This was posted 6 years 9 months 10 days ago, and might be an out-dated deal.

Related
  • expired

Adler's A110 Lever Action Shotgun Synthetic Stock. 20" and 28" Model Available. $665. @ Cleaver Firearms

2321
Adler's A110 Lever Action Shotgun Synthetic Stock. 20" and 28" Model Available. $665. @ Cleaver Firearms
Go to Deal
Hayesy22 on 16/07/2017 - 09:27 cleaverfirearms.com (6903 clicks)
Last edited 16/07/2017 - 12:03 by 2 other users

Great Price at $665, most stores sell these for approx $800

Available models:
20" barrel with straight grip stock
28" barrel with pistol grip stock

Features:
12Ga 3" Chamber
5 shot magazine capacity
Hard chrome bore and chamber
3 x internal screw in chokes
Barrels feature ventilated rib with brass bead
Alloy receiver with 3/8" dovetail rail
Forend accessory rail
Ventilated recoil pad
Synthetic stock
Sling swivels
Weight: 7lbs approx.
5 Year Warranty

For those in NSW Horsley Park Gun Shop have them on special also costing $10 more.
Adler A110 12G 28"
Adler A110 12G 20"

Dealers Licence No: 50000073

Sports & Outdoors Firearm

Related Stores

Cleaver Firearms
Cleaver Firearms

closed Comments

  • Scab on 16/07/2017 - 09:31
    +146

    Thanks OP, perfect gift for the bikie in your family.

    • Diji1 on 16/07/2017 - 10:10
      +6

      They're criminals so they'll be using the superior pump action design and hitting targets whilst rapidly reloading unlike the people that follow Australia's moronic gun laws.

      • TheBilly on 16/07/2017 - 10:21
        +1

        Why even neg this? Its true? Some peoples butt hurts when they read truth

        • Sapiens on 16/07/2017 - 10:41
          +2

          Also plus one for humour

      • JohnHowardsEyebrows on 16/07/2017 - 10:44
        +104

        Moronic gun laws that actually work.

        You gun nuts are so tedious.

        • iratepirate on 16/07/2017 - 10:54
          +2

          I hope you gave the deal a negative vote because it's not a quality shotgun that was made popular by the anti gun lobby - classic Streisand effect, not because you don't like guns…

        • skrep on 16/07/2017 - 11:46
          -4

          Sorry johnny but stats don't lie
          https://youtu.be/T4F9sOJ1mxA

        • brentsbits on 16/07/2017 - 12:02
          +20

          @perksie89:

          YouTube often does though

        • Magpye on 16/07/2017 - 12:17
          +30

          It's actually the Ned Flanders types that are tedious.
          Panicking and outraging against things they think are dangerous, and ohmigosh won't somebody think of the children kneejerk reponses.

          The gun laws work. Nothing moronic about them, and because of them, we do not have the situation America has, where gun crime is an actual problem.
          Australia leads the world in smart gun laws, and whilst there will always be contention around something like this, the fact remains that we have successfully balanced the needs and concerns of the majority, without excessively penalising the minority.

        • jovialjosie2002 on 16/07/2017 - 12:54
          +10

          @iratepirate:
          Yep it's a $500 gun selling for $800 because the greens have tried to ban it. My 60 year old Mossberg bolt action shotgun shoots faster and better than this Turkish made shotgun and my old Mossberg has negligible recoil. These Turkish guns kick like mules.
          However, at $500, which is what they will be worth soon, I'd consider one for pest control on a farm….

        • jovialjosie2002 on 16/07/2017 - 12:58
          +4

          @Superior79:
          Don't forget Canada, it has more guns per head than USA. However, you don't here about "mass murders" in Canada. I guess there is just less "mentally insane" people in Canada and hence less mass murders.

        • Magpye on 16/07/2017 - 12:59
          +5

          @Superior79: Please, share with the class the last time you were held up at gunpoint ? Shot at ?
          Perhaps heard a gunshot in the distance ?

          Thanks for making my point.

          Comparing a third world country with a first world country is hardly doing you any favours, given the robust human traffiking and underage market there.
          As you say, can get your hands on pretty much anything.

        • garage sale on 16/07/2017 - 13:07
          +8

          well my gunsafe was stoken while i was on holidays ….. ripped of the walls with the studs and all …… 3 shoties which are probable been sawn down by now …… so yeah …… licensed people aren't the issue ….. its criminals ……

        • Superior79 on 16/07/2017 - 13:08
          +12

          @Magpye:

          Shot at?
          12 years ago near Point Peron…

          Magpie calling Czech republic a 3rd world country really shows your level of intelligence (or the lack of).
          It is a first world country, and 6th safest country in the world.
          Finland #11 on the list, and Switzerland #5, are also countries with relatively lacks gun laws…

        • Superior79 on 16/07/2017 - 13:17
          +7

          @jovialjosie2002:
          I'd love for australia to base gun laws based on evidence, and to look at Canadian or NZ crime records and adobt their laws….
          Love to get myself a semi…

        • 8200 on 16/07/2017 - 13:53
          -1

          @iratepirate:

          Indeed, all these Turkey made guns are built to low low price and quality

        • Foma2 on 16/07/2017 - 14:45

          @Superior79:

          I can be absolutely wrong but the keywords are : Czech Republic.

