Thread: How to lose your NZ Firearms License?

I wonder what offence(s) one would have to be charged for to lose a Firearms license?... Assault, Theft, Robbery, Drug possession, Drink driving, Property damage?

Regarding offences, the lowest would be infringement notices only ie speeding tickets. I doubt you would lose your F/L over these.

After infringement notices, offences in NZ fall under the Criminal Procedure Act 2011 and are categorised on the basis of maximum penalty/level of seriousness.

Category 1 offence
An offence punishable with a maximum penalty of a fine only. For example careless driving (that doesn’t cause injury or death), exceeding the speed limit by more than 50 km/h.

Category 2 offence
An offence punishable by a term of imprisonment of less than two years or a community-based sentence ie common assault or a first or second drink driving conviction.
Judge-alone trial in a District Court.

Category 3 offence: Probably lose F/L?
An offence that is punishable by imprisonment for 2 years or more. Examples would be aggravated assault, threatening to kill, dangerous driving or a third (or more) drink driving conviction.
Judge or jury trial in a District Court.

Category 4 offence: Severe crimes where you would definitely lose your F/L.
An offence listed in Schedule 1 to the Act ie murder, manslaughter, torture and terrorism offences.
Jury trial in the High Court.

So does anyone actually know.... or what do you think one has to break the law over/commit an offence to lose one's Firearms License?

I have no actual idea but these days I think category 2 would be enough reason for the police to take your licence away.

Regarding offences, the lowest would be infringement notices only ie speeding tickets. I doubt you would lose your F/L over these.


YES - you can have your FAL revoked for Speeding Tickets - Whether it stands up after a judicial review, that is going to court to challenge is probably unlikely - but that will cost you 10-20k to prove the point.

As my friends interview went - Sir, You have a clear disregard for the law - I will not repeat the answer.

It was crystal clear, IF the friend had not fronted up for the interview with the Head Honcho, the FAL was gone for speeding.

Originally Posted by Doghead

As my friends interview went - Sir, You have a clear disregard for the law - I will not repeat the answer.

It was crystal clear, IF the friend had not fronted up for the interview with the Head Honcho, the FAL was gone for speeding.

I wouldn't say it was 'crystal clear'... your friend didn't lose his F/L for speeding.
If he did lose it then it would be crystal clear. At the moment it's still 'murky' when it comes to speeding.

If you have no offences since your last Firearms Licence was issued, by Law in the new Act they cannot go back and retrospectively revoke your Firearms Licence.

It is not murky - the conditions to not lose it were satisfied - The letter was a Letter of Revocation, in accordance with the Arms Act - the revocation was complete on the grounds provided - unless the interview was fronted up to and Head Honcho was satisfied with the answers.

In the noted case you could argue that the licence was not lost for speeding - it would have been lost for not meeting the conditions as prescribed by the police as they have formed the opinion that they were not a Fit & Proper person. The police, under the Arms Act have considerable latitude to remove a licence, in that case for speeding and speeding alone being the route cause.

Judicial review would well have overturned it - but why waste a day in court and 10k to sort it when a half hour interview solves the issue.
27 Surrender and revocation of firearms licence

(1)

A person may at any time surrender their firearms licence to a member of the Police.

(2)

A commissioned officer of Police may, by written notice, revoke a firearms licence if, in the opinion of the officer,—(a)

the holder of the licence is not a fit and proper person to be in possession of a firearm or an airgun; or

27CRevocation of suspended firearms licence

(1)

A member of the Police may, by notice in writing to the holder of a firearms licence that is temporarily suspended under section 60A, revoke the licence if the member of the Police—(a)

has considered any submissions made by the holder before the day stated in the notice of suspension on whether the licence should be revoked on the ground stated in that notice; and

(b)

is satisfied that the licence should be revoked on that ground.

(2)

A member of the Police must give the holder written notice of a decision on whether to revoke a firearms licence temporarily suspended under section 60A promptly after the decision is made.

