve legitimised that disparity 100 fold. Plus we have three times in eight elections given the choice of Prime Minister not to the people, but to an extremist minority politician.

      As Mark Twain said “It is easier to fool a man, than to convince him he’s been fooled”. We were fooled over MMP and we’re refusing to admit we were fooled. MMP enables all of this insanity and there’s little point going after a symptom until the cause is fixed.

      0

      0

  4. I have searched on line for a schedule of the types and brand of rifles and guns that have been banned, but can’t find one anywhere. So I will not be handing in my Lee Enfield Mk.IV .303 Jungle Carbine because it is obviously not a semi-automatic. Neither will I be handing in my Gevarme semi-automatic .22 sporting rifle, because it is not an “Assault Weapon”. ( For God’s sake , any weapon can be an assault weapon if that is the intention – emotive terms to alienate the general public against law abiding gun owners).

    0

    0

    • This is what you need I think. Your .303 is still legal and your Gevarm too as long as the magazine does not hold more than 10 rounds:

      Prohibited firearms parts and magazines
      Prohibited firearms are:

      All semi-automatic firearms (including semi-automatic shotguns), but:
      excluding rimfire rifles .22 calibre or less as long as they have a magazine (whether detachable or not) that holds 10 rounds or less; and
      excluding semi-automatic shotguns that have a non-detachable, tubular magazine that holds 5 rounds or less.
      Pump action shotguns that:
      Are capable of being used with a detachable magazine; or
      Have a non-detachable tubular magazine capable of holding more than 5 rounds.
      Only a person who meets one of the exemption categories and who has applied for and obtained a new endorsement and permit to possess may lawfully possess a prohibited firearm.

      Prohibited magazines are:

      Shotgun magazines (whether detachable or not) capable of holding more than 5 rounds.
      Magazines for other firearms (excluding pistols) that are:
      Detachable magazines bigger than 10 rounds that are capable of holding 0.22 calibre or lower rimfire cartridges
      Detachable magazines bigger than 10 rounds that are capable of being used with a semi-automatic or fully automatic firearm
      Other magazines, detachable or not, that are capable of holding more than 10 rounds.
      Only a person who meets one of the exemption categories and who has applied for and obtained a new endorsement and permit to possess may lawfully possess a prohibited magazine.

      Prohibited parts are:

      Any part designed or intended to be an integral part of a prohibited firearm.
      Examples include: butt, stock, silencer, sight
      Any component that can be applied to enable a firearm fire with (or near to) semi-automatic or automatic action.
      Examples include: gas block, gas tube, sub-calibre conversion kit.
      Only a person who has an endorsement permitting them to possess a prohibited firearm may lawfully possess a prohibited part.

      More info at: https://www.police.govt.nz/advice/firearms-and-safety/changes-firearms-law-prohibited-firearms#anchor6

      0

      0

    • Are you looking for contact details?

      Because given the government and police response around Christchurch and people who speak out in favour of firearms he’d be putting himself at risk with publishing anything like that.

      Whatever you’re after, be wary of putting somebody at risk of being trod under Jacinda Arderns’ jackboot.

      0

      0

      • Because if was me that was the writer no one would care.
        But as the writer is a well known gunsmith and collector then he has more gravitas.
        (even though I have never heard of him!)

        0

        0

  5. It is already late as the first “tranche” of repressive legislation has been passed and is in effect now. I agree, that action was rushed, deliberately, to reduce opposition. The tactic was successful in that the legislation went far further than was announced and spoken of in the house. An action of a government not to be trusted in my opinion.

    We hear of the supposed reluctance of Licenced fire arm owners to comply. I suggest that initially those with other than the much spoken off MSSA or military assault weapons did not think the issue related to their bolt action .22 or shot gun. They are subsequently learning of the enormity of the unjustified action taken by our current government against law abiding Licenced firearm owners.

    We hear the phrase from Police that people handing in weapons, .22 and shotguns with magazines above what is now the capacity limits, are “ reluctant to hand them in but know they have to”. Therein is the reality of the law abiding nature of Licenced Firearm owners. My view is they will remain as law abiding citizens despite the unreasonable action against them by the current government. The other choice is to have them modified by restricting magazine capacity.

    None of this has made any New Zealander safer. That the actions have improved public safety is an assertion from the Minister that is easily rejected. Licenced Firearm owners were not the problem, if a problem even existed.

    Pleasing to hear Minister Nash complaining that the opposition party is intending to resist the second “tranche” Arms Act amendment. The failure to do so first time around was a substantial disappointment for this voter. That Minister Nash will encounter opposition to his further unreasonable proposals and threat to remove the earned right to hold a licence to own a firearm is appropriate. That right cannot be converted to something else.

    Great open letter from a Rodney Woods, I agree.

    0

    0

    • The way more fightable fight is in the second round of new arms legislation, the Nats have said they wont support it so the LFO’s train has lurched back onto the tracks here, so all put your differences aside, and get some critical mass together to counter Nash/Cahill’s stupidity.

      0

      0

  6. I’m not a gun owner, but I’m on their side.

    I have an email list of all the Labour Mp’s
    And today on their website they say they are keeping us safe!
    So I’m going to email them all and ask them that if they really want to keep us safe they would order the police to call on every gang pad and every gang house (they know where they are) every week, for the next year and confiscate every gun they find and then crush them on Youtube.

    0

    0

Comments are closed.

Recent posts

Tell the UN to get stuffed.

U.N. CHIEF GUTERRES CALLS FOR ‘IMPROVED WORLD GOVERNANCE’ From AP: U.N. Secretary General Antonio Guterres on Monday called for “improved world governance” as one solution to...

Not a priority at last. Can we have more like this please.

Leaders' debate absent of Maori issues, Ardern and Collins forced to explain RadioNZ reports: Jacinda Ardern and Judith Collins have been forced to front-up and explain...

Is Capitalism Dead?

A Comment on the New History of Capitalism Phillip W. Magness: As recent discussions in the broader academic literature illustrate, the economic dimensions of American slavery...

Recent comments

revtech120 on Have Your Say
DifferentPerspective on Have Your Say
DifferentPerspective on Have Your Say
DifferentPerspective on Have Your Say
Viking on Have Your Say
Viking on Have Your Say
Tarquin on Have Your Say

The way we all feel about this useless government

Hamilton
moderate rain
14.8 ° C
15 °
14.4 °
92 %
7.6kmh
100 %
Wed
14 °
Thu
15 °
Fri
19 °
Sat
21 °
Sun
17 °
NZD - New Zealand Dollar
USD
1.5221
EUR
1.7780
AUD
1.0804
CAD
1.1388
GBP
1.9418
JPY
0.0144
CNY
0.2235
INR
0.0207