Results 1 to 9 of 9
  1. #1

    Default Update from Martin Hood

    Two issues I have been mulling over for the last week or so. The first was a meeting the dealers had with Gen Bothma. At that meeting the dealer representatives were asked to sign a register that contained a declaration in terms of the secrecy act that we could not disclose the contents of the meeting. This was a consultative stakeholder meeting that took place as a result of a directive to the police from Parliament. So how do the dealers tell their members about the meeting if the proceedings are secret and it is a criminal offence to disclose them? The secrecy act is an apartheid piece of security legislation that has survived into our new dispensation. It is ironic that Bothma wants to rely on apartheid legislation to protect his meetings.
    At that meeting he also somewhat gleefully told us that printing of licences was to be outsourced to the government printer. This means it will be much harder to obtain a reprint of a licence that has not yet been delivered and probably will come at an extra cost. No wonder Bothma was happy.
    Finaly the new amendments are going to be published shortly , over the holiday seasson again to make it as inconvenient as posible for us to comment.

  2. #2
    User
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Location
    Pretoria
    Posts
    129

    Default Re: Update from Martin Hood

    Please keep us updated so that we can support where needed.These snakes always want to sneak oppressive legislation late night through the backdoor!I wish there were an oversight comitee whose job it was solely to check if these types of legislation was done with a fair hand towards the people they were targeting.

  3. #3
    User
    Join Date
    Nov 2013
    Location
    KZN
    Age
    35
    Posts
    311

    Default Re: Update from Martin Hood

    Quote Originally Posted by Flintstone View Post
    Please keep us updated so that we can support where needed.These snakes always want to sneak oppressive legislation late night through the backdoor!I wish there were an oversight comitee whose job it was solely to check if these types of legislation was done with a fair hand towards the people they were targeting.
    This!
    Please keep us updated.

  4. #4
    User
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Age
    39
    Posts
    661

    Default Re: Update from Martin Hood

    Thanks Martin - indeed I think we are all wide awake and awaiting so that we can do what is necessary. No sneaking it by in the middle of the night this time!

    Regards

    Werner

  5. #5
    User
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Pretoria
    Posts
    1,352

    Default Re: Update from Martin Hood

    Sound like this Bothma character has some personal beef against gunowners.

  6. #6

    Default Re: Update from Martin Hood

    Another update

    Everybody
    Another challenge we must be aware of is the following. I have just read a news report quoting our minister of police as stating that the firearms appeal board is formulating policy proposals for future firearm legislation[control]. I have an uneasy relationship with the appeal board due to concerns about it's expertise and decision maing abilities and I am not alone in this respect as many judges also have made negative comments about it. {Lazarides and the Black case in particular but there are many others]. I have publically challenged the chairman of the board in parliament about his competency and decision making because the appeal board makes decisions behind closed doors without scrutiny and absent any publicaly disclosed policy on how they make decisions.
    Here is my concern: how can the so called independent appeal or review body deal with appeals when the decisions it is mandated to review is based upon a policy that it has created?
    Is this not like asking the Supreme court of Appeal and not Parliament to draft laws and then hear court cases in the same court challenging or interpreting that same legislation.?Where is the independence of thought and application of one's mind when you are deciding appeals based upon your own policy?

  7. #7

    Default Re: Update from Martin Hood

    The chairman of the appeals board stated in parliament at the firearms summit that he is opposed to civilian firearm ownership.

    Sent from my SM-G935F using Tapatalk
    Quemadmodum gladius neminem occidit: occidentis telum est.

    Seneca (4 BC - 65 AD)

  8. #8

    Default Re: Update from Martin Hood

    Quote Originally Posted by Antelope View Post
    Another update

    Everybody
    Another challenge we must be aware of is the following. I have just read a news report quoting our minister of police as stating that the firearms appeal board is formulating policy proposals for future firearm legislation[control]. I have an uneasy relationship with the appeal board due to concerns about it's expertise and decision maing abilities and I am not alone in this respect as many judges also have made negative comments about it. {Lazarides and the Black case in particular but there are many others]. I have publically challenged the chairman of the board in parliament about his competency and decision making because the appeal board makes decisions behind closed doors without scrutiny and absent any publicaly disclosed policy on how they make decisions.
    Here is my concern: how can the so called independent appeal or review body deal with appeals when the decisions it is mandated to review is based upon a policy that it has created?
    Is this not like asking the Supreme court of Appeal and not Parliament to draft laws and then hear court cases in the same court challenging or interpreting that same legislation.?Where is the independence of thought and application of one's mind when you are deciding appeals based upon your own policy?
    Surely that entire process is a breach of PAJA?

  9. #9

    Default Re: Update from Martin Hood

    Stefan Molyneux said it best:

    "There is no such thing as gun control. there is only the concentration of gun ownership in the hands of a tiny political elite and their minions."

    I do think the message must be that more gun control is simply placing all guns under the control of the ANC/Zuma/Guptas. If you ban guns, all you do is place all remaining guns either under the control of politicians, or criminals, between which there really is no difference.

    Time to go berserk on the publicity, its a public safety issue. More guns = less crime = less likely there will be corrupt government.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •