Thread: Register to Stay

The Police Commissioner on TV tonight said he couldn’t understand why anyone would need a ‘high powered semiautomatic’
Read into that what you like.

Originally Posted by Finnwolf

The Police Commissioner on TV tonight said he couldn’t understand why anyone would need a ‘high powered semiautomatic’
Read into that what you like.

Exhibit 152987 showing why the FSA needs to be moved out of Police. Leave them to apply and enforce the law, not decide what it should be. Separation of powers is critical

Well if you take a long look at this topic nothing much really changes. The direction remains the same who ever gets in, they just dress it up differently

Originally Posted by Finnwolf

The Police Commissioner on TV tonight said he couldn’t understand why anyone would need a ‘high powered semiautomatic’
Read into that what you like.

Did anyone ask him why the police had them then? Or the army for that matter, I would suspect they would fall under the umbrella of 'anyone'.

Originally Posted by inglishill

Did anyone ask him why the police had them then? Or the army for that matter, I would suspect they would fall under the umbrella of 'anyone'.

he bloody annoyed me could not see past killer MSSA with huge magazines muppett ohh well the crims will have a shop soon mail order called breaking into the register up your security guys

Originally Posted by inglishill

Did anyone ask him why the police had them then? Or the army for that matter, I would suspect they would fall under the umbrella of 'anyone'.

The law specifically states they are available for endorsed pest-controllers (they are not banned). Is he saying he doesn't understand the law he is responsible for applying? Or that he disagrees with an Act passed by Parliament?

Neither reflect well on him

Originally Posted by Finnwolf

The Police Commissioner on TV tonight said he couldn’t understand why anyone would need a ‘high powered semiautomatic’
Read into that what you like.

His comprehension is clearly lacking. The existence of a pest controller endorsement even post 2019 clearly demonstrates a need.

Originally Posted by Oscar

The law specifically states they are available for endorsed pest-controllers (they are not banned). Is he saying he doesn't understand the law he is responsible for applying? Or that he disagrees with an Act passed by Parliament?

Neither reflect well on him

I disagree.

To most New Zealanders there is no difference between a single shot .22 and an M16.

Most of the America centric anti-gun reporting revolves around mass shootings with semi auto's,that's most kiwis experience with guns in the media,so that's what he is playing on.

Originally Posted by norsk

I disagree.

To most New Zealanders there is no difference between a single shot .22 and an M16.

Most of the America centric anti-gun reporting revolves around mass shootings with semi auto's,that's most kiwis experience with guns in the media,so that's what he is playing on.

This is the Police Commissioner, not a random member of the public

Originally Posted by Finnwolf

The Police Commissioner on TV tonight said he couldn’t understand why anyone would need a ‘high powered semiautomatic’
Read into that what you like.

I did laugh at that, the same fella probably can't understand why we suddenly have a serious wild animal control problem in this country or probably more correctly doesn't care as it's not his remit and not his problem. What duty of care as a Govt entity? Even the TB stats are showing a backward trend - a few years back we were thinking it had been damn near knocked over.

And it's fairly obvious that if he thinks that no one needs high powered semi automatic firearms then you duck boys better be concerned as the average self loading shotgun is a lot more harder hitting than a self loading rifle. Biggest problem we seem to have in this country is clowns with no bloody idea trying to lead people also with no idea and no reason to disbelieve their bosses - that's not just in Police as well it seems across the board in the Govt departments at the moment. I have a few good ones going on at the mo with a couple of Govt depts that have ignored their operating legislation because they figured the consequences were not severe enough to worry about and it's left me in a very shitty place. With lawyers at the mo... What that experience does do is it has not filled me with confidence as far as the continued safe operation of anything as critical as a registry.

Originally Posted by No.3

I did laugh at that, the same fella probably can't understand why we suddenly have a serious wild animal control problem in this country or probably more correctly doesn't care as it's not his remit and not his problem. What duty of care as a Govt entity? Even the TB stats are showing a backward trend - a few years back we were thinking it had been damn near knocked over.

And it's fairly obvious that if he thinks that no one needs high powered semi automatic firearms then you duck boys better be concerned as the average self loading shotgun is a lot more harder hitting than a self loading rifle. Biggest problem we seem to have in this country is clowns with no bloody idea trying to lead people also with no idea and no reason to disbelieve their bosses - that's not just in Police as well it seems across the board in the Govt departments at the moment. I have a few good ones going on at the mo with a couple of Govt depts that have ignored their operating legislation because they figured the consequences were not severe enough to worry about and it's left me in a very shitty place. With lawyers at the mo... What that experience does do is it has not filled me with confidence as far as the continued safe operation of anything as critical as a registry.

Problem is, there are no personal consequences for them, nor can we sue without their prior approval. The crown has very deep pockets and you know, 'why can't we just move on and get over it', I quote a judge there.