Was referee for a mates renwal. Was asked if he habitually sped when driving, said not when I was with him. Mate was warned he might be refused because of two camera and one radar speeding tickets over 4 years. Not meeting ‘fit and proper person’ guidelines. Has put the shits up both of us.

Originally Posted by Doghead

In the noted case you could argue that the licence was not lost for speeding - it would have been lost for not meeting the conditions as prescribed by the police as they have formed the opinion that they were not a Fit & Proper person. The police, under the Arms Act have considerable latitude to remove a licence, in that case for speeding and speeding alone being the route cause.

Originally Posted by woods223

Was referee for a mates renewal. Was asked if he habitually sped when driving, said not when I was with him. Mate was warned he might be refused because of two camera and one radar speeding tickets over 4 years. Not meeting ‘fit and proper person’ guidelines. Has put the shits up both of us.

Yes, the police base their issuing and revoking of F/L based on whether a person is fit and proper for holding a F/L.
However, the criteria they use for making that 'fit & proper' assessment comes back mostly to criminal offenses:
– the applicant’s criminal history (category of offending)
– any pending criminal proceedings
– any protection orders made against the applicant under the Domestic Violence Act
– any other court order made against the applicant, that is or may be relevant to the application
– the applicant’s history of serious behavioural problems, including any history of violence, drug abuse, or alcohol abuse.

Now it looks like @Doghead and @woods223 are pointing out that a flagrant disregard for traffic/speeding laws could also result in failing the fit & proper test...

Originally Posted by Hermitage

Yes, the police base their issuing and revoking of F/L based on whether a person is fit and proper for holding a F/L.
However, the criteria they use for making that 'fit & proper' assessment comes back mostly to criminal offenses:
– the applicant’s criminal history (category of offending)
– any pending criminal proceedings
– any protection orders made against the applicant under the Domestic Violence Act
– any other court order made against the applicant, that is or may be relevant to the application
– the applicant’s history of serious behavioural problems, including any history of violence, drug abuse, or alcohol abuse.

Now it looks like @Doghead and @woods223 are pointing out that a flagrant disregard for traffic/speeding laws could also result in failing the fit & proper test...

That in itself raises an interesting proposition. Should Police lose their jobs if they are caught speeding? If not, why not? If FAL holders are held to a higher standard than Police, what right do Police have to administer the firearms act that does not make it hypocritical?

If they wish to say that speeding is proof someone is not 'fit and proper' to hold a license, then surely a speeding ticket would mean a person is not of good enough character to be a police officer?

Or to put it another way...If a policeman loses his license for drink driving, would that police officer be allowed to drive as part of their duties? And why would that officer be allowed to continue to undertake their duties?

Originally Posted by timattalon

That in itself raises an interesting proposition. Should Police lose their jobs if they are caught speeding? If not, why not? If FAL holders are held to a higher standard than Police, what right do Police have to administer the firearms act that does not make it hypocritical?

If they wish to say that speeding is proof someone is not 'fit and proper' to hold a license, then surely a speeding ticket would mean a person is not of good enough character to be a police officer?

Or to put it another way...If a policeman loses his license for drink driving, would that police officer be allowed to drive as part of their duties? And why would that officer be allowed to continue to undertake their duties?

There's been a couple of cases recently where Police officers did lose their licenses and hence their employment as a result of driving offenses resulting in loss of license. It's not broadcast by Police as an organization when it happens, for obvious reasons - humans make mistakes etc etc.

One of my issues with the domestic violence thing is there is a class of lawyer advising clients to go for protection orders and make complaints in order to give the wife(ex) a better case come custody/family court time. I've heard of several cases where its happened, some from the guy being an acquaintance or a good mate and some where the women is the contact and telling me what the lawyer has told her she needs to do. In one case she was told she had to do it as the nz system is heavily weighted against mothers and that she had to go after half the ex husband's company pension and entitlements - I seriously think it's more a case of lawyers gaming the system as those steps require a few more reports assessments and another couple of hearings. Bloody vultures...

