Kiwi Gun Blog

Protecting Responsible Firearms Ownership in New Zealand

A Chance For Reason and Fairness to Prevail

From the ‘Fair and Reasonable’ campaign:

Thanks to the financial support from people like you, this week the Fair and Reasonable campaign appointed one of New Zealand’s foremost litigators, Jack Hodder QC, to lead our class action against the Government on behalf of responsible firearms licence holders. 

yy.jpg

Along with our solicitors, Jack has identified several potential class actions – and in the coming weeks we’ll be able to tell you more about the legal steps which the team are currently hard at work on.

The Bill for the Government’s second round of amendments to the Arms Act is due to be published this month. While we have started work on the cases/legal avenues we have shortlisted, more potential actions may arise from the Bill.

Similarly though, we do not want to throw our limited financial resources to legal actions that are made moot by the Government’s next round of law changes.  That’s why we have had to keep our powder dry.

We have a number of lawyers supporting the QC in strategy, Arms Act interpretation, researching, and implementation. The legislation was rushed but our team response has to be carefully formed to have the best impact.  If you’re a lawyer, or able to assist with the effort, please let me know – we’re doing as much as we can to make sure our limited funds go as far as possible to stand up for the cause, and hold the Government accountable.

Thank you again for your support of this effort for fair and reasonable firearms laws.

Michael Dowling
Chairman
Council of Licenced Firearms Owners
(on behalf of the Fair and Reasonable Campaign)

 

The Kiwi Gun Blog

,

17 responses to “A Chance For Reason and Fairness to Prevail”

  1. 40 Year LFO Avatar
    40 Year LFO

    Please, everyone support this endeavor, it’s our best chance of holding the radical & misinformed people & politicians to account.

    Like

    Reply
    1. john moses Avatar
      john moses

      hell yes!!

      Like

      Reply
  2. mrrobismyname Avatar
    mrrobismyname

    It is sad that it has gotten to this level.

    One can only hope that National and NZ First call time on this bullshit and force the Government into a proper consultation.

    There does need to be changes, but they have to be effective and workable.

    What we are seeing is an inevitable march towards banning firearms for everyone, except for the Government.

    Have a quick look at how that worked in modern day Venezuela. And how it has worked throughout history.

    Are we really doomed to repeat our mistakes.

    Liked by 1 person

    Reply
    1. Xpat Avatar
      Xpat

      If I was a bookmaker, I’d take your bet and give you 500 to 1 odds on neither Nationals or NZ First doing any backflip on the current legislation.

      The odds on me having to payout on that bet would be zero.

      Unfortunately, the horse has already bolted and the legislation passed, so the Nationals can do two parts of bugger all now, as they don’t have the numbers in parliament. They can talk all they want in an effort to recapture a few lost votes, but at days end, thats all it is…talk…and for most of us, we have simply stopped listening to them.

      As for NZ First, well Winston has already very vocally committed to a firearms register, and just about everything else his marxist stable mates want. I think from this point forward, NZ First have adopted a scorched earth policy on their way out of parliament next election.

      From my perspective, legal challenges are the only way forward, followed up with a redirection of votes to New Conservative or ACT.

      Liked by 1 person

      Reply
      1. lawabidingvictim Avatar
        lawabidingvictim

        I agree as far as New Conservatives goes, I have read quite a bit of their stuff and both the leader and his deputy speak a lot of logical common sense.

        Liked by 1 person

  3. paul b Avatar
    paul b

    i fully support this and have donated as well but we still need to vote next year and let the current government know that what they have done is not acceptable to use

    Liked by 1 person

    Reply
  4. Terry Shulze Avatar
    Terry Shulze

    Jack, have a read of this article –

    Review of Australian Law and Its Decline

    The same concepts in English Law apply in NZ.

    There is no ‘rational basis’ for the legislation. The legislation is based on fraud, actually, it is worse than that, it is based upon the crimes of murder.

    Go back through the banned video and you can see that the killer is being directed by other persons . This is not a ‘lone gunman’ scenario, it is a well orchestrated psy-op – by your own government.

    “If a government tries to disarm it’s citizens by killing them, that is not a government you surrender your guns to.” – Wake up!

    Somebody contact Jack about this post.

    Liked by 1 person

    Reply
    1. Xpat Avatar
      Xpat

      Terry, thank you for posting this exceptional article.

      While it was a tough read at times for for a layman, it did awaken the senses to the fundamental basis of our “legal rights”. Perhaps our “perceived” vs “actual” legal rights, is the real argument here.

      I’ve always had difficulty with politicians living under the same laws as the rest of us, yet possessing vastly different rights.

      The recent New Zealand example being the findings of the presiding Justice in the Kiwi Party case. Essentially, this Justice made findings which rejected all arguments in law made by the plaintiffs.

      This case was based upon numerous documents, including The Bill of Rights, Magna Carta, Treaty of Waitangi etc. The findings of this case, effectively extinguishes a great many perceived rights we felt we held under law. Yet, if it extinguishes so many perceived rights for the common person, then shouldn’t the same extinguishment of rights apply to politicians likewise.

      Why should politicians have the right of “parliamenty privilege” afforded under the context of the same Bill of Rights, when the common person is denied a right to private ownership of property, or the right to own a firearm inter alia.

      I’m too old to be a radical, but do believe there should be equality in law under the democratic principles and institutions we were brought up to believe in.

      As a former Australian, I’ve always had scepticism over the firearms laws that followed the incident at Port Arthur. Moreover, the manner by which the convoluted “evidence”, simply didn’t add-up in respect to the incident in question. The facts firstly being sealed for 20 years, now extended to 30 years, simply begs the question, what is the Australian Government hiding.

