Log In

Reset Password

NZDF avoiding blushes?


Speaking again of “Wally regimes”, we have to look no further than Tuesday's national news to see that even our NZDF is steeped deep in “wallydom” when they reject a plan to mark rifle magazines to identify them as NZDF property. In the next breath NZDF admits to having “lost” more than a thousand rifle magazines.

You do not “lose” that many magazines. The majority of them will have been stolen or otherwise illegally dealt with, so why would the NZDF not mark them, given that they would be illegal to be in anyone's possession other than for defence force purposes? The real “cat to be let out of the bag” would be the revealing of how many actual military rifles and other ordinances have been “lost” also.

The public could be forgiven for thinking that the refusal to mark military property might well be because of the embarrassment when it is revealed that military personnel are stealing items to sell to mates, or secrete away themselves to form little militias in these troubled times, if that is in fact what is happening.

Dennis Pennefather

  1. P.J. Reed says:

    Thanks Dennis.
    When I first skimmed through it I thought you were talking about Guns and Ammo or other such periodicals. This is outrageous and obviously someone in the Armed Forces must know where it’s gone.
    Put me down for a Tank.

  2. Ken Ovenden says:

    Hi Dennis, yes, please request a list from NZDF as to what exactly they have lost over the past three years – the magazines lost (you say 1000) could all be 223 cal designed for military weapons which were available to the public, and the few sources now for very high capacity magazines [say 20-30 rounds] is illegally from military personnel or the black market. That could account for the 1000 missing. Please follow this up Dennis, thanks.

  3. Richard Whitley says:

    It’s quite likely more than a few of them were “bought back” for a princely sum, meaning the Government, or more correctly the tax payer, has purchased them twice over.

  4. Jason Mahony, Taranaki says:

    You have no idea do you, Dennis? As you state, you do not “lose” that many magazines.
    First I would ask you how many mags a soldier is issued?
    Then I would ask you how many rounds a front-line soldier is issued with?
    Then I would ask you if you expect a soldier to be reloading mags while in combat?
    But it does not just stop there Dennis, as I would ask how many mags does the soldier have extra without rounds in that he rotates so the springs can decompress to limit the springs going weak and causing jams?
    Where do these extra magazines come from?
    Why does the soldier have to pay for these items themselves?

    Stupid statements like yours could cost the lives of our professional soldiers.

    1. Ken Ovenden says:

      Hi Jason, not sorry but I do not believe a word you say, being ex-military myself. Forget your BS – you are issued a firearm and a number of magazines, they are your responsibility, you check that they remain in your possession. How many rounds does a soldier need, do you expect to reload mags in combat, and your rotation of springs to avoid jams really only shows the compression your thought processing must be under. If, and only if, there are really 1000 mags missing that can really only come from a central armoury, not likely from individual personnel. Richard may have “hit the bullseye” – ie stolen to order, sold back for a nice profit, an armistice, no arrest, supposed to have been destroyed, no evidence, almost a perfect crime, LOL