Thread: Farmlands

Its a bit shortsighted and unfair for everyone to shit on farmlands and not support them now they are not selling ammo. The regulatory shit they have thrust on them is large. Would people still buy the ammo if the price increased say 40% to cover the implementation of all the storage and admin they will now have to deal with?

Its a simple business decision they made, however its more of the death by 1000 cuts we are getting.

Lastly, Do you know that from the 24th of December the possesion of any gun part at all by an unlicenced person could cost them 5 years in prision or a 10K fine. Thats anything at all.

Originally Posted by Percy Jones

Its a bit shortsighted and unfair for everyone to shit on farmlands and not support them now they are not selling ammo..............

I always understood that if a seller did not provide a service their customer's wanted, then the customer was justified in walking away.

Am I wrong?

Originally Posted by Percy Jones

............Lastly, Do you know that from the 24th of December the possesion of any gun part at all by an unlicenced person could cost them 5 years in prision or a 10K fine. Thats anything at all.

Have you forgotten the idiocies of NZ Customs when climbing aboard Constable Plod's wagon which was being pulled by the Show Pony and deeming that "parts" included slings, scopes, and other non essential parts?

So could you please be a little more precise and define "parts" before spreading what appears to be "false news?" Further, by "define", I mean a link to the Statute / regulation / order in council/ /whatever that defines "Parts", NOT a throw away line like " the local arms officer said" because that is meaningless.

Thank You.

Originally Posted by Kiwi Sapper

So could you please be a little more precise and define "parts" before spreading what appears to be "false news?" Further, by "define", I mean a link to the Statute / regulation / order in council/ /whatever that defines "Parts", NOT a throw away line like " the local arms officer said" because that is meaningless.

Thank You.

This sufficient for you?

Originally Posted by Percy Jones

This sufficient for you?

No.

I don't know how I can be any clearer in asking you to define a "part" of a fire arm, but I'll make one last attempt.

1...You have drawn our attention to an extract from a copy of something. Whatever is the extracted copy from?

2...That copy uses the words "non prohibited part." Give us credit for understanding that if a part was a "prohibited" part, then because they have been defined, there is an issue.

But what parts of a firearm are "non prohibited".

I have already pointed out the earlier stupid use of classifying scopes and slings as part of a firearm and if the definition of a "non prohibited part" is to be considered as "it is not named as a prohibited part" , we are right back to where we were with the earlier lunacy.

To make something illegal, the obvious first step is to identify it. Nowhere do I see any such identification, but, as you saw cause to create a post on this matter, could you please either

3 list ;the "non prohibited parts" of a fire arm;
or
4...provide a link to a list of "non prohibited parts".

This would assist our members and we would be most grateful and I for one, would not accept Constable Plod making a decision on what is a "non prohibited part " whenever the mood or situation may happen to suit him.

Thank You.

Originally Posted by Kiwi Sapper

No.

I don't know how I can be any clearer in asking you to define a "part" of a fire arm, but I'll make one last attempt.

1...You have drawn our attention to an extract from a copy of something. Whatever is the extracted copy from?

2...That copy uses the words "non prohibited part." Give us credit for understanding that if a part was a "prohibited" part, then because they have been defined, there is an issue.

But what parts of a firearm are "non prohibited".

I have already pointed out the earlier stupid use of classifying scopes and slings as part of a firearm and if the definition of a "non prohibited part" is to be considered as "it is not named as a prohibited part" , we are right back to where we were with the earlier lunacy.

To make something illegal, the obvious first step is to identify it. Nowhere do I see any such identification, but, as you saw cause to create a post on this matter, could you please either

3 list ;the "non prohibited parts" of a fire arm;
or
4...provide a link to a list of "non prohibited parts".

This would assist our members and we would be most grateful and I for one, would not accept Constable Plod making a decision on what is a "non prohibited part " whenever the mood or situation may happen to suit him.

Thank You.

Where have you been living for the past 6 months, as you seem unaware of the new laws that have been written and will be implemented into legislation 6 months from date of signing. The best bit is police also cant quantify what a prohibited or non prohibited part is. So we just have to wait till some poor sap get pinged for possesing something untill it is clarified. My guess is a non prohibited part is a non MSSA part. As for links, well you can look at the legislation on the govt website, I dont need to bother posting links. Perhaps on the 24th police will define exactly what parts are referred to. Did you know that after the 24th, possesion of ammo by a non licence holder is also good for jail time, and to put the icing on the cake, possesion is deemed to be in the same location as the ammo (for a non LFO person) eg house sitting for an LFO and there is some ammo stached in a drawer.

