Posted in firearm law changes, but important enough to post here as well.
Released September 2020
https://www.police.govt.nz/about-us/...orage-guidance
Printable View
Posted in firearm law changes, but important enough to post here as well.
Released September 2020
https://www.police.govt.nz/about-us/...orage-guidance
A fair bit of ‘recommend’ in that lot?
I read enough, it is lame.Quote:
Originally Posted by Bol Tackshin
Its recommended that wooden boxes have piano hinge, yet the picture has 2 and only 2 butt hinges. Ammo storage ==== a separate lockable box in a safe is appropriate for the storage of ammunition. Shows a picture of safe with ammo box at the top which I was told on my first inspection that it is no good for storage. Lame alright
Agree that it is lame. You couldn't use that in court with all the soft terms, like 'recommend'. It should really be 'must' and 'shall not' language, and give minimum standards, so you can draw a plan from it and build or buy suitable storage, rather than guess and be found deficient when it is too late.
I didn't hear any announcement by COLFO or any other association about it, so assume it was done fairly low-key without broad consultation? Happy to be proved wrong on this point...
It seems to be a wasted opportunity to potentially make a real difference to firearm safety.
The two butt hinges are probably more sturdy than a piano hinge anyway. Steel gun cabinets are not safes; a safe is a different beast altogether. The separate ammo lock box inside a steel gun cabinet almost always has a flimsy little lock on it that is easily broken into with a screwdriver. If a thief can break into the main gun compartment then it obvious that the little internal lock box can be accessed. Therefore it's reasonable to expect that ammo should be stored elsewhere or the firearms made inoperable.Quote:
Originally Posted by chindit
I agree totally that the word 'should' is not the same as 'must'. Disappointed that this security update is not more defined.
Easy opportunity to show they can be professional about this shit.....and threw it away.
And they wonder why we shake our heads..........
At the end of the day, the best lock will be opened by the owner while supervised by a knife wielding 'midnight guest'
I had a 'license renewal' letter from the arms office.
It got posted through the PO box (local dairy) and had "firearms office" stamped on the rear.
I called the arms office and complained, suggesting they are defeating my security measures with their lack of discretion.
They didn't give a shit.
These clowns are an embarrassment.
.....or possibly not, if the jury is understanding as Orrens' was.Quote:
Originally Posted by 40mm
Thats OK....the people who saw the letter now know that you will be without a license for several months and wont have firearms on site cos the delay in getting it processed will take months....Quote:
Originally Posted by 40mm
Or try what a mate did....he scanned the letter, deleted the text and typed out a letter to himself telling him that his license was revoked due to unspecified reasons....then he pinned it on a cheap gunsafe in the shed with gardening gear in it.....so if anyone breaks in.....I doubt it will stop them having a good poke around and finding other stuff they can steal, but he thought it would be a precaution...
Good idea, it gave me another though....Quote:
Originally Posted by timattalon
Send letters with "dear restricted weapons license holder" stamped in big bold red letters on both sides of the envelope, send these to all the PNHQ and arms office staff.
See how they fucking well like having their home advertised to the world as a juicy target for home invasions.
Probably worth pointing out that his answer machine is set to sound like he has just answered the phone and then he is droned out by what sounds like a police raid complete with a fire fight before another voice says "Hang on" and hangs the phone up....Quote:
Originally Posted by 40mm
I suspect its enforced policy rather than legislation. Again.Quote:
Originally Posted by 10-Ring
The police recommendations are meant as guide and to be helpful, obviously not to hinder. Unless the exact details of, "secured against theft" is clearly written in legislation then the police have no choice but to make a call on what they consider it to mean. It is not the fault of the police that the legislation is lacking and needs updating.Quote:
Originally Posted by Danger Mouse
I think most people following the last 10 years of administration of the arms act, wouldn't be willing to give them the benefit of the doubt any more.Quote:
Originally Posted by 10-Ring
Like when the re printed the arms code, changed a bunch of stuff, got called on it, and then claimed that they hadnt reprinted the arms code.
Touch our butts.
Storage requirements.
It keeps eroding peoples confidence.
There has been several instances of it. I had to laugh when ron mark at the colfo debate called them incompetent in their administration of the act.
Fuckwits writing dribble? geeze
Hold the phone...Skidmark called someone incompetent. Takes one to know one, I suppose.Quote:
Originally Posted by Danger Mouse
Don't fret, guys..the document refers to "Firearms Storage GUIDANCE", not requirements. For me, I want to make it as difficult as possible for a ninja to access my firearms. Good stout construction, bolts and screws inaccessible, keys, ammo and bolts secured in other parts of the house.
I wouldn't count on another agency taking over soon or for quite a few years yet. It's going to cost multitudes of millions to set up and as we all know, the country isn't rolling in spondoolies.Quote:
Originally Posted by Mauser308