Sorry to hear you are in a shitty situation, my experience has taught me that even lawyers don't know the half of it, ACC, FC, IRD, they are just there to collect the earnings, they don't actually give a shit about you or your case. Most of the time they do not even know the law and are just backroom dealing anyway.

Originally Posted by Oscar

This is the Police Commissioner, not a random member of the public

He is addressing members of the public using a narrative that they identify with.

None of this is incidentall

Originally Posted by Oscar

Exhibit 152987 showing why the FSA needs to be moved out of Police. Leave them to apply and enforce the law, not decide what it should be. Separation of powers is critical

one of the statements I put in my submission

no govt will take away the register its good PR for them (I never expected Nicole McKee to succeed at that)...... until everyone's on it and gun crime keeps going up but all the registered guns are tucked away or a catastrophic breech of the data happens and we get to a point when it cant be spun in a way to deflect blame away from pollies and police and back onto a firearms licence holding minority

I read quite a while back about gun control in a govt? Document called the mosaic. If thats a legit document the register aint going anywhere, plain and simple. Enjoy your firearms while you still can....

Mark Mitchell's response for those who haven't seen it

There is likely to be some debate today about the Government “agreeing to disagree” on firearms changes recently, so I wanted to walk you through it.

National is firmly opposed to any proposals that could negatively impact public safety. The role of the firearms registry is to ensure a full picture of legal firearms ownership in New Zealand, which assists police in taking enforcement action against “straw buying” - a practise in which a firearms license holder purchases a firearm and on-sells it to a criminal. Our country deals with firearms violence constantly and it creates stress, fear and anxiety for Kiwis and communities that are impacted.

There is a devastating human cost for every life lost or person suffering a gunshot wound. The heartbreaking loss of Constable Matthew Hunt in the line of duty reminds us of the risk our front line police officers carry. The public and our police officers deserve to have every step taken to make them safer.

On coming into Government, Police advised that the dealer obligations and the “ammunition as an activating circumstance” regulations, as part of the continued implementation of the firearms registry, could be deferred as they were not in a position to be implemented. This was something we agreed with and opted to progress. Later, Police did further work and identified that the ammunition as an activating circumstance regulation could be implemented as planned and asked us not to defer that coming into effect.

The dealer obligations ensure that dealers are inputting the stock that they hold into the firearms registry and the ammunition as an activating circumstance requirements would mean that the first time you purchase ammunition from the date the regulation comes into force, you must register all arms items in your possession within 30 days.

At the time, Police advised that by not proceeding as planned to include the purchase of ammunition as an activating circumstance for the registry, we would be putting public safety at risk. That is not something I am prepared to tolerate and so we have since opposed attempts to defer that regulation coming into force.

At the same time, the review of the firearms registry that was agreed to in the coalition agreement with Act was commencing. Cabinet had agreed a set of terms of reference and that it would be led by the Ministry of Justice - with the responsible Minister being the Associate Minister of Justice Nicole McKee.

It was agreed that we would wait and see what the registry review came back with before making a final decision on the activating circumstance deferral.

The review of the registry was completed late last year and overwhelmingly supported the continuation of the registry, as well as its continued implementation (with regard to the purchase of ammunition being an activating circumstance).

Cabinet ended up opting to agree to disagree on two things. The first was our view that the registry review, undertaken as part of the coalition agreement and led by the Associate Minister of Justice, was sufficient to meet the agreement made between National and Act. Act do not share that view, and so we have agreed to disagree.

The second was our view that there is no clear policy basis for deferring the ammunition as an activating circumstance regulation. Police advised that that was a simple implementation and if not implemented, would put the public at risk. Act do not share our view on this either. A variety of reasons for this have been presented, including that the registry review was not sufficient and that there is no clear definition of “ammunition” in the Arms Act. Police’s advice on the latter was clear that that has not been an issue in the past and won’t impact on implementation. I am not convinced that disagreeing with Police’s clear public safety advice on the basis of there being no definition of ammunition in legislation is a sufficient reason to jeopardise public safety.

Cabinet has therefore agreed to defer the dealer obligations in the firearms registry from 2025 to 2027. This will allow more time for the Firearms Safety Authority and Police to build a workable system that makes it easy for dealers to input their stock to the registry.

Cabinet has not agreed to the proposal to defer the purchase ammunition as an activating circumstance from 2025, with an agree to disagree between National and Act. Our position on this was very clear; nothing at the expense of public safety.

Cabinet has also not agreed to undertake a second, further review of the firearms registry, again with an agree to disagree between National and Act. The review already undertaken was endorsed by Cabinet as meeting the requirements of the coalition agreement and the advice was that that would provide very little further value not already captured in the review just completed.

There is value in even a single life being saved by having a firearms registry in New Zealand. Firearms are not a thing New Zealanders should just have to learn to live with and nor are firearm deaths.

I want to assure everyone that I enjoy a strong, respectful working relationship with Minister McKee. Although there are some things we will debate and work through, we are both united on improving public safety.