Thread: ARMS OFFICE NEWSLETTER WAIKATO DISTRICT

Originally Posted by P38

Your not Wrong Kscott

Yep but the Police's job is to enforce the laws as written, not to interpret them and act accordingly. That job is for the courts.

It seems with the Arms Act there is a whole lot of "interpretation" going on by everyone especially some of the AOs round the country.

Originally Posted by mikee

Yep but the Police's job is to enforce the laws as written, not to interpret them and act accordingly. That job is for the courts.

It seems with the Arms Act there is a whole lot of "interpretation" going on by everyone especially some of the AOs round the country.

That is a very ignorant way of looking at it.

It is a judges job to judge on the laws as they are written, when not written clearly then they have to interpret. Same with Police, they have to interpret the law and enforce it when it isn't clear, yet the judge can interpret the law differently and overrule them.

A lot of law needs to be interpreted as it isn't sufficiently clear, Police couldn't do their job without interpreting law which hasn't been clarified in court.

People so often miss the forest for the trees when it comes to the Arms Act.

Originally Posted by Savage1

That is a very ignorant way of looking at it.

It is a judges job to judge on the laws as they are written, when not written clearly then they have to interpret. Same with Police, they have to interpret the law and enforce it when it isn't clear, yet the judge can interpret the law differently and overrule them.

A lot of law needs to be interpreted as it isn't sufficiently clear, Police couldn't do their job without interpreting law which hasn't been clarified in court.

People so often miss the forest for the trees when it comes to the Arms Act.

The problem arises when police become overzealous in their interpretation of the law and get it wrong. The legal system is weighted heavily in favour of the enforcement agents and they will sometimes use this to their advantage. The average citizen does not have the same level of understanding of the law as the enforcement agent, so is already at a disadvantage before their case even comes to court.

Once their case goes before court, the average citizen does not also have unlimited funds to spend on defending his / her actions and the veneer of "fairness" afforded by a court appointed legal representation isn't worth a hill of beans.

Laws apply to everyone and as such, it should in my opinion, be a legal requirement that everyone can understand them instead of the obfuscation that we currently have. Citizens, police, judges would all be able to understand it, time in court and legal fees would be reduced.

Originally Posted by Savage1

That is a very ignorant way of looking at it.

It is a judges job to judge on the laws as they are written, when not written clearly then they have to interpret. Same with Police, they have to interpret the law and enforce it when it isn't clear, yet the judge can interpret the law differently and overrule them.

A lot of law needs to be interpreted as it isn't sufficiently clear, Police couldn't do their job without interpreting law which hasn't been clarified in court.

People so often miss the forest for the trees when it comes to the Arms Act.

Agree with you that the Police have to interpret the law to enforce it on many occasions. But they also get that interpretation wrong often on many occasions and tend to bring a over zealous and poorly informed interpretation to the table.

The thumbhole fiasco was a incorrect interpretation on a previously incorrect pistol grip interpretation (high court decision). Kiwi shooters were abiding by the Police's incorrect pistol grip interpretation to keep the peace with the police and due to many not knowing it was a flawed/incorrect interpretation, but then the Police decided to change the interpretation again to include a thumbhole as a pistol grip-this was a incorrect interpretation too far and action was taken against that.

The interpretation then created a wedge and ill feeling between a section of law abiding shooters and the Police which I hope will be able to be fixed and the good feelings return.
The Police have since retracted the thumbhole interpretation and do seem at the local AO level to be making attempts to repair the ill feeling generated. However the management still seem to be tracking in the wrong direction on firearm safety/control.