Thread: Taupo range

Basically everything changed with the 2015 Worksafe Laws and it has taken time for all of the "Safety" legislation to come out , it has been slowly pushed for some time. A Club that operates , and sometimes doesn't,a range is Liable under the Worksafe laws for a multiple of possible sins . Being not paid is no defense as the club/range accepts money , even volunteers are liable , and previously you could get a charge of Manslaughter if things went particularly pear shaped .
As for the Police and Armed Forces they have always had to have a Qualified RO , and yes the Police have been effectively kicked off ranges in Auckland to the point they had to build one in Onehunga?. I know of one range that gave a half arsed reason for them not to come back with the real reason being they where more trouble than they were worth .
The Taupo range is just catching up with the times and the need to get there ducks in a row prior to the new Range rule? , whatever they will be .

Originally Posted by Tankd

Basically everything changed with the 2015 Worksafe Laws and it has taken time for all of the "Safety" legislation to come out , it has been slowly pushed for some time. A Club that operates , and sometimes doesn't,a range is Liable under the Worksafe laws for a multiple of possible sins . Being not paid is no defense as the club/range accepts money , even volunteers are liable , and previously you could get a charge of Manslaughter if things went particularly pear shaped .
As for the Police and Armed Forces they have always had to have a Qualified RO , and yes the Police have been effectively kicked off ranges in Auckland to the point they had to build one in Onehunga?. I know of one range that gave a half arsed reason for them not to come back with the real reason being they where more trouble than they were worth .
The Taupo range is just catching up with the times and the need to get there ducks in a row prior to the new Range rule? , whatever they will be .

Everybody repeat after me.. " There is no range in Taupo, never was, we were never there, "

Mike Loader lodged an OIA requesting safety or otherwise incidents at NZ rifle/pistol ranges to justify the new strict regulations for ranges.
Police came back saying anecdotal evidence pointed to complaints from members of the public, but no actual facts to support this.
Mike then contacted all regional and city councils in NZ regarding complaints made about ranges in their areas.
I recall it was 1-2 noise incidents reported for the entire country and I suspect they were for the Auckland Shooting Club range and from the hippy meditation centre 5km away.
No other incidents reported for the councils that replied.

So it seems the regulations are really from the bookshelf ie NSW Police manual on how to create red tape for licensed gun owners.
There was no justification at all in NZ.

Although I strongly suspect Pete Breidahl's 5 minutes of fame saying BRC (and by association all gun clubs) are all racists and made BT into the psycho he is was used as justification.
We all know the Royal Commission basically said Mr Briedahl's accusations are bullsh*t when compared to the facts, but the damage has been done now due to this.

Of course Briedahl is no longer in NZ (he's riding a horse across Russia or something) and I've heard his own license has been revoked.

The situation we now find ourselves in with Ranges is that previously they where in a very grey area of there was nothing in Law to actually Control/Certify them . So that while you did not legally need to certify a Range , if something happened then the fact it was not certified would work against you .And I would suspect that "Complaints" against a range where more than likely made to the Local Council . One I know of had a Complaint of sorts around the use of Machineguns , which was just rapid fire, and the Councils reaction was " There's a range where?" and it had been operating for 40+years continually and 60 years before in a different guise.And the Council had given "Permission" for the range to operate with conditions previously ,record keeping is only as good as the method of doing it.
And as for accidents just ask pistol shooters about "Glock leg" probably called something else earlier, it happens but very quietly .

Originally Posted by Tankd

The situation we now find ourselves in with Ranges is that previously they where in a very grey area of there was nothing in Law to actually Control/Certify them . So that while you did not legally need to certify a Range , if something happened then the fact it was not certified would work against you .And I would suspect that "Complaints" against a range where more than likely made to the Local Council . One I know of had a Complaint of sorts around the use of Machineguns , which was just rapid fire, and the Councils reaction was " There's a range where?" and it had been operating for 40+years continually and 60 years before in a different guise.And the Council had given "Permission" for the range to operate with conditions previously ,record keeping is only as good as the method of doing it.
And as for accidents just ask pistol shooters about "Glock leg" probably called something else earlier, it happens but very quietly .

That's a good point about existing 'conditions'.
As most ranges pre date the RMA.

Originally Posted by Steve123

Everybody repeat after me.. " There is no range in Taupo, never was, we were never there, "

It’s just a lawnmower away from being another Wimbledon!

Originally Posted by dogmatix

That's a good point about existing 'conditions'.
As most ranges pre date the RMA.

Yes they do but the requirement for "shooting ranges" to comply with RMA goes back to at least Joe Green's manual of 2005 so nothing new. RMA 1991.

There was a thread sometime back on the legislation effects on ranges. We all got fired up back then but have become lambs since. Also concerning is some shooters not being aware of changed or introduced legislation.

One of the issues posted in that thread was what constitutes a shooting range. Obviously the likes of Taupo would be seen as a shooting range and subject to any rules required of it but what about a few mate's gathering in a farm paddock to do some zeroing?

Originally Posted by zimmer

Yes they do but the requirement for "shooting ranges" to comply with RMA goes back to at least Joe Green's manual of 2005 so nothing new. RMA 1991.

There was a thread sometime back on the legislation effects on ranges. We all got fired up back then but have become lambs since. Also concerning is some shooters not being aware of changed or introduced legislation.
One of the issues posted in that thread was what constitutes a shooting range. Obviously the likes of Taupo would be seen as a shooting range and subject to any rules required of it but what about a few mate's gathering in a farm paddock to do some zeroing?

And that’s what will happen, I’ll end up sighting in on the farms I have access to. The reason I shoot on Taupo, is Tect Park is a pain in tharse, with regulations, unless you shoot by yourself, during the week.

Originally Posted by Maca49

It’s just a lawnmower away from being another Wimbledon!

It's just a community tennis court with no courts where people sometime happen to zero their rifles.

Originally Posted by zimmer

There was a thread sometime back on the legislation effects on ranges. We all got fired up back then but have become lambs since. Also concerning is some shooters not being aware of changed or introduced legislation.

Some of use are working hard in the background... difficult to say much more until Police release more information publicly - hopefully this will happen in the next few weeks and Regulations will be drafted for public comment about the end of this year.

Originally Posted by zimmer

One of the issues posted in that thread was what constitutes a shooting range. Obviously the likes of Taupo would be seen as a shooting range and subject to any rules required of it but what about a few mate's gathering in a farm paddock to do some zeroing?

Yes, this is a concern. I expect Police will write something like "If it is just you and a mate "sighting in" on private land with written permission from the land owner and you are doing it safely (i.e. following Police recommendations) then range certification will not be required." However, the Arms Legislation Act is quite clear that all target shooting is a range and requires certification therefore do not get a complaint...
Notice i said specifically "sighting in" not practicing, plinking, recreational shooting, training, etc.

Also any target shooting with an air rifle comes under the legislation as well. Only paint ball and air soft are exempt. So you can own an air rifle (non-PCP) without a firearms license if you are over 18 years old but if you shoot it at targets then you'll need range certification by the letter of the Act...

Originally Posted by Tankd

Basically everything changed with the 2015 Worksafe Laws and it has taken time for all of the "Safety" legislation to come out , it has been slowly pushed for some time. A Club that operates , and sometimes doesn't,a range is Liable under the Worksafe laws for a multiple of possible sins . Being not paid is no defense as the club/range accepts money , even volunteers are liable , and previously you could get a charge of Manslaughter if things went particularly pear shaped .

The following is taken directly from the WorkSAFE website regarding Volunteer Organisations and the Health and Safety at Work Act (HSWA):
What is a volunteer association?

1. A volunteer association is a group of volunteers working together for a community purpose with no employees. A volunteer association is not a PCBU and has no duty, responsibility or liability under HSWA.
2. If the group of volunteers has employees (even only one part-time) it is classed as a PCBU and therefore has duties under HSWA.
3. If the group of volunteers engages individuals to work for them under a contract for service instead of having employees, then it is classed as a volunteer association and is not a PCBU. Note that the contactor may be a PCBU and will have duties under HSWA.