        • duchy on 16/07/2017 - 16:04
          +3

          @Superior79: In Czech Republic you have to pass some serious tests regarding gun laws and gun handling + mental health test. It has some of the strictest gun laws in the world. Hence the low crime rates.

          Guns are limited - rifles can be only semi-automatic etc…

          You can't get your hands on everything.

          Source: My dad is Czech and nuts about guns.

          Ukraine on the other hand…

        • OzzyOzbourne on 16/07/2017 - 16:18
          +4

          We need more guns to make Australia safer, just like the US. Then we need bullet proof backpacks for our kids.

        • JohnHowardsEyebrows on 16/07/2017 - 16:37
          +4

          @perksie89: A gun nut makes a video about gun laws…gee, I wonder what the conclusion will be…

        • [Deactivated] on 16/07/2017 - 17:32
          +4

          @Superior79: The "defend yourself" logic is complete rubbish, precisely why America has a huge gun problem.

        • tap on 16/07/2017 - 17:43

          @garage sale: Really? What suburb? They obviously knew you had a gun safe.. someone you know maybe?

        • skrep on 16/07/2017 - 18:56

          @JohnHowardsEyebrows: why would someone who doesn't care about this topic do the research? This bloke has done the research and makes it seem like your whole idea on 'gun laws that actually work' seems nullified. Care to share a rebuttal about how the current laws are working? or maybe you don't care enough to share?

        • dsg101 on 16/07/2017 - 19:57
          +5

          From https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_firearm-r….

          This is a historical list of countries by firearm-related death rate per 100,000 population in one year.
          Czech Republic 2.01 (2012)
          Australia 0.93 (2013)

        • cannedhams on 16/07/2017 - 20:52
          +8

          @jovialjosie2002: I've heard heaps of people say that they can fire a bolt action faster than a pump or a lever action firearm. It is usually absolute bollocks. Moving quickly, I can fire a bolt action rifle every three seconds. Lever action closer to a second and a half and pump action shotgun two to three rounds per second.

          Sure, you might be superman on the bolt action, but even if you were you would presumably still be superman on the pump or lever action as well, so lever action or bolt action would still be quicker.

          For what its worth, it was strange that you could previously buy any shotgun no matter how powerful on a Category A weapons licence as long as it wasn't a pump, whereas you were limited to rimfire rifles (basically .22s) which are the weakest rounds commonly available.

          The gun laws are still weird. You can still buy any break or bolt action shotgun on a Cat A licence. It wont be fast as a lever action but still plenty lethal, way more lethal than the 0.22 rifle which is the most you can basically buy.

          However, the success of the gun laws post Port Arthur isn't because of the restriction and weapon classifications, but instead the requirements that all shooters be licensed, demonstrate some understanding of responsible gun ownership and have some reason for needing the firearm (such as belonging to a gun club). These modest requirements basically kept complete loser dipsticks from easily acquiring a firearm, and most Martin Bryant types tend to be complete loser dipsticks.

          Unfortunately, its difficult to find commonsense, moderate opinions in this space. Most gun advocates are completely hostile to the gun laws, and most control advocates would happily ban all firearms if they could.

        • PCHammond on 16/07/2017 - 22:15
          +3

          @dsg101:
          https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_intention…

          Murder rate per 100,000 inhabitants
          Australia 0.98
          Czech Republic 0.75

          You also don't quote the whole stats from your link.
          Czech Republic: deaths 2.01; of which murders are 0.15, suicides 1.66
          Australia: deaths 0.93; murders 0.16, suicides 0.74

          So Australia has more people murdering with guns, but Czech Republic has more people killing themselves with guns.

          And if you look at suicide rate: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_suicide_r…
          Czech Republic 10.6
          Australia 10.4
          So Australians may not be using guns, but we are still killing ourselves.