      If you dare to question the offical story, some how you become a radical fringe dweller, or conspiracy theory nutcase.

      In a similar vein, the alleged perpetrator of the Christchurch incident, has already been found guilty by the media and political elite alike. He may or may not be guilty, thats a matter for the courts to decide. Though in saying this, I find it unique, how the NZ Government immediately implemented new firearm laws, made it illegal to watch the alleged perpetrators video, or read his manifesto. Appearances being, why is a “transparent” Government acting in such a manner.

      Liked by 3 people

      Reply
      1. lawabidingvictim Avatar
        lawabidingvictim

        @Xpat,

        FYI,

        A good read here.
        Free pdf download.

        https://archive.org/details/DeadlyDeceptionAtPortArthur

        Author JOE VIALLS is an independent investigative journalist with thirty years direct experience of international military and oilfield operations.

        Why is the case sealed for 30yrs?

        ***

        Liked by 1 person

  5. Xpat Avatar
    Xpat

    @lawabidingvictim

    Yes, I’ve actually read the writings of the late Mr Vialls, and frankly it’s raises more questions than it does answers in respect to the role of the media, along with Australian State and Federal governments regarding the Port Arthur incident.

    In a similar vein, there once was a website by another gentleman who also probed facts and evidence surrounding Port Arthur. The host took down the site following ongoing death threats and various other forms of intimidation.

    Like many who silently question aspects of this incident, I have grave reservations over key information that was publicly released by the media and governments alike.

    One has only had to undertake basic military training to understand, that “fire and movement” is physically exhausting, moreover greatly impairs a soldiers ability to maintain accurate fire. Yet here we have a young bloke with mental health disorders, below average physical heath, no military training, no previous firearms experience…but managed to inflict carnage on a grand scale, then successfully evade authorities.

    Perhaps instead of being left to rot in Ridson prison, maybe the Government should have made Martin Bryant commander of the SAS, as his obvious skill set was of a standard higher than most elite special forces combatants.

    I suppose at days end, the truth is unlikely to ever be revealed.

    Like

    Reply
    1. Terry Shulze Avatar
      Terry Shulze

      Since you guys wanted to bring up the Port Arthur psy-op, here’s a link to a video I helped Dee Maclachan with.

      “Justice” in the Lucky Country

      She had to trim the contents to get it under 10 minutes and she says in the video “a very rare SLR”. It was actually a very rare METRIC thread SLR. There were only 5 metric thread SLRs in Oz before the massacre and then a 6th after the massacre that nobody had ever seen before.

      If you go to the comments you will see one of the rough draft scenes I wrote to help her with the evidence. She wants to do a full movie with all the evidence revealed, but it seems that everybody is scared to get involved. Hopefully, you Kiwis have got bigger cajones than the Ozzies.

      Liked by 1 person

      Reply
  6. Pav Avatar
    Pav

    The thought is Admirable. Take the Govt. to court. Odds on the outcome?
    Colfo has proven to be a waste of space. It is merely a club of firearms dealers and compliant shooting disciplines.
    The only recourse the public have to this authoritarian regime comes next year at the election for parliament. The job is to punish all those who voted for this attack on the citizenry, and reward good behaviour on our behalf.
    I know that the NZ pond-life are incapable of doing such a rational thing, and will instead return these bastards who betrayed our trust.
    We deserve nothing less for our stupidity.

    Liked by 2 people

    Reply
    1. Terry Shulze Avatar
      Terry Shulze

      “Take the Govt. to court. Odds on the outcome?” – OK, I’m as cynical as you. However, you have to take the fight to the foe.

      If you challenged the legislation based upon no ‘rational basis’ and then explained in your pleadings that the video showed that the killer was being assisted by people unknown, it brings the psy-op out in the open. The media may rag on you, but that works to your advantage.

      You can then strongly suggest in the media that the bogus ‘Royal Commission’ could clarify that issue by examining the actions of the killer on the video and also other aspects of the ACTUAL MASSACRE (like what happened to all those people that were apprehended).

      The present bogus ‘terms of reference’ of the Royal Commission completely AVOID any aspect of the massacre itself (that is just unbelievable!)

      A qualified lawyer running the case would connect with Moslem lawyers to have them part of the team (they have skin in the game). Those Moslem lawyers would also be communicating directly with victims families and would want the truth to surface.

      If you can’t get the NZ population to wake-up to what has just happened in their country, you can forget anything positive happening at another election where the populace remains dumbed-down to the real facts.

      Liked by 1 person

      Reply
      1. MRMAX Avatar
        MRMAX

        Read the High Court decision on the case brought on behalf of the gun owners by the Kiwi Party , it was the same given in the COLFO decision and all based on the outcome of the 1688 rebellion …

        Like

  7. Ukridge Avatar
    Ukridge

    This deserves wide dissemination. Please read their proposals, forward to all your contacts and sign up:

    https://fairfirearmlaws.act.org.nz/?utm_campaign=1000_strong&utm_medium=email&utm_source=actnz

    Like

    Reply
    1. Terry Shulze Avatar
      Terry Shulze

      Sounds like the Kiwis are going to repeat the errors of the Aussies after Port Arthur. They think they can vote their way out of the problem.

      Doing the same thing over and over again and expecting a different result, is the definition of….

      Liked by 1 person

      Reply
  8. MRMAX Avatar
    MRMAX

    That argument was lost in 1688 and in the previous Kiwi Party case ,, I like Albert Einstein : “Insanity is doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results.” . COLFO has NEVER mentioned the UN in any of its issues , why simply because David Seymour and ACT are pro-globalist and pro-UN and now COLFO is a puppet of ACT supporting the other UN agendas !

    Liked by 2 people

    Reply

Leave a comment