A volunteer organisation can charge a fee and still fall out of the HSWA requirements. The volunteer organisation becomes a PCBU under the Act where they employ someone.

Website LINK

Originally Posted by Gillie

Some of use are working hard in the background... difficult to say much more until Police release more information publicly - hopefully this will happen in the next few weeks and Regulations will be drafted for public comment about the end of this year.


Yes, this is a concern. I expect Police will write something like "If it is just you and a mate "sighting in" on private land with written permission from the land owner and you are doing it safely (i.e. following Police recommendations) then range certification will not be required." However, the Arms Legislation Act is quite clear that all target shooting is a range and requires certification therefore do not get a complaint...
Notice i said specifically "sighting in" not practicing, plinking, recreational shooting, training, etc.

Also any target shooting with an air rifle comes under the legislation as well. Only paint ball and air soft are exempt. So you can own an air rifle (non-PCP) without a firearms license if you are over 18 years old but if you shoot it at targets then you'll need range certification by the letter of the Act...

That is absolute madness if you are correct in your assumption.
It seems like the Police seem to enjoy making extra work for themselves, knowing that they won't be able to Police it correctly.

You just have to hope you aren't the poor sod they decide to pick on when they want to make an example of someone.

Originally Posted by Gillie

Some of use are working hard in the background... difficult to say much more until Police release more information publicly - hopefully this will happen in the next few weeks and Regulations will be drafted for public comment about the end of this year.


Yes, this is a concern. I expect Police will write something like "If it is just you and a mate "sighting in" on private land with written permission from the land owner and you are doing it safely (i.e. following Police recommendations) then range certification will not be required." However, the Arms Legislation Act is quite clear that all target shooting is a range and requires certification therefore do not get a complaint...
Notice i said specifically "sighting in" not practicing, plinking, recreational shooting, training, etc.

Also any target shooting with an air rifle comes under the legislation as well. Only paint ball and air soft are exempt. So you can own an air rifle (non-PCP) without a firearms license if you are over 18 years old but if you shoot it at targets then you'll need range certification by the letter of the Act...

That is absolute madness if you are correct in your assumption.
It seems like the Police seem to enjoy making extra work for themselves, knowing that they won't be able to Police it correctly.

You just have to hope you aren't the poor sod they decide to pick on when they want to make an example of someone.

The problem will be adherence to stupid rules, I’m sure I would not be providing written proof to the police, for sighting, practising or plinking with a rifle on private land
Look at the anti Vaxers and you’ll get some idea of how big the finger will be. It’s one big joke and will be disobeyed, oh for some sensible people to be in charge, without agendas!

Originally Posted by Beetroot

That is absolute madness if you are correct in your assumption.
It seems like the Police seem to enjoy making extra work for themselves, knowing that they won't be able to Police it correctly.

You just have to hope you aren't the poor sod they decide to pick on when they want to make an example of someone.

There is more guidance coming in the new Police Range Manual - of course the Police Range Manual will then need to be supported in the new Regulations under the Act. I will be reading the proposed Regulations carefully when they come out - i hope they provide more flexibility and guidance. I will provide feedback in the public comment period on the regulations and i will be encouraging others to do so as well.

Originally Posted by Maca49

The problem will be adherence to stupid rules, I’m sure I would not be providing written proof to the police, for sighting, practising or plinking with a rifle on private land

That is a personal choice of course - and to be clear to anyone else reading this not one i support. Licensed firearms owners need to be compliant with the Act and Regulations.

That said, I think the drafting in the Act was ludicrous - every instance of a firearm being fired at an inanimate object (moving or stationary) is considered a range and therefore requires Certification by the Commissioner of Police. In my opinion this is absolutely unrealistic and basically impossible to practically enact. I think Police and those involved in the drafting of the Act massively underestimated the number of and diversity of shooting ranges in NZ... and on top of that had absolutely no appreciation for recreational shooting outside of the national shooting organizations.
As above i hope there will be guidance given in the Police Range Manual and further guidance in the new Regulations.