Question: Retaining a licence with no firearms but without secure storage facilities

Interested to hear on any updates following on from this thread in 2022 please:

https://www.nzhuntingandshooting.co....nt-flat-87042/

I've been made aware of a forum member where the advice from the FSA is that his existing licence now needs to be surrendered, part–way through the licence period, because he is in a temporary flatting situation where it is impractical to install the security measures that he has in place at the family home and present when the licence was approved and issued. He has no firearms in his name or on-site, only using firearms when he returns home. Other family members are licenced and hold the firearms in their names securely at the home address.

I have confirmed with the FSA that this advice is based on the Arms Regulations 1992. Only the sections relevant to this forum member's situation are copied below:

Arms Regulations 1992, Clause 19: Conditions relating to security precautions

(1c) the holder must take reasonable steps to ensure that any firearm in their possession is secured against theft:

(2) The reasonable steps required by subclause (1)(c) are—
keeping on the holder’s premises—
(2)(a)i a lockable cabinet, container, or receptacle of stout construction in which firearms may be stored; or
(2)(a)iii a lockable display cabinet or rack in which firearms are immobilised so that none of them may be fired; and
(2)(b) securely fixing to the premises all locked cabinets, containers, racks, and receptacles in which firearms are stored; and

(3) The steps taken under subclause (2) must be approved by a member of the Police following an inspection carried out—
(3)(a) at the time the holder’s firearms licence is issued (or renewed); or
(3)(b) during an inspection under section 24B of the Act


Arms Regulations 1992, Clause 24B: General conditions of firearms licence

(1) Every firearms licence is subject to the conditions that the holder of a firearms licence must,—
(1)(c) permit a member of the Police to inspect the place or places where the firearms are or will be kept, and the place or places where the ammunition is or will be kept, and, for those purposes, to enter at all reasonable times upon the premises where that place or those places are situated.

Also
Arms Legislation Act 2022, Clause 55:
A holder of a firearms licence who changes their address must, within 30 days after doing so, give written notice of the change to a member of the Police.

From what I understand of the above, following receiving notification of a change of address, Police may choose to arrange an inspection of the security or they may not, but either way security that meet the above must be in place.
I'm interested in the padlocked chain placed around a secure fixture such as the hot water cylinder mentioned in the previous thread as being (perhaps not universally) accepted as sufficient security. Presumably this was accepted when there were no firearms currently at the place of residence, and that should any firearms be stored on-site in the future, they would have arrived in their own pelican case or similar that meets the secure container requirement of (2)(a)i above, and that by chaining such a container in place the requirements of (2)(b) are then also met.

Either way the opportunity to contribute to the re-write of the Arms Act is timely, and I'll put in a submission along the lines that this area could be tidied up. Cancelling and then reapplying for a licence in these circumstances seems a needless waste of resources.

If you consider that the FSA website has a video of how to store a firearm in the roof cavity, a chain or cable lock around a sound structure in an inconspicuous place should pass.
I know of a case where the son lives in town and stores his firearms at his parents farm an hour away, as he only ever uses them there.
I'm not sure if he has secure storage facilities in town though.

What is also confusing here is what actually constitutes a change of address?

If he is living in a Halls of Residence type situation during the term for learning but then returning home and having most of his possessions at the home, retains that address as his 'address for service' - has his address actually changed in the eyes of the law?

Similarly, if someone lives at home Sat/Sun but travels to a different area Mon/Fri for work, do they need security at both addresses or is one the 'address for service'? Also, someone who is retired, travels around the country in a motor home but retains a home address.

For the purposes of the Arms Act, the assessment appears to be that the address for Arms Act purposes is considered to be the address of the property where the licence holder is currently residing temporarily or otherwise. If it is a temporary address, and then returning to the previous address where security is approved - has the licence holder actually changed their address?

The chained to a stout bit of the house thing is another interesting one, as the section above doesn't specifically rule it out but also doesn't expressly rule it in in terms of a rack or container securely fixed to the premises...

A couple of points, here.

"Arms Regulations 1992, Clause 19: Conditions relating to security precautions

(1c) the holder must take reasonable steps to ensure that any firearm in their possession is secured against theft:".

Why is there an assumption that the holder of a firearms licence actually owns a firearm?
Surely, a firearms licence is issued to a "fit and proper" person, so that that person MAY use a firearm without the requirement for immediate/one-on-one supervision?
In the same way as a person can be tested for competence and issued with a licence to drive a motor vehicle. It is NOT a requirement to own a vehicle.

Remember to make your submission for consideration during the re-write of the Arms Act.
There are too many conflicts, and anomaly's, such as this.

That is an interesting point, if I was to make a guess I would say it's a management decision made many years ago that it's just easier for the arms regime management - to simply consider all firearms licence holders as 'in possession' of arms items requiring secure storage as per the act and assessing security as such at the time of vetting (a money and labour saving decision, not a 'compliance' one).

The way that is worded, would appear to align with what you are suggesting in that not every firearms licence holder needs compliant security if they currently aren't in possession of arms items. The security requirements only kick in if the licence holder takes possession of arms items.

Interesting point.

Just had 4 months travelling in a caravan, had secure storage in it signed off. So just rang and the girl put a note on my file with no rifle at home address. I rang back couple of days later and asked if any note on my file to confirm. All was good.

I know someone who was studying at uni and kept his guns at the parents alongside their guns, since thats the only place he was using them, and the same story was he had to install a safe in his flat, even though it was kept empty.

Surely the register will tell them if you actually have firearms?? I asked the vetting guy last time about the safe thing. He said if tou have a firearms licence you have to have a safe where you live weather you store firearms there or not. I guess the thinking goes if you own firearms your bound to have them at your house at some point..

Thanks for the contributions so far.

Here is a link to the short video mentioned: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JD63CM8UHYA
and on Page 6 of the Storage and Transportation Guide is the full description of the padlocked cable method for securing a single firearm.
https://www.firearmssafetyauthority....e-guidance.pdf

Know of Military personal who cannot store their personal firearms on base, allowed to be secured at friends property.

I would still be interested to know the answer if you spend your time at two addresses - do you need security at both addresses or how do they pick which is the 'home' and which is the 'away'?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by blip

Surely the register will tell them if you actually have firearms?? I asked the vetting guy last time about the safe thing. He said if tou have a firearms licence you have to have a safe where you live weather you store firearms there or not. I guess the thinking goes if you own firearms your bound to have them at your house at some point..

---

I basically had the above explained to me nearly 20 years ago. The scenario was given that if I came home late one night from spotlighting and was locked out of mum/dads house, I was obliged to have a storage at my own residence in the event I end up going there without dropping off my firearm.

Yes plenty of people only use their firearms at the place they store them but might not live, but there will be others that store offsite and shoot somewhere else. Given enough time, sooner or later, someone will bring their firearm home.

So the law caters to the lowest denomination, which is that scenario. Otherwise you need two separate options within the law, one that says you must have storage at your home regardless of whether it contains anything, and another option which says you don’t need storage at home if you only shoot at xyz farm/range where firearms are stored.
Then it starts to get more complicated than having a token chain and padlock in the ceiling which never gets used until it does get used.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by No.3

I would still be interested to know the answer if you spend your time at two addresses - do you need security at both addresses or how do they pick which is the 'home' and which is the 'away'?

---

Depends if firearms are stored at both locations.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by longshot

Depends if firearms are stored at both locations.

---

Not according to what is stated above though, as the OP's situation the person was in temporary accommodation but still needed security without firearms based on the fact that as a licenced person he might have firearms... It's somewhat blurry now as what is the cut off is, especially in the situation of military living on base and having to store the firearms at another address???

I think the argument is that as the holder of a license, at any point you could buy or otherwise take possession of an arm - and so need storage.
It would seem to me that at that point you have obligations - but not until that point.
Fit and proper and all - so as a fit and proper person I'll make sure any arms in my possession are safely stored. Until then, I don't need to.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by longshot

I basically had the above explained to me nearly 20 years ago. The scenario was given that if I came home late one night from spotlighting and was locked out of mum/dads house, I was obliged to have a storage at my own residence in the event I end up going there without dropping off my firearm.

Yes plenty of people only use their firearms at the place they store them but might not live, but there will be others that store offsite and shoot somewhere else. Given enough time, sooner or later, someone will bring their firearm home.

So the law caters to the lowest denomination, which is that scenario. Otherwise you need two separate options within the law, one that says you must have storage at your home regardless of whether it contains anything, and another option which says you don’t need storage at home if you only shoot at xyz farm/range where firearms are stored.
Then it starts to get more complicated than having a token chain and padlock in the ceiling which never gets used until it does get used.

---

If I sleep under a tree in the bush I can lean my rifle against said tree for the night, quite legally, with no security, because it is in my possession.
So should we be required to secure firearm under those conditions too?
No way!!!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by 7mmwsm

If I sleep under a tree in the bush I can lean my rifle against said tree for the night, quite legally, with no security, because it is in my possession.
So should we be required to secure firearm under those conditions too?
No way!!!