        • PCHammond on 16/07/2017 - 22:18

          @cannedhams:

          Talk to the oldies about training with Lee Enfields. They could absolutely churn out shots damn quickly. The British Army's doctrine used to be based around the rate of fire of Lee Enfields too. Apparently there is a technique of shooting Lee Enfields where you work the bolt with your forefinger and thumb and shoot with your pinky…my hands are too small to try this though :(

        • wisc on 16/07/2017 - 22:38
          +6

          @Possumbly:

          There are 30,000 gun related deaths per year by firearms, and this number is not disputed. U.S. population 324,059,091 as of Wednesday, June 22, 2016. Do the math: 0.00000925% of the population dies from gun related actions each year. Statistically speaking, this is insignificant! What is never told, however, is a breakdown of those 30,000 deaths, to put them in perspective as compared to other causes of death:

          • 65% of those deaths are by suicide which would never be prevented by gun laws
          • 15% are by law enforcement in the line of duty and justified
          • 17% are through criminal activity, gang and drug related or mentally ill persons – gun violence
          • 3% are accidental discharge deaths

          So technically, "gun violence" is not 30,000 annually, but drops to 5,100. Still too many? Well, first, how are those deaths spanned across the nation?
          • 480 homicides (9.4%) were in Chicago
          • 344 homicides (6.7%) were in Baltimore
          • 333 homicides (6.5%) were in Detroit
          • 119 homicides (2.3%) were in Washington D.C. (a 54% increase over prior years)

          So basically, 25% of all gun crime happens in just 4 cities. All 4 of those cities have strict gun laws, so it is not the lack of law that is the root cause.

          This basically leaves 3,825 for the entire rest of the nation, or about 75 deaths per state. That is an average because some States have much higher rates than others. For example, California had 1,169 and Alabama had 1.

          Now, who has the strictest gun laws by far? California, of course, but understand, so it is not guns causing this. It is a crime rate spawned by the number of criminal persons residing in those cities and states. So if all cities and states are not created equally, then there must be something other than the tool causing the gun deaths.

          Are 5,100 deaths per year horrific? How about in comparison to other deaths? All death is sad and especially so when it is in the commission of a crime but that is the nature of crime. Robbery, death, rape, assault all is done by criminals and thinking that criminals will obey laws is ludicrous. That's why they are criminals.

          But what about other deaths each year?
          • 40,000+ die from a drug overdose–THERE IS NO EXCUSE FOR THAT!
          • 36,000 people die per year from the flu, far exceeding the criminal gun deaths
          • 34,000 people die per year in traffic fatalities(exceeding gun deaths even if you include suicide)

          Now it gets good:
          • 200,000+ people die each year (and growing) from preventable medical errors. You are safer in Chicago than when you are in a hospital!

          • 710,000 people die per year from heart disease. It’s time to stop the double cheeseburgers! So what is the point? If Obama and the anti-gun movement focused their attention on heart disease, even a 10% decrease in cardiac deaths would save twice the number of lives annually of all gun-related deaths (including suicide, law enforcement, etc.). A 10% reduction in medical errors would be 66% of the total gun deaths or 4 times the number of criminal homicides……Simple, easily preventable 10% reductions!

          So you have to ask yourself, in the grand scheme of things, why the focus on guns? It's pretty simple.:
          Taking away guns gives control to governments.

          The founders of this nation knew that regardless of the form of government, those in power may become corrupt and seek to rule as the British did by trying to disarm the populace of the colonies. It is not difficult to understand that a disarmed populace is a controlled populace.

          Thus, the second amendment was proudly and boldly included in the U.S. Constitution. It must be preserved at all costs.

          So the next time someone tries to tell you that gun control is about saving lives, look at these facts and remember these words from Noah Webster: "Before a standing army can rule, the people must be disarmed, as they are in almost every kingdom in Europe. The supreme power in America cannot enforce unjust laws by the sword, because the whole body of the people are armed and constitute a force superior to any band of regular troops that can be, on any pretense, raised in the United States. A military force at the command of Congress can execute no laws, but such as the people perceive to be just and constitutional; for they will possess the power."

          Remember, when it comes to "gun control," the important word is “control," not “gun."

        • WazzaP on 17/07/2017 - 01:06

          @cannedhams:
          A lot of people throw out the "shotgun, no matter how powerful" line - keep in mind that a 12GA shotgun in break, bolt, lever, pump or semi-auto all fire the same rounds, so no one is more "powerful" than the other. Also keep in mind the difference between Cat A and Cat B when getting your license is basically nil (speaking for NSW) - yes you may only be allowed rimfire on Cat A, but getting a cat B license is effectively just an extra tick on your form, so changing lever action shotguns from Cat A to Cat B will have little real world effect, aside from confusing things slightly for no real benefit.
          Your lethality argument is also fairly strange - at close range a shotgun has the benefit of basically no need to aim, where a 22LR would need to be aimed (to give you an idea on the lethality, a friend owns a dairy farm and uses a 22LR to put down sick cows, so a well placed shot a short distance is lethal even on a reasonably large animal) - move that distance out to 25m and you need to aim both as the shotgun round is starting to spread more so you need to focus on the target more - out to 50m and beyond and the benefit starts heading more towards the .22LR as shotguns are really intended as close range firearms so the shot starts to spread more, and loses accuracy and speed.