Originally Posted by Percy Jones

Where have you been living for the past 6 months, as you seem unaware of the new laws that have been written and will be implemented into legislation 6 months from date of signing. The best bit is police also cant quantify what a prohibited or non prohibited part is. So we just have to wait till some poor sap get pinged for possesing something untill it is clarified. My guess is a non prohibited part is a non MSSA part. As for links, well you can look at the legislation on the govt website, I dont need to bother posting links. Perhaps on the 24th police will define exactly what parts are referred to. Did you know that after the 24th, possesion of ammo by a non licence holder is also good for jail time, and to put the icing on the cake, possesion is deemed to be in the same location as the ammo (for a non LFO person) eg house sitting for an LFO and there is some ammo stached in a drawer.

Great except MSSA's such as they were no longer exist in law. Really what it is is the Po Po mking shit up ("policy") om the hoof, as they go and then it effectively being rubber stamped by the pony's mob and we who are actually effected left to try and figure out wht we have to do to keep ourselves on the right side of the rules. Its all getting a bit hard and eventually most will give it away for that reason.........................which I believe is the ultimate end game anyway.

I mean if you look in my truck I am sure if you looked hard enough you could find a live round or 2 rolling around in the dash or under the seats and that would mean my wife could effectively be in possetion of ammo as a non licence holder WTF

Originally Posted by mikee

I mean if you look in my truck I am sure if you looked hard enough you could find a live round or 2 rolling around in the dash or under the seats and that would mean my wife could effectively be in possetion of ammo as a non licence holder WTF

Yes you are correct, and that is the danger we face after the 24th.

Originally Posted by mikee

Great except MSSA's such as they were no longer exist in law. Really what it is is the Po Po mking shit up ("policy") om the hoof, as they go and then it effectively being rubber stamped by the pony's mob and we who are actually effected left to try and figure out wht we have to do to keep ourselves on the right side of the rules. Its all getting a bit hard and eventually most will give it away for that reason.........................which I believe is the ultimate end game anyway.

I mean if you look in my truck I am sure if you looked hard enough you could find a live round or 2 rolling around in the dash or under the seats and that would mean my wife could effectively be in possetion of ammo as a non licence holder WTF

yes she can be...it has been this way for quite some time....Ive always said if I was to vist someone in prison I would have to get local copper to search my car first as there is bound to be a few rounds floating around and definately a knife or three.

Originally Posted by Percy Jones

Where have you been living for the past 6 months, ..........

Had you been contributing to this site "for the past 6 months," then you would know.

Originally Posted by Percy Jones

Its a bit shortsighted and unfair for everyone to shit on farmlands and not support them now they are not selling ammo. The regulatory shit they have thrust on them is large. Would people still buy the ammo if the price increased say 40% to cover the implementation of all the storage and admin they will now have to deal with?

Its a simple business decision they made, however its more of the death by 1000 cuts we are getting.

Lastly, Do you know that from the 24th of December the possesion of any gun part at all by an unlicenced person could cost them 5 years in prision or a 10K fine. Thats anything at all.

This world isn't fair, thought their stores would have their ammo storage up to scratch. When storage of chemicals etc had to be upgraded, they didn't stop selling them. Maybe the profit margin on ammo is not as good as other farming requirements?

Originally Posted by tetawa

This world isn't fair, thought their stores would have their ammo storage up to scratch. When storage of chemicals etc had to be upgraded, they didn't stop selling them. Maybe the profit margin on ammo is not as good as other farming requirements?

I expect that because the staff need to have a FAL, to get that FAL they require secure storage at home (like the rest of us). So who pays for that? If I was the staff member I would be asking the company to pay.

Originally Posted by Cigar

I expect that because the staff need to have a FAL, to get that FAL they require secure storage at home (like the rest of us). So who pays for that? If I was the staff member I would be asking the company to pay.

Just a thought. If you had a FAL, but no gun, would you still be required to have secure storage?

Originally Posted by outlander

Just a thought. If you had a FAL, but no gun, would you still be required to have secure storage?

currently yes, because you could buy a gun at any time.

Originally Posted by Percy Jones

currently yes, because you could buy a gun at any time.

True, but wouldn't that be the time to acquire secure storage? Hypothetically, you could have the firearm within your control 24/7 and not need secure storage at all. The question becomes relevant once again, when the inspector person interviews and checks on storage for said non existent firearm. Perhaps then, one is required by law to own a firearm once the license is issued, which in turn, makes the secure storage necessary, but not if it's under your immediate care.

@Sideshow One of your paragraphs caused me to seek further information

Yep that will be the next move cutting down to only what you can justify.....(they do this here for rifle ammo in the UK) But it will be worse for you in NZ because shotguns are not a right.

What are the "limits" and how are they justified? A link will be fine if it is a lengthy matter.

What is the reasoning to exclude shotguns from those limitations" Again, a link will be fine if it is a lengthy matter.

Finally, whatever do you mean when you say "in NZ shotguns are not a right"? i ask 'cos no firearms of any sort are a "right" here in Middle Earth.

Thank You