---

Arm chair critic post:
Along similar lines, what does Rogee on YT do when he goes on his public land cross valley recoveries? Their rifles are never carried with them for that part of the video. One would assume the rifles are simply stashed in the trees.
I think he’d have a hard time explaining himself if their gear got ripped off in this day and age no matter how unlikely it might be.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Moutere

Arm chair critic post:
Along similar lines, what does Rogee on YT do when he goes on his public land cross valley recoveries? Their rifles are never carried with them for that part of the video. One would assume the rifles are simply stashed in the trees.
I think he’d have a hard time explaining himself if their gear got ripped off in this day and age no matter how unlikely it might be.

---

Arm chair critic?
Bullshit. It's a valid statement.
In my situation, if I am inside for a cup of tea, I can quite legally have a rifle leaning in the corner unsecured because it is in my possession. I frequently shoot things from the house so hardly secure one firearm during the day.
Basically a hunting situation.
The same as hunting in the bush.
If you read each situation from a practical viewpoint the law is not what some people think.

I was referring to myself being an arm chair critic within my own post. Hence use of the colon ( : ).
I actually agree with your post.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Moutere

I was referring to myself being an arm chair critic within my own post. Hence use of the colon ( : ).
I actually agree with your post.

---

Oh I'm sorry.

I have been pondering that very question as to regards Roggee and even made that comment on one of his videos

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ross Nolan

I think the argument is that as the holder of a license, at any point you could buy or otherwise take possession of an arm - and so need storage.
It would seem to me that at that point you have obligations - but not until that point.
Fit and proper and all - so as a fit and proper person I'll make sure any arms in my possession are safely stored. Until then, I don't need to.

---

It's one of the many contradictory behaviors of the police. Once we are vetted fit and proper they trust us to use our firearms as prescribed by law, that should include storage. I suspect that they just don't want to do second visit once a safe is fitted. This thread indicates that there are plenty of situations where your firearms are not at your address, the police should be able to cater for that, they just can't be bothered.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by imaca

It's one of the many contradictory behaviors of the police. Once we are vetted fit and proper they trust us to use our firearms as prescribed by law, that should include storage. I suspect that they just don't want to do second visit once a safe is fitted. This thread indicates that there are plenty of situations where your firearms are not at your address, the police should be able to cater for that, they just can't be bothered.

---

And I think that lines up with my feelings on the matter - the law says what the law says, and the people administering it (with admittedly limited and arguably misdirected resources) have made a lot of decisions to attempt to dictate the behaviour of and transfer costs to licence holders to make things easier and cheaper for the management.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ross Nolan

I think the argument is that as the holder of a license, at any point you could buy or otherwise take possession of an arm - and so need storage.
It would seem to me that at that point you have obligations - but not until that point.
Fit and proper and all - so as a fit and proper person I'll make sure any arms in my possession are safely stored. Until then, I don't need to.

---

I would agree with this, but at the end of it you are completely correct as you could be away from home and be called to take possession of a restricted item (I have had this due to being the only license holder in a situation where the person who was in possession needed to take an unscheduled trip to hospital). The fit and proper requirements kick in, even if you are not near your storage or home residence. But, it's a bit of a sideline away from the original question now - but I think this is a case where the original applicant needs to really sit down with the higher ups and dive a bit deeper into the specifics driving this decision as it's quite ridiculous to be forced to surrender a license at huge expense due to a temporary change in address for a valid reason.

If this isn't able to be sorted out, I would wager that the solution is 'don't ask, don't tell' which is not ideal for anyone.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ross Nolan

I think the argument is that as the holder of a license, at any point you could buy or otherwise take possession of an arm - and so need storage.
It would seem to me that at that point you have obligations - but not until that point.
Fit and proper and all - so as a fit and proper person I'll make sure any arms in my possession are safely stored. Until then, I don't need to.

---

If that is the meaning and intention of the law then anyone in the army should have a place to store their firearm on base.

Being in a flatting situation where you aren't allowed to store a firearm or install a safe would be the same thing as not being allowed a personal firearm on base.

My son at uni and flatting in Auckland with no intention of having rifles there had to still demonstrate storage.
They accepeted a pair of eye bolts in a wardrobe with cable and padlock.
First version got turned down as the eyebolts were not deemed large enough.
Z

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ZQLewis

My son at uni and flatting in Auckland with no intention of having rifles there had to still demonstrate storage.
They accepeted a pair of eye bolts in a wardrobe with cable and padlock.
First version got turned down as the eyebolts were not deemed large enough.
Z

---

$80 cordless grinder from the warehouse and I don't care how large your eyebolts are.