          I completely agree with you on the reasons behind the success of the post PA gun laws being the licensing, training/testing and genuine reasons - these I (and a lot of other gun owners) have no issues with - the problem is the govt continue their knee jerk banning/reclassifying of firearms without any evidence based reasoning.

        • Slo20 on 17/07/2017 - 07:11

          edit - already covered in other replies

        • Aneurism on 17/07/2017 - 09:32
          +2

          It's almost like trying to Jedi mind trick people with numbers to try to divert key logical errors.

          The article begins with gun related fatality statistics at the beginning of the article. The problem is they seem to infer that 'all gun crime' involves death.

          Unfortunately they forget that guns are also used for other types of crime (which also can cause physical and psychological harm that aren't covered in fatality statistics)

          There are other further problems but as I'm in a hurry, I wonder how many people get threatened with flu as a weapon.. 'Give me all your money! Otherwise I'll give you flu'!!

        • Speckled Jim on 17/07/2017 - 10:03

          Syringes have been used coercively many times. Flu, HIV, Hep, cordial…yikes.

        • cannedhams on 17/07/2017 - 10:21

          @FiftyCal: Even having absolutely no regard for accuracy, the time taken to take your hand off, cycle the bolt, put your hands back home again and fire is three seconds. Put that up to five or six seconds if you actually want to aim at something.

        • PCHammond on 17/07/2017 - 10:37

          @cannedhams:

          Cycling the bolt with your thumb and forefinger and pulling the trigger with your pinky allows you to keep the rifle aimed. How well it's done is an art

        • cannedhams on 17/07/2017 - 10:38

          @WazzaP: Its not just the gauge, you might want to fire slug or sabot rounds with that shotgun. For all intents and purposes, a 12GA shotgun firing slug rounds is just as lethal out to about eighty metres as .30 cal rifle rounds.

          I dont think that it makes any sense. If the Cat A licence is basically for people who need an occasional bunny gun, I don't think they should be able to buy 12GA shotguns. Probably a .410 is all they need.

          You dont need a powerful weapon to put down stock, when you are basically firing from 1 yard away. Incidentally, I used a .410 for this very same purpose and it was plenty for putting down horses, dogs etc. Remember when the farmers said that they needed to keep their semi-autos to put down stock? What a load of rubbish that was. Most of those semi-autos were for mucking around on, pure and simple.

          That same .410 was my house gun for a long time. I kept it loaded with birdshot. I had that many arguments with people who said that it wasnt enough. Believe me, it is enough when you are firing at a home invader from 8 yards or less away. I used birdshot because I didnt want to risk punching through two thin layers of fibro and killing the kid next door.

        • cannedhams on 17/07/2017 - 10:48

          @FiftyCal: Yeah, but how many Martin Bryant loser dipstick types tend to fit in that category? For 99% of us, its going to be way slower firing a bolt action than a lever or pump.

        • OzBragain on 17/07/2017 - 11:27

          @cannedhams:

          Remember when the farmers said that they needed to keep their semi-autos to put down stock?

          No

        • jabroni on 17/07/2017 - 11:41

          @wisc:

          First of all thats Mercia!

          and secondly, you think your piddly semi autos are going to protect you from american military drone strikes and 50 man swat team dropping through your door with grenade launchers?

          and we take off our shoes at airports for 1 potential shoe bomber which would have max taken down 300 ppl so yeah deal with it

        • WT on 17/07/2017 - 12:08
          +2

          @Superior79:

          I agree with the nz part, their firearm murder rate per 100k people is about the same as ours yet they can have semi auto rifles, supressors etc etc.

          according to this canada while similar gun laws to nz, arnt ranked all that great
          https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_firearm-r…

          I agree that howard and bryant fkd us over since TAS at the time was way behind the other states where he would not have been able to obtain a firearm period, yet in tas he could walk in and buy one.

          Regular people dont know the hoops, jumps and triple checks firearm owners have to go through which criminals simply wont pass. Current laws is like making drivers use a horse and cart, because speed kills.

        • [Deactivated] on 17/07/2017 - 12:15

          @wisc: http://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-34996604

          Here's a few more facts which might open your eyes, although I very much doubt it: https://www.thetrace.org/2016/12/gun-violence-statistics-201… There are plenty more for anyyone interested in the realities of gun violence in the good old USA.

          The fact that most people die of heart disease, etc etc has nothing whatsoever to do with the risks of firearms in society as the reports of mass shootings, shootings at schools regularly attests in a so called advanced society. Your paranoia is noted however and is a regular feature of some who defend their right to bear arms capable of taking down a whole classroom within minutes. The fact is that many advocates of gun ownership are precisely those who should be prevented from obtaining guns because of their mentality - including in some cases an intense fear of democratically elected governments.

