Thread: Firearms Registry Consultation Open

Is there anything in the legislation about re stamping numbers? For instance a firearm made from several different SMLE parts which all had different numbers... which have been re marked to make a set

Originally Posted by Chilli_Dog

Is there anything in the legislation about re stamping numbers? For instance a firearm made from several different SMLE parts which all had different numbers... which have been re marked to make a set

My post 87 in this thread has a link to the UN guidelines. Serial no's and there absence / re-stamping is discussed. The number on the receiver is the reference number according the link

Originally Posted by Rusky

Some people aren't as organized as you. In fact, the above stolen firearms that were mentioned were reported to police in Whangarei straight away. The paperwork hadn't even been completed before the call from North Shore Police had located them due to the fact they were registered.

I am far from the most organised bloke on the block... it just takes a few minutes to take a photo of your firearms with your phone, including close-ups of any serial numbers. That way, it just sits on your phone, ready when you need them, or you can download it to an encrypted thumb drive if you don't want the pics available on your phone. You can also email them to yourself. Or, just email yourself the details, so that you have a record. Not difficult, and worth gold when you need it.

HAHAHA and down the rabbit hole we go - I have one action body with four serials on it. In the old times pre and WW1 era the master component was the barrel as the most expensive, time consuming and difficult to make as well as historically the main component in the muzzle loading era. The barrel got the 'legal' serial number on it, and any time a barrel was fitted with a second hand action body, bolt and funiture as a depot-level repair the action body etc were remarked to match the barrel. This presents a problem nowadays, when the action (or receiver) is considered the master part and a lot of barrels aren't serialled at all. No real space to remark the action body after that many numbers so no idea how that's going to work with the majic interegistry.

Put them all in, plus the viewers marks broad arrows, cyphers etc let them see how the system copes

Originally Posted by Moa Hunter

Agreed, perhaps the best counter measure is to promote hunting as an ideal activity for young men with the mental health / youth suicide prevention groups. Getting out in the bush, cooking around a campfire, bringing wild food home and the sense of purpose and success this brings. We need to recruit more hunters and not fight the register - leave that to the ballot box

I agree. Been watching this guy's efforts for a while. Put someone like him together with Mike King and you might get some interesting results.

https://www.facebook.com/NickGoldsmith01

Originally Posted by small_caliber

To me what the police are proposing seems to be complicated, full of irrelevant detail, and a big overreach on their part.

Totally agree with this, they are adding undue complexity - and probably cost - to the system. It could open them up to legal action later.

Wonder how much of this is the software company looking to generate more 'fries with that' on the building and maintenance of the database software. The bigger and more convoluted and unweildy the thing, the more maintenance it will need. And ultimately the less accurate and useful...

Originally Posted by small_caliber

The law required the police to build a "Firearm" registry.

To me this is the serial number of the firearm nothing more.

They already have my details, my f/l number, the details of my safe, and everything else that is covered when they do a firearms license application or renewal.

I don't see in the law where all this other detail is required to be collected and stored by the police.

In my opinion the firearm registry should be a separate database with the firearms details in it and no personal details, just an identifier so the f/l holders details can be accessed through another database. This would give some security.

When it comes to caliber, marks on stocks etc, does this mean you have to update the details everytime you change a barrel or put another mark on your stock, have it refinished or fit another stock.

To me what the police are proposing seems to be complicated, full of irrelevant detail, and a big overreach on their part.

Been thinking this same thought - separate all details that could identify someone out and align the master record as the F/L number. Against that - the database probably isn't useful then for the 'other agencies' that I have no idea what the use of a registry for them is to be fair. Customs looking at imports and exports - if it's an import it's not yet 'in possession' so not yet on someone's ticket and needing to be entered into the registry so they have no reason to access the database that I can see. All the necessary paperwork will still need to be completed for import checks, so whats the point of that as a access requirement?

This is what the law says must be in the registry, anything else it can be argued is not required by law so shouldn't be included:
94 Content of registry
(1) The following particulars must be recorded in the registry:
(a) the number and date of expiry of every type of licence held by a person under this Act:
(b) every licence holder’s full name, date of birth, and address:
(c) every endorsement on a licence:
(d) every condition on a licence or an endorsement that is additional to conditions imposed by this Act or regulations made under section 74:
(e) the particulars of the make, model, and identifying markings of every firearm, restricted weapon, and prohibited magazine possessed by a licence holder, and of the location of the firearm, restricted weapon, and prohibited magazine, if the particulars are held by the Police:
(f) every particular that regulations made under section 74 require to be recorded in the registry.
(2) The registry may include—
(a) photographs provided under section 34A; and
(b) any other information that the Commissioner considers necessary or desirable—
(i) to ensure that the registry is complete and accurate; or
(ii) for the administration of this Act and regulations made under it; and
(c) any other photographs that the Commissioner considers necessary or desirable.

Originally Posted by Cigar

This is what the law says must be in the registry, anything else it can be argued is not required by law so shouldn't be included:
94 Content of registry
(1) The following particulars must be recorded in the registry:
(a) the number and date of expiry of every type of licence held by a person under this Act:
(b) every licence holder’s full name, date of birth, and address:
(c) every endorsement on a licence:
(d) every condition on a licence or an endorsement that is additional to conditions imposed by this Act or regulations made under section 74:
(e) the particulars of the make, model, and identifying markings of every firearm, restricted weapon, and prohibited magazine possessed by a licence holder, and of the location of the firearm, restricted weapon, and prohibited magazine, if the particulars are held by the Police:
(f) every particular that regulations made under section 74 require to be recorded in the registry.
(2) The registry may include—
(a) photographs provided under section 34A; and
(b) any other information that the Commissioner considers necessary or desirable—
(i) to ensure that the registry is complete and accurate; or
(ii) for the administration of this Act and regulations made under it; and
(c) any other photographs that the Commissioner considers necessary or desirable.

Unfortunately 2b means anything they want

Originally Posted by Rushy

Unfortunately 2b means anything they want

I'd like to see how 2b stacks up with the privacy act

Originally Posted by No.3

Been thinking this same thought - separate all details that could identify someone out and align the master record as the F/L number. Against that - the database probably isn't useful then for the 'other agencies' that I have no idea what the use of a registry for them is to be fair. Customs looking at imports and exports - if it's an import it's not yet 'in possession' so not yet on someone's ticket and needing to be entered into the registry so they have no reason to access the database that I can see. All the necessary paperwork will still need to be completed for import checks, so whats the point of that as a access requirement?

It will be useful enough if they are presented with a FAL. It is an official photographic ID and positively identifies the person about whose firearms they are making enquiries.

Here is another one....
https://i.stuff.co.nz/national/crime...ools-customers

Originally Posted by Bol Tackshin

It will be useful enough if they are presented with a FAL. It is an official photographic ID and positively identifies the person about whose firearms they are making enquiries.

In a lot of places F/L isn't considered an acceptable form of photographic evidence - I suspect because it's issued by Police and not by a directly-controlled Govt department. Weirdly enough, a NZDF ID is better than the F/L. The 'accepted' forms of ID are passport, driver's licence, the offical over 18 ID card and stupidly enough as it's not photographic the good old birth cert. My wife argues the marraige license as well, as she's still running into the old name change deal (I suggested she could change it back if she wasn't happy - she told me where to stick it which I found odd considering the cause of the issue).