Originally Posted by No.3

There's been a couple of cases recently where Police officers did lose their licenses and hence their employment as a result of driving offenses resulting in loss of license. It's not broadcast by Police as an organization when it happens, for obvious reasons - humans make mistakes etc etc.

One of my issues with the domestic violence thing is there is a class of lawyer advising clients to go for protection orders and make complaints in order to give the wife(ex) a better case come custody/family court time. I've heard of several cases where its happened, some from the guy being an acquaintance or a good mate and some where the women is the contact and telling me what the lawyer has told her she needs to do. In one case she was told she had to do it as the nz system is heavily weighted against mothers and that she had to go after half the ex husband's company pension and entitlements - I seriously think it's more a case of lawyers gaming the system as those steps require a few more reports assessments and another couple of hearings. Bloody vultures...

I know there was one who lost her job for drink driving crashing etc recently in the news. I was really inferring that if we are to lose our FAL for speeding level offences THEN they should also lose their ability to be Police for the same. They should be held to a higher standard than us, or at the very least, the same as us.

In truth, my real view is that a few speeding offenses , especially fairly minor ones should not have repercussions that outweigh the offense.- They should not lose their jobs for sometimes being a few ks over and nor should a FAL be taken for the same. Wof a few weeks / days over etc. We should not have to drive with our eyes glued to a speedo to make sure we stay under 100km when the real danger is in front of the bonnet (traffic, road conditions, hazards etc...) Sure excessive speed or showing clear disregard for the law is going to understandably going to have an impact as is frequent and repetitive flouting of limits. But an occasional oversight , missed sign, or my last one (about 3km over the limit while trying not to cause delays to Christmas holiday traffic while towing a trailer...) should show that we are trying to obey laws that are being policed to a tolerance level that is below the accuracy of most peoples speedos....

Originally Posted by woods223

Was referee for a mates renwal. Was asked if he habitually sped when driving, said not when I was with him. Mate was warned he might be refused because of two camera and one radar speeding tickets over 4 years. Not meeting ‘fit and proper person’ guidelines. Has put the shits up both of us.

More of a worry for me would be how far they go looking for evidence, i.e. Could some of the debates on here be used or twisted to declare someone unfit ?

My issue with the legislation is the word "opinion", in essence it would suggest that the opinion was formed after a review of the evidence presented to justify the firearms licence being revoked, however it is subjective.
No problem if there is a conviction or proof of criminal offending but the openness of the legislation is a concern.
We have to be careful of what we believe and are fed from the media as in my mind they have no credibility at all, don't believe the Police are out to take all the firearms away, the Government maybe as it is they who draft and pass laws, I say this because of the following.
I was recently the referee for a guy who when he was 17 was convicted of some drug offences and did home detention. He delayed his licence application for 8 years as he hoped to prove he had moved on. Since his conviction he had done an apprenticeship, is in full time employment and has not had any further convictions.
This came up in the interview, but was not a focus and in the mind of the Police officer doing the licence was not a big deal. He made his decision based on the present not the past. The licence was issued, no problem.

Yep, one recent one was a speeding offense on a motorcycle, I actually felt for that guy as from what I heard from a third party it was one of those mitigating circumstances and don't do it again would have sufficed but the guy got the book, book ends and the shelf.

I don't know much but I suspect a lot. What I suspect is that Police apply a certain amount of discretion within the law and are legally entitled to do so. So if on the balance of things you're a fine contributing upstanding citizen who happens to get pinged over the speed limit a couple of times as an "aberration", the only consequence is your fine and demerits. Get a rep as a Clever Harry, a Slippery Jack, a Suspected Affiliate, a Closet Basher or Left-Handed Taker etc etc, then you may find Police take the opportunity you present them with to clip your wings.

On the other hand, prejudice and profiling exist in all walks of life so if you happen at the moment in question to be in the "wrong" demographic, or perceived to be something you may not be, then you're vulnerable to arseholes such as can be found in any part of our society. Met a few myself along the way. All wore "uniforms", some Official Blue, most not, (a suit after all is a uniform too).

Take care out there...