          When it comes to gun control the important words are GUNS, and easy access. "Control" in the American context is next to non-existent in all practical senses.

        • OzBragain on 17/07/2017 - 17:02
          +1

          @Possumbly:

          The fact is that many advocates of gun ownership are precisely those who should be prevented from obtaining guns because of their mentality

          Source???

        • [Deactivated] on 17/07/2017 - 17:14

          [@OzBragain](/comment/4886659/redirect
          Work it out for yourself, use a search engine if necessary. The mentality is obvious to anyone with a modicum of intelligence and some life experience.

        • WazzaP on 17/07/2017 - 18:22
          +1

          @cannedhams:
          Yes you can use slugs and sabots, but again a 12GA is a 12GA, the Adler is no more or less powerful than any other 12GA, nor is it more accurate, or more capable of running slugs than any other shotgun.

          And you're incorrect about the reason for the cat A - it's not "for people who need an occasional bunny gun", it's for people who need access to a rimfire rifle, air-rifle, or a shotgun. Now you'll have Cat A for rimfire rifle and bolt/break open shotguns and Cat B for centre fire rifles and lever shotguns up to 5 rounds (and presumably falling block, being that it mostly resembles a "lever" action despite being single shot). Why should someone be limited to a .410 just because you think they don't need a 12GA? You do realise that even if they changed the laws to make 12GA Cat B only the only change it will make is more people getting Cat A and B, rather than actually preventing anyone from getting a 12GA (hell, NSW announced that due to the recategorisation of the Adler to Cat B, anyone who currently has an Adler and has Cat A only will automatically be changed to Cat A and B). Is someone less dead because they were killed by a 410 instead of a 12GA? Personally I'd rather they focus on preventing the criminals from getting ANY firearms, rather than somehow hoping that a crim that somehow is allowed a firearms license will only tick the Cat A option.

          As for farmers wanting to keep semi-autos - I highly doubt any farmer would want a semi-auto for putting down stock, far more likely they wanted them for pest control. Not sure what hobby farms you've been around, but a little .410 loaded with birdshot isn't going to take down a mob of pigs, nor are they going to hang around long enough for you to cycle your bolt, which is where a semi-auto comes in handy.

        • OzBragain on 17/07/2017 - 19:10
          +2

          @Possumbly:

          Tried a search engine and couldn't find this fact you refer to…guess it's just another hysterical opinion based on Hollywood and sensationalist media.

          It's a pity the discussion over firearms legislation is so often overtaken by emotion with facts being left at the door.

          The mentality is obvious to anyone with a modicum of intelligence and some life experience.

          If you're referring to the mentality of legal firearms owners in Australia where have you formed this opinion? Spending time legal firearms owners or from somewhere else?

          I've generally found that intelligent members of society tend to base their views on facts…no facts in your statement :/

        • wisc on 18/07/2017 - 14:46

          @Possumbly: yeah, i doubt it too :)

          there are over 1 million guns in Australia, believe me, if they where a problem you'd know before now.

        • [Deactivated] on 18/07/2017 - 16:00
          +1

          @OzBragain: Obviously you didn't know what to search for, and probably neither did you know how to assess comments from gun lobbyists without having them spoonfed to you. Have another read of my long post and see who and what I was responding to and perhaps you'll get a better idea. If not phone a friend because the reality is obvious to anyone who has read comments on numerous gun discussions across the web. Wisc's paranoia regarding government control is a not uncommon response. You may be happy to arm such people, I'm certainly not.

        • GreyGargoyle on 18/07/2017 - 16:57

          Yep, lots of people shooting up SW Sydney using registered firearms, hey? You anti gun idiots are tedious.

        • OzBragain on 18/07/2017 - 23:20
          +3

          @Possumbly:

          Obviously you didn't know what to search for, and probably neither did you know how to assess comments from gun lobbyists without having them spoonfed to you.

          Please feel free to further your cause by showing me and others who don't "know what to search for" where this elusive fact might be referenced. Come on…please :) Just one or two legitimate references to back up your fact that many advocates of gun ownership are precisely those who should be prevented from obtaining guns because of their mentality

          Have another read of my long post

          No thanks, I've only questioned what your hilarious "fact" is based on.

          If not phone a friend because the reality is obvious to anyone who has read comments on numerous gun discussions across the web.

          Ahhh, now I see. Without dissecting your blatantly ignorant sentence, your fact is in fact not a fact but merely an opinion based on "numerous gun discussions across the web". Niiiice work champion!!

