Thread: New range laws and shooting on unregistered ranges

Well the general idea it seems is to make compliance so onerous and difficult we all will give our hobby/recreational activity away.... which was always the endgame anyway.
These were the good old days. I hope you made the most of them!

I guess DOC land will have to be used if the law makers keep on being a pain re using private land?

Originally Posted by Finnwolf

I guess DOC land will have to be used if the law makers keep on being a pain re using private land?

You mean public land. There is no such thing as "DoC" land. DoC administered yes, but it is public land

Originally Posted by Finnwolf

I guess DOC land will have to be used if the law makers keep on being a pain re using private land?

Under the current DOC Hunting permit, target shooting is not allowed either. The permit allows for hunting only, and only the species mentioned in the permit. This has been the case for over 10 years, if not much longer. The hunting permit fulfills the requirement for "the landowner consent to use a firearm on the land" within the Arms Act from a long time ago (not the changes since March 2019).

I would also challange that most hunters on DOC administered land DON'T have a current premitt too.

Greetings All,
I would be more concerned over the Police Shooting Range Manual. Although this will no doubt be written from the viewpoint of a club range the danger areas are likely to at least partly to home ranges under the Health and Safety rules in other legislation, especially after any unfortunate accidents. I am looking at re aligning my range for this reason.
Regards Grandpamac.

Originally Posted by Danger Mouse

Appreciate the information and contribution gillie. It's important we keep as informed as possible.

Its a little tricky. Until Police actually release their "Exposure draft" Shooting Range Manual i am not allowed to distribute it. I can talk to whats in it in general though...

Originally Posted by grandpamac

Greetings All,
I would be more concerned over the Police Shooting Range Manual. Although this will no doubt be written from the viewpoint of a club range the danger areas are likely to at least partly to home ranges under the Health and Safety rules in other legislation, especially after any unfortunate accidents. I am looking at re aligning my range for this reason.
Regards Grandpamac.

In the soon to be released "exposure Draft" Police Shooting Range Manual a range that doesn't already fall under the HSWA2015 will not be required to fall under it. The HSWA2015 is very clear about volunteer organisations, etc. A commercial range being operated as a business right now does fall under the HSWA and that won't change. A "range" on a farm, if it is not operated as part of the farm business, does not necessarily fall under the HSWA either.

Originally Posted by Gillie

Its a little tricky. Until Police actually release their "Exposure draft" Shooting Range Manual i am not allowed to distribute it. I can talk to whats in it in general though...



In the soon to be released "exposure Draft" Police Shooting Range Manual a range that doesn't already fall under the HSWA2015 will not be required to fall under it. The HSWA2015 is very clear about volunteer organisations, etc. A commercial range being operated as a business right now does fall under the HSWA and that won't change. A "range" on a farm, if it is not operated as part of the farm business, does not necessarily fall under the HSWA either.

Where it got difficult in day's long gone was if you gave school kids a few dollars to pull targets for you at your (non commercial) rifle club.
That of course has disappeared as an issue (except at Trentham Nats?) as what kid will give up a Saturday for 2 bob?

Greetings All,
In my last post I tried not refer only to the HSWA but also to other legislation that governs our duty not to recklessly endanger others. The principal risk in having a home range is that a projectile goes further than we intend. Some of us try to mitigate tis by siting the range where we have a decent backstop but others not so much. My concern is that the very high standards needed for a centrefire range where position shooting is done get applied to the home range where only a few shots are fired and those from a bench. I will read the draft with interest when it is released.
Regards Grandpamac.

Originally Posted by grandpamac

Greetings All,
In my last post I tried not refer only to the HSWA but also to other legislation that governs our duty not to recklessly endanger others. The principal risk in having a home range is that a projectile goes further than we intend. Some of us try to mitigate tis by siting the range where we have a decent backstop but others not so much. My concern is that the very high standards needed for a centrefire range where position shooting is done get applied to the home range where only a few shots are fired and those from a bench. I will read the draft with interest when it is released.
Regards Grandpamac.

Absolutely agree - and I have spent ~18 months trying to convince the Police staff involved of this. Our history of 0 incidents has to demonstrate what we are doing now works?
So far the definition of "decent backstop" in the Exposure Draft Police Shooting Range Manual is almost impossible to comply with unless you are shooting into a bluff, have an excavator, or have exclusive control of the ~3km behind your target...

"Ad hoc" sighting in is excluded at the moment - but among other definitions that means you can't leave your target in place in between visits...

I'll be encouraging everyone i can to read and provide comment back on the draft when it gets released.

Here the pay rate was a bag of chips and bottle of fizz

I can say with an extremely high degree of confidence that your submissions make a very big difference when it comes to the formulation of legislation. I implore you to submit your consideration if there is something that you have identified as being incorrect or poorly conceived. Every one of the submissions will be analysed and an analysis conducted to examine what needs to be addressed, amended, or included. EVERY submission will be analysed. Identify the section and subsection that you don't agree with and highlight why. Make sure it is within the scope of the Act/Bill, and write in a way that reflects the legislative process.

Also, if you see something that could be improved, make a recommendation. First, identify the section and appropriate subsection/clause, and then offer up your recommendation. Ask for an amendment or removal etc. It all gets taken into consideration. I'm telling you, ALL of it gets read and analysed. It's a real democratic process and one that every kiwi should truly be proud of.

Originally Posted by Daniel Kwon

I can say with an extremely high degree of confidence that your submissions make a very big difference when it comes to the formulation of legislation. I implore you to submit your consideration if there is something that you have identified as being incorrect or poorly conceived. Every one of the submissions will be analysed and an analysis conducted to examine what needs to be addressed, amended, or included. EVERY submission will be analysed. Identify the section and subsection that you don't agree with and highlight why. Make sure it is within the scope of the Act/Bill, and write in a way that reflects the legislative process.

Also, if you see something that could be improved, make a recommendation. First, identify the section and appropriate subsection/clause, and then offer up your recommendation. Ask for an amendment or removal etc. It all gets taken into consideration. I'm telling you, ALL of it gets read and analysed. It's a real democratic process and one that every kiwi should truly be proud of.

like they did with the semi auto changes?

Originally Posted by ilikepie

like they did with the semi auto changes?

Of course, can't you read 1000 submissions an hour? Peasant, the glorious government can.

Originally Posted by Daniel Kwon

I can say with an extremely high degree of confidence that your submissions make a very big difference when it comes to the formulation of legislation.

Your faith in government process is quaint, but the current government's actions suggest they receive submissions, laugh, throw them in a file to pretend they undertook meaningful consultation, and then do whatever they were planning to do anyway.

Numerous pieces of legislation have been forced through (often 'under urgency' despite there being nothing urgent about them) with in some cases IIRC 80-90% of submissions opposed, including objections from submitters like the law society and human rights commission. And guess what... legislation pushed through with minimal changes. So much for democratic process.

Not even this submission to Tranche 2 made any difference.
Why bother.