Thread: Police at it again

Police advised the Minister of Police that shooters undermine the objective of the act by importing parts and assembling them into MSSAs, even if they do it legally.

"...and undermined the objective of the 1992 amendment act, that is to limit the number of MSSAs in New Zealand".

First of all they don't know the difference between aim and objective. You set an objective task to complete, aiming to achieve something thereby.

Second, I digressed, is the reduction of the number of MSSAs in NZ the actual stated aim of the act?

Originally Posted by Cordite

Police advised the Minister of Police that shooters undermine the objective of the act by importing parts and assembling them into MSSAs, even if they do it legally.

"...and undermined the objective of the 1992 amendment act, that is to limit the number of MSSAs in New Zealand".

First of all they don't know the difference between aim and objective. You set an objective task to complete, aiming to achieve something thereby.

Second, I digressed, is the reduction of the number of MSSAs in NZ the actual stated aim of the act?

If this were truely thir intention they would have only puta restrictions on upper and lower recivers, it doesn't matter how many barrels, triggers, pistol grips, gas blocks a person has without the upper and lower recivers only one rifle can exist.

In fact they should just restrict the importing of lower recivers, as these are the only parts that actually have a serial number that then becomes the MSSA (or not).

Either the Police have completely different intentions than what they are saying, or they are totally incompetent/oblivious to how an AR15 actually works.

I think it's probably both.

Originally Posted by Cordite

Police advised the Minister of Police that shooters undermine the objective of the act by importing parts and assembling them into MSSAs, even if they do it legally.

"...and undermined the objective of the 1992 amendment act, that is to limit the number of MSSAs in New Zealand".

First of all they don't know the difference between aim and objective. You set an objective task to complete, aiming to achieve something thereby.

Second, I digressed, is the reduction of the number of MSSAs in NZ the actual stated aim of the act?

Got a PM from a community member pointing out that certainly wasn't the purpose of the amendment.

The purpose of the amendment was outlined as:

Purpose

The aim of the Bill is to amend the Arms Act 1983 (the Act) to:

amend the definition of military style semi-automatic firearm (MSSA);

enable regulations to be made declaring a firearm or type of firearm to be an MSSA, and to define or describe features of a firearm that is an MSSA;

provide for an appeal process to the District Court to apply when a firearms owner disagrees with a classification of a firearm as an MSSA; and

place restrictions on the importation of airguns that look like real pistols, MSSAs, or restricted weapons [1] .

No mention of reducing MSSA numbers.

https://www.parliament.nz/en/pb/bill...rms-and-import

@GDNP
AR15s cheap? Yeah, I know. Just fantasising..

Nuff bout dem Armalites. Ah ttink tis tred has been continued by the tred on the Thorpe report.

I haven't waded through the 6 pages of replies but is there anyone who supports this new way of thinking apart from me?

The government has it's reasons and the vehicle they use is the Police. The Police don't just take on extra work in the general sense without a directive from up the food chain. So your angst should be at central government. Where is falls over is leaving it solely to the Police, they have a pretty crap system for managing all things firearms related (it not most things). The ground troops and most in the arms offices around NZ also have a poor understanding of the law and a lot of things related to firearms.

I know of one person in NZ that had a D class and was importing so called "A" cat parts. They were then on-selling them to a man of a middle eastern background who was believed to be supplying a well known gang in West Auckland in an "E" cat form. So instead of laying all this on the NZ Police, perhaps point the finger at some of our pairs who bend the rules daily while we sit by and say "its not us, its not our problem". Well if the replies here are anything to go by, it is now your problem and it is not going away.

Paraphrasing police statements and interpreting them to suit your own agenda or way of thinking is also pretty small time. Think of what the real issue is and try to get your thinking aligned before commenting. This is the internet however, it hardly reflects the real world at times.

I'm all for tougher laws around firearms and firearms related offences. It is however a complex machine involving a lot a working parts and government departments don't often get that right.

Originally Posted by 6x45

I haven't waded through the 6 pages of replies but is there anyone who supports this new way of thinking apart from me?

The government has it's reasons and the vehicle they use is the Police. The Police don't just take on extra work in the general sense without a directive from up the food chain. So your angst should be at central government. Where is falls over is leaving it solely to the Police, they have a pretty crap system for managing all things firearms related (it not most things). The ground troops and most in the arms offices around NZ also have a poor understanding of the law and a lot of things related to firearms.

I know of one person in NZ that had a D class and was importing so called "A" cat parts. They were then on-selling them to a man of a middle eastern background who was believed to be supplying a well known gang in West Auckland in an "E" cat form. So instead of laying all this on the NZ Police, perhaps point the finger at some of our pairs who bend the rules daily while we sit by and say "its not us, its not our problem". Well if the replies here are anything to go by, it is now your problem and it is not going away.

Paraphrasing police statements and interpreting them to suit your own agenda or way of thinking is also pretty small time. Think of what the real issue is and try to get your thinking aligned before commenting. This is the internet however, it hardly reflects the real world at times.

I'm all for tougher laws around firearms and firearms related offences. It is however a complex machine involving a lot a working parts and government departments don't often get that right.

I hope you reported that to the Police then.

There are issues with what is happening, firstly the Police could say every part for every semi auto is E cat because the rifle it is part of can be configured in an Ecat configuration (ie magazine or pistol grip). Then there is the implication that an Ecat rifle is significantly more dangerous to the public and the police, which it is not.

Even in your example above you emphasized that the rifles were being supplied to gangs in Ecat config. Personally I am more concerned about rifles vs no rifles being supplied to people who shouldnt have them, than whether some one who shouldnt have a rifle has an Acat or Ecat

Originally Posted by 6x45

I haven't waded through the 6 pages of replies but is there anyone who supports this new way of thinking apart from me?

The government has it's reasons and the vehicle they use is the Police. The Police don't just take on extra work in the general sense without a directive from up the food chain. So your angst should be at central government. Where is falls over is leaving it solely to the Police, they have a pretty crap system for managing all things firearms related (it not most things). The ground troops and most in the arms offices around NZ also have a poor understanding of the law and a lot of things related to firearms.

I know of one person in NZ that had a D class and was importing so called "A" cat parts. They were then on-selling them to a man of a middle eastern background who was believed to be supplying a well known gang in West Auckland in an "E" cat form. So instead of laying all this on the NZ Police, perhaps point the finger at some of our pairs who bend the rules daily while we sit by and say "its not us, its not our problem". Well if the replies here are anything to go by, it is now your problem and it is not going away.

Paraphrasing police statements and interpreting them to suit your own agenda or way of thinking is also pretty small time. Think of what the real issue is and try to get your thinking aligned before commenting. This is the internet however, it hardly reflects the real world at times.

I'm all for tougher laws around firearms and firearms related offences. It is however a complex machine involving a lot a working parts and government departments don't often get that right.

I think we would all like to see tougher sentences and the bad people with firearms be delt with, but most of don't see how these new rules do anything other than punish the good guys, when the Police should try harder to get the bad eggs.

The UK had their firearms rules toughened up after a few events that could have easily been prevented had the Police actually done their job and in one case were given multiple tip offs about the guy being a lunatic.

I was bought up to respect the Police and authority, but over time I've slowly lost that respect after seeing them going after the low hanging fruit and ignoring the people out their doing the real damage.

Originally Posted by Beetroot

I think we would all like to see tougher sentences and the bad people with firearms be delt with, but most of don't see how these new rules do anything other than punish the good guys, when the Police should try harder to get the bad eggs.

The UK had their firearms rules toughened up after a few events that could have easily been prevented had the Police actually done their job and in one case were given multiple tip offs about the guy being a lunatic.

I was bought up to respect the Police and authority, but over time I've slowly lost that respect after seeing them going after the low hanging fruit and ignoring the people out their doing the real damage.

Nail on the head

Originally Posted by 6x45

I haven't waded through the 6 pages of replies but is there anyone who supports this new way of thinking apart from me?

The government has it's reasons and the vehicle they use is the Police. The Police don't just take on extra work in the general sense without a directive from up the food chain. So your angst should be at central government. Where is falls over is leaving it solely to the Police, they have a pretty crap system for managing all things firearms related (it not most things). The ground troops and most in the arms offices around NZ also have a poor understanding of the law and a lot of things related to firearms.

I know of one person in NZ that had a D class and was importing so called "A" cat parts. They were then on-selling them to a man of a middle eastern background who was believed to be supplying a well known gang in West Auckland in an "E" cat form. So instead of laying all this on the NZ Police, perhaps point the finger at some of our pairs who bend the rules daily while we sit by and say "its not us, its not our problem". Well if the replies here are anything to go by, it is now your problem and it is not going away.

Paraphrasing police statements and interpreting them to suit your own agenda or way of thinking is also pretty small time. Think of what the real issue is and try to get your thinking aligned before commenting. This is the internet however, it hardly reflects the real world at times.

I'm all for tougher laws around firearms and firearms related offences. It is however a complex machine involving a lot a working parts and government departments don't often get that right.

Your entire argument falls over with your basic assumptions. Government have told Police that the laws are not changing, the laws they already have are sufficient, and that they need to get on with policing those laws that they have generally failed to police. They have been told to get out and deal with the criminal element. They were also told to have meaningful consultation with licensed firearm owners, which they just finished playing inadequate lip service to. So no, Police are not listening to the directives of government and are showing utter contempt for government, the courts, licensed firearm owners and dealers.

Originally Posted by 6x45

I haven't waded through the 6 pages of replies but is there anyone who supports this new way of thinking apart from me?

The government has it's reasons and the vehicle they use is the Police. The Police don't just take on extra work in the general sense without a directive from up the food chain. So your angst should be at central government. Where is falls over is leaving it solely to the Police, they have a pretty crap system for managing all things firearms related (it not most things). The ground troops and most in the arms offices around NZ also have a poor understanding of the law and a lot of things related to firearms.

I know of one person in NZ that had a D class and was importing so called "A" cat parts. They were then on-selling them to a man of a middle eastern background who was believed to be supplying a well known gang in West Auckland in an "E" cat form. So instead of laying all this on the NZ Police, perhaps point the finger at some of our pairs who bend the rules daily while we sit by and say "its not us, its not our problem". Well if the replies here are anything to go by, it is now your problem and it is not going away.

Paraphrasing police statements and interpreting them to suit your own agenda or way of thinking is also pretty small time. Think of what the real issue is and try to get your thinking aligned before commenting. This is the internet however, it hardly reflects the real world at times.

I'm all for tougher laws around firearms and firearms related offences. It is however a complex machine involving a lot a working parts and government departments don't often get that right.

the police expect us to live to the letter of the law.

the police can dam well lead by example.
until it is law then they need to piss right off.

I haven't waded through the 6 pages of replies but is there anyone who supports this new way of thinking apart from me?

Not many as you can see

I'm all for tougher laws around firearms and firearms related offences. It is however a complex machine involving a lot a working parts and government departments don't often get that right.

Correct. The cat up North who supplied that nutcase with 10 firearms, resulting in 2 deaths of innocent people - 12 months home D, what a sick fucking joke. The other 275000 of us didn't. Your unnamed dealer - what did he get? Did they recycle the same wet bus ticket? If they are going to push for something to be done, decent sentencing would be the first thing to look at. Making more laws for criminals to also ignore is taking the piss quite frankly. Mind you, this is the "100kmh = safe, 104kmh = deeply unsafe'' kind of thinking that seems ingrained in Bullshit Castle

Unfortunately there are some in Police who are hell bent on getting rid of AR rifles and they will keep trying it on until they succeed, we also now have a govt who wants to let criminals out of prison early as apparently we are locking to many up and oh it costs a lot to keep them there (and the public safe) which is why we won’t see decent sentences handed out for gun crimes. That guy up north who let that unhinged bloke use his licence and trade me account to buys guns should have been done for manslaugther.

The govt and police are to scared to face the real issues but still want to been seen to be doing something, like attacking the mostly law abiding FAL holders.

Originally Posted by outdoorlad

Unfortunately there are some in Police who are hell bent on getting rid of AR rifles and they will keep trying it on until they succeed, we also now have a govt who wants to let criminals out of prison early as apparently we are locking to many up and oh it costs a lot to keep them there (and the public safe) which is why we won’t see decent sentences handed out for gun crimes. That guy up north who let that unhinged bloke use his licence and trade me account to buys guns should have been done for manslaugther.

The govt and police are to scared to face the real issues but still want to been seen to be doing something, like attacking the mostly law abiding FAL holders.

Just like they bang on about the road toll being so high, so put cops and speed cameras all down the Waikato express way tobping people for doing 110kph amd do absolutely nothing about the absolutely atrocious drivers who shouldn't be allowed to drive, but they don't speed so never get pulled over.

Also lowering the drink driving limit whilst giving people back their licenses after 8 or 9 drink driving convictions when they are 3 times over the limit.

I was explaining this to my wife who has no real interest in firearms. I simplified it for her and the convo went something like....
Wife: so your rifle is legal and your allowed it.
Me: yes
W: But if you change some parts you are not allowed it.
M:right
W: But if you try to buy a part from overseas that is already on your rifle, not one of the illegal parts, you are not allowed to .
M:no
W: Even if you already have that part?
M: Yes
W: and you are allowed that part....
M: Yes
W: ....and that part wont make it illegal
M: No
W: (after looking at me for a moment to gauge if I was taking the piss) ........ Well thats just stupid.
M: yes

@gadgetman - you've nailed it. And the police miss the fact that their actions cost them the respect and goodwill of a heck of a lot of good people.