          My view on firearms (not a fact, just a personal view) started well before the internet when we were taught at a young age how to safely and responsibly handle a rifle, shown the damage a single bullet can do and why firearms rarely anything like Hollywood would have you believe. No too many gun nuts back then…not too many anti gun prancing fairies either.

          Many decades later, while I'll admit there are some d!ckheads I've come across who shouldn't be allowed to hold a firearm, the overwhelming majority of nutters I've met are the anti gun fanatics who've never fired a round and form their opinion on anything but the facts.

          Overall the majority of Australians are sensible with guns. If you have a problem with gun crime in this country, lobby the government for stricter border control because that's where the crims get their hands on them.

        • Aydin on 19/07/2017 - 06:14

          @jovialjosie2002:
          The Turks make some of the best guns in the world and the Adler is quite a popular item.

        • [Deactivated] on 19/07/2017 - 18:55

          @OzBragain: Comprehension problems AND lack of life experience is never a good mix. My response was unequivocally to the rambling rubbish written by Wisc in regard to the American problem - where guns are awash in society and regulation is rubbish, as anyone with even a basic knowledge of the situation there should know. In your case it's difficult to know what you understand about the gun lobby and the advantages of gun control/limitation of firearm numbers in societies, but a little bit of reading on the topic will help no end. In Australia, as in the USA, MOST registered gun owners are responsible. They are rarely the ones encountered on forums arguing for gun rights. I doubt you have the foggiest about the psychology of gun ownership or the well known "weapons effect" and judging from your responses I also doubt you have any interest in expanding your knowledge but in case you do I suggest you google 'gun psychology', 'reasons for gun ownership', and 'gun statistics'. A lot of things are obvious but as you need to be spoonfed you'll find plenty of good analysis to keep you occupied. Your last par shows just how ignorant you are. Google 'gun theft' and get a clue. If it's not too much try cogitating on the results of the UK Firearms ACT and the Howard response to the Tasmanian massacre. There's a whole lot more but as the saying goes, Rome wasn't built in a day.

        • OzBragain on 19/07/2017 - 22:11

          @Possumbly:

          Comprehension problems AND lack of life experience is never a good mix.

          Spending your days reading internet forums does not constitute life experience. Back away from the keyboard and head out to a range and chat to people face to face. Take a trip out of suburbia and meet some of the Aussie who grow the food you buy in nice neat little packages and see what you learn about poncy little catch phrases like "weapons effect", 'gun psychology', 'reasons for gun ownership', and 'gun statistics'. You might even learn a thing or two about firearms and realise that they're not as scary as you've seen in the movies or read on the interweb.

          My response was unequivocally to the rambling rubbish written by Wisc in regard to the American problem

          Doesn't matter if you were responding unequivocally to the existence of an advance race of potato people on Pluto. You've made a BS claim that "many advocates of gun ownership are precisely those who should be prevented from obtaining guns because of their mentality" and tried to dress it up as a fact. If it's a fact you can back it up. If not then just accept you were wrong and move along.

          I asked you to back up something you claimed as fact and all I'm reading is the standard drivel and deflection of the anti gun fruits…emotion and opinion mixed in with a few lies claiming to be hard facts.

          I've had a good laugh seeing you try to squirm out of providing any substance to your pretend facts and for that I thank you. Feel free to have the last word, no one will think any less of you for regurgitating more anti gun propaganda and trying to spin it as superior intellect.

        • [Deactivated] on 20/07/2017 - 11:50
          -2

          @OzBragain: Handling a gun apparently makes you an expert on gun safety and the attitudes of all gun owners and advocates. Hilarious. Your ignorance just gets better with every response. I'm well aware that certain groups need access to a firearm, certainly don't need a wet behind the ears gun nut to tell me the obvious. Checked out gun theft did you? Not likely because it doesn't fit your quaint little world of ignorance. Instead of dribbling over your fav calibre weapon and displaying your ignorance on a forum you'd be far better off familiarising yourself with some facts, although the myriad analysis and discussion on guns in society are really aimed at people who actually have a capacity for thought so you may be wasting your time. I've already indicated where you can find ample evidence of the mentality of many gun advocates (as against owners - you see that difference?) but it's apparently beyond your capacity. Not unexpected.

        • PCHammond on 20/07/2017 - 13:28
          +3

          @Possumbly:
          As someone who goes on forums to debate about gun rights and is pro gun, I am offended by your accusation that I am a wet behind the ears nutjob. I also find it funny that your "evidence" is basically "just google it yourself". I guess the scientific journal articles that I have co authored should just list "google it yourself" in the reference list.

          My position is that we should stop punishing lawful responsible firearms owners and punish the irresponsible ones and criminals. Laws are increasingly targeted at lawful owners and do nothing to punish actual criminals, because much of these laws are written by people with absolutely no understanding of firearms at all. I am all for stronger gun laws to punish the criminals, but I am also for softer laws for the responsible owners.