What an absolute nonsense

Recent reply back from the FSA on acceptable alternatives to the eyebolts, cable and padlock:
https://www.guncity.com/outdoor-outf...un-rack-389806
Back of a wardrobe, two screws into a stud.

My son has just turned 16, and he has talked about getting his FAL which I am happy to support. Can he share my storage?

now an ex workmate but he still stores his firearms at his parent house with no issue. i am due for the renewal in 2 days. lets just say the security system from hell.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by vulcannz

My son has just turned 16, and he has talked about getting his FAL which I am happy to support. Can he share my storage?

---

Yes.
We have that situation.

Has anyone ever attempted to contact an arms officer and ask if they would be willing to answer questions on the police interpretation of the law on the site? Like there could be a sticky for it or something. Just an idea?

There is "no issue" only because the Police don't know about it. If they did they would probably be obliged to follow it up. All licence holders are required to have a minimum standard of security at their place of normal residence, whether or not there are firearms only very occasionally held at that site, or even if there is no intention to ever hold firearms at the property. It makes no difference. As I put in my original post, the legislation clearly says that security must be in place. I contacted the FSA a week or so ago, and the minimum security installation that is acceptable is 1. the padlocked cable that passes through two eye bolts that has been mentioned elsewhere, or 2. the gun rack I linked to that the FSA pointed me to as an acceptable alternative to 1. As also raised above, I'm unsure in respect of the definition of normal residence. Maybe if one has 30 days to notify a change of address, if you move residence for longer than 30 days, then perhaps that is the time frame that is considered a change? It seems that those serving on military bases come under different rules, though this does not appear to follow the Arms Regulations.

That rack is what I had in the caravan bolted to the chassis they signed it off as fine.

Just been through this... Sold the house, have a rental whilst we choose the next house.
Gave my rifles (fully registered) and ammo to another licensed firearms owner to store (Thanks mate!).
Updated the registry (which you have to do by phone - they don't have an online process for transfers...) so that they are recorded as in his possession (as it may be more than 30 days which is a requirement...)
Then I get a call, I need to have a secure storage solution at the rental. Despite having zero firearms or ammo in my possession. Nope, they see it as a condition of the license.

So I have spent a few hours getting permission from the owner to drill into the structural parts of their house, installing a cable and 10mm eye bolts and quality padlocks, taking photos of them, and sending them to Wellington. Difficult to explain to the owner that this was a productive use of anyones time and money... A compliant gun storage solution for absolutely zero guns.

Hopefully the arms act review will be a bit more thought through than this current process. I have made a submission on this example.

Oh and if you use RealMe to login to the Firearms authority site, the service they use to send a verification code to your mobile only is only up during business hours. The world's first IT system on public service hours.

With processes and systems like this no wonder they claim they have such a high cost structure, most of this is waste.
- poorly worded regulations that drive nonsensical compliance requirements.
- digital systems that dont cover common use cases, so they need to be dealt with by people, making phone calls. I spent an hour on the phone.
- digital systems that are unavailable outside office hours
- multiple handling of the same case.

I guess this would have cost them a few hundred dollars in costs for what could have been a self service database update. And a day of my time and a hundred bucks of bits. So far...

You can apply for an "alternate storage location" which they will inspect and approve - and when they do that they no longer seem to require storage at your residence. I know several people who have done this.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by anzac_mike

You can apply for an "alternate storage location" which they will inspect and approve - and when they do that they no longer seem to require storage at your residence. I know several people who have done this.

---

They did not interpret the law that way for me.

The rack linked to further up in the post I would argue is next to useless as a form of security in the form shown in the photo on the webpage - I had a mate come to stay for a few days and placed his rifle in my safe. While it was in there and before he left to go on his hunt he realised he didn't have his action lock key, was on the same key ring as his four wheeler which his other half was using on the beach back home. This was one of those flexi-loop padlock things that it looks like that lock on the gun rack. He said well, I need it off - one snip with the end nippers and it was. Wasn't even a big pair of nippers, I was quite surprised and a little disappointed how easy it was to snip. I think a leatherman or the like would go through it no problem.

If you were using that style of rack, I would get a solid shackle padlock and possibly make up a plate that has a 90deg bend in it that fits over the trigger guard pin and the bend goes over behind the bolt and rear of the action. That would stop someone unscrewing the triggerguard and sliding the rifle out of the rack...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Puffin

Recent reply back from the FSA on acceptable alternatives to the eyebolts, cable and padlock:
https://www.guncity.com/outdoor-outf...un-rack-389806
Back of a wardrobe, two screws into a stud.

---

Gun City will be very pleased to hear that the FSA is promoting their wares!