          As an example, semi automatic pistols are required to have a barrel length of 120mm or more. 119mm? Illegal. 120mm, legal. Total length is irrelevant. Total size is irrelevant. I have no idea where they got the 120mm mark at all, but their justification was to basically make easily concealed pistol illegal. Even before this law, I knew nobody with an "easily concealed" pistol. Hell, this law came about due to the Monash University shooting, which was performed by a mentally ill person using guns that are mostly still legal, so clearly this law would not have prevented the shooting and was just a kneejerk reaction which punished the wrong people. I'm all for a psych evaluation as part of licensing, but the lawmakers would prefer to make arbitrary decisions based on no knowledge because of "muh feels".

          Oh, and I know plenty of sane responsible firearms advocates. And I know gun owners who are absolute morons and should never own a gun let alone a car yet they are not doing anything illegal by word of law. Likewise, I know sane responsible anti gunners and I know moron anti gunners. Gun owners are like any population. You get the good ones and you get the morons. Like any law, we should be punishing the morons not everyone.

        • [Deactivated] on 21/07/2017 - 23:53
          -2

          @FiftyCal: Have another look. I didn't read your comment let alone reply to you, but now that you've weighed in….

          Your last par is sensible and I agree (almost) totally. That said, if just this one par below is any indication then you have no idea whatsoever. The second sentence in particular is complete bollocks, but a fairly typical uninformed and populist notion. It displays a total lack of knowledge of how gun laws (or laws of any sort for that matter) are developed and enacted, and subsequently policed.

          My position is that we should stop punishing lawful responsible firearms owners and punish the irresponsible ones and criminals. Laws are increasingly targeted at lawful owners and do nothing to punish actual criminals, because much of these laws are written by people with absolutely no understanding of firearms at all. I am all for stronger gun laws to punish the criminals, but I am also for softer laws for the responsible owners.

          I don't know what your concept of "softer" laws for responsible owners is (slack storage security? fewer checks? more access to higher powered/automatic weapons which the vast majority likely don't need?) but you might want to contemplate where criminals get some of their guns and what effect "softer" laws might have on the total numbers of guns in our society (and the likely results of same).

        • PCHammond on 22/07/2017 - 07:10
          +3

          @Possumbly:
          Right, so instead of using logic and reason and actually being civil, you just launch into "LOLNO"

          Youre not worth the effort

        • Eeples on 08/08/2017 - 22:59

          @jovialjosie2002:

          What's your source?

          Wiki says you are wrong….

          https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Estimated_number_of_guns_per…

      • Belv on 16/07/2017 - 13:30
        -2

        yeh because theres so many bikies going around shooting innocent people.i just see it dailly. America is alloud neally any gun and that does nothing to prevent shootings. good try kid

      • subywagon on 16/07/2017 - 17:12
        +1

        Lever action has more style.

    • PJC on 16/07/2017 - 11:48

      It's a bit harsh though. It is also cheaper to neg with a valid reason.

  • DrC on 16/07/2017 - 09:34
    +23

    Any deals on canned food?

    • sweetnipples on 16/07/2017 - 09:58
      +9

      You get every deal going when you present a lever action shotgun fella :)

  • belongsinforums on 16/07/2017 - 09:36
    +3

    Beware the broden on this

  • mgf909 on 16/07/2017 - 09:38
    +41

    Awsome - was after some new hardware for my next bank job.

    • poor_me on 16/07/2017 - 10:34
      +7

      This basically pays for itself!

      • jackwoz on 16/07/2017 - 11:47
        +3

        Essentially CashRewards is supported :)

    • woteva on 16/07/2017 - 11:07
      +6

      Will go great with this deal I purchased yesterday.
      https://www.ozbargain.com.au/node/317897

    • Smigit on 16/07/2017 - 13:51

      Make sure you claim a depreciation next year in your tax too.

  • lealvinav on 16/07/2017 - 09:43
    +6

    Does it have bluetooth?

    • Merlict on 16/07/2017 - 09:44
      +92

      Nah, this is operated through a point and click interface

  • iratepirate on 16/07/2017 - 09:44
    +19

    Does it cost any extra for the moral outcry, or is that standard equipment for this shotgun?

    • Hayesy22 on 16/07/2017 - 09:47
      +26

      Two reports already, looks like it comes free of charge.

      • heal on 16/07/2017 - 09:57
        +3

        And those who report happily tuck into their lamb roast tonight. On second thought maybe they're having lentil stew. In any case, they benefit from farmers being able to control feral animals on their properties.

        • ryang on 16/07/2017 - 10:05
          +24

          Oh please… Most farmers use rifles. Who the hell wants to get into shotgun range of a feral animal?

        • Diji1 on 16/07/2017 - 10:15

          they benefit from farmers being able to control feral animals on their properties.

          Not if the farmers follow the law they don't. See because you cannot store ammunition and firearms in the same location the pests have usually run off by the time the farmer has retrieved items from 2 seperate locations and loaded the weapon after unlocking boxes and/or a trigger guard.

        • Hayesy22 on 16/07/2017 - 10:25
          +9

          @ryang: you really have no idea. Plenty of farmers use shotguns as they perfect for rabbits/foxes/pigs. they also don't have a problem getting in range of feral animals

        • Hayesy22 on 16/07/2017 - 10:27

          @Diji1: I thinking his talking about actively hunting Feral animals.

        • ireadtermsofuse on 16/07/2017 - 11:22

          @ryang: they use hacks

        • hoxygt on 16/07/2017 - 11:55

          @Hayesy22:

          Nah not really $2 shells vs Rifle rounds. As for pigs and a shotgun, not ideal!

          Close range in an urban setting though - perfect!

        • heal on 16/07/2017 - 13:16

          @ryang:

          Oh please… Most farmers use rifles

          I've met over 100 farmers who have shotguns. How many have you met that don't have and use a shotgun?

        • Superior79 on 16/07/2017 - 13:23
          +3

          @Diji1:

          Rubbish, that is only storage law.
          When your on the farm, with the firearm in your hand, you can carry to rifle loaded, and with as much ammo on you as you can carry.

        • ryang on 16/07/2017 - 14:09
          +3

          @heal: Grew up in the country. Family and friends are farmers. Sure - most own a shotgun, but none of them would use it over a rifle.

        • Consumer Sheep on 16/07/2017 - 17:09

          @heal: You don't shoot ducks with rifles

        • Consumer Sheep on 16/07/2017 - 17:40
          +1

          @Hayesy22: With all due respect, your statement is idiotic. No one would use a shotgun to control foxes. Rabbits-yes. Foxes-no. I live in the country and all the shooting you hear at night is rifle. I've never heard anyone claim they hunted foxes with shotguns. The only time I've known of it is when one of the bastards has been caught in with the chooks. Baits, spotlights and rifles are how it's done. Even PestSmart.org says "12-gauge shotguns with heavy shot sizes of No. 2, SSG, BB or AAA (within a 20- metre distance only)". You'd be lucky to get within shotgun distance of a fox a few times a year.

        • Hayesy22 on 16/07/2017 - 18:34
          +1

          @Consumer Sheep: my statement is idiotic? I live in the country and I also Hunt. While its true spotlighting at night is done with mostly done with rifle but other then that you obviously have no idea about fox hunting. Im guessing you have never heard of a fox drive before? here is some information https://ssaa.org.au/stories/hunting-conducting-a-fox-drive.h… very popular type of fox hunting that accounts for many scalps using shotguns. Another way can be used shotguns are used is when fox calling.

          Calling my statement idiotic is just ignorant

        • heal on 16/07/2017 - 19:06

          @Consumer Sheep:

          Exactly. A lot of rice farmers where I live.

        • heal on 16/07/2017 - 19:11

          @ryang:
          Then why the

          Oh please…

          to my comment regarding people reporting this deal?

        • raven492 on 16/07/2017 - 19:19

          @Diji1:
          A moving target is pretty much the exact reason to use a shotgun…

        • hoxygt on 16/07/2017 - 20:47

          @Consumer Sheep:

          In the West I dont know of many farmers that shoot ducks…

        • hoxygt on 16/07/2017 - 20:49

          @raven492:

          Yeah so long as its less than 30m away. Spotlight makes ém stop and look - rifle.

        • brick22 on 17/07/2017 - 10:15
          +1

          @Diji1: That is for storage only. You can have a loaded magazine and a firearm in a ute. Please don't spread misinformation.

        • brick22 on 17/07/2017 - 10:19

          @Consumer Sheep: Shotguns are used when chasing down foxes in paddocks. Don't comment on subjects you know little about.

      • pegaxs on 16/07/2017 - 10:00
        +23

        Lol. Up to 7 reports now for "illegal/inappropriate". I hope the mods let it stay because it is neither illegal nor inappropriate…

        • Diji1 on 16/07/2017 - 10:16

          Talking about guns is taboo because the police are always there bro.

        • nocure on 16/07/2017 - 10:27
          +3

          @Diji1:
          Show your license and tell the popo to GTFO

        • ScoMosas on 16/07/2017 - 10:57

          @nocure: car or forklift

        • goober on 16/07/2017 - 12:11
          +11

          Shows that 7 ozbargainers are Greeny/leftidy/baby cats!

Login or Join to leave a comment
Login Join