Welcome guest, is this your first visit? Create Account now to join.
  • Login:

Welcome to the NZ Hunting and Shooting Forums.

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed.

Black Watch NZGR


User Tag List

+ Reply to Thread
Page 3 of 5 FirstFirst 12345 LastLast
Results 31 to 45 of 74
Like Tree88Likes

Thread: Secure Storage Requirements Police Consultation

  1. #31
    Member Savage1's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Posts
    2,368
    Quote Originally Posted by JWB View Post
    How dare you bring irony and common sense to this forum? You'll just confuse most of the readers.
    As a side note to Feral, when you're next having a coffee, ponder as to how police will know what you intend to store in your safe, when you have no intention of telling them? Does this proposed policy's acceptance mean that police will be able to compile their much desired, illegal register as a condition of your security inspection?
    Actually, to imply that a single thing like registration would prevent every gun crime or solve every one lacks common sense, and just shows a silly strawman argument being put forward in an attempt to discredit an idea. It in fact shows a complete lack of common sense or logic.

    If it was in fact committed with a registered pistol and not a modified A-Cat then it would be a pretty good piece of evidence if the projectiles were recovered.
    gadgetman and Cordite like this.

  2. #32
    Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    Taranaki
    Posts
    761
    Important -

    The email address supplied by NZ Police for submitting your response is WRONG. Should we be surprised at that I wonder.... ?

    The correct email address is secure-storage-firearms@police.govt.nz.

    The earlier one supplied had commas between police and co and govt.

    I will leave it to your call as whether this was a deliberate ploy to reduce the number of submissions ......

    check here for details https://www.facebook.com/kiwigunblog/
    Cats have nine lives-which makes them ideal for experimentation...

  3. #33
    Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2013
    Posts
    515
    Quote Originally Posted by Savage1 View Post
    Actually, to imply that a single thing like registration would prevent every gun crime or solve every one lacks common sense, and just shows a silly strawman argument being put forward in an attempt to discredit an idea. It in fact shows a complete lack of common sense or logic.

    If it was in fact committed with a registered pistol and not a modified A-Cat then it would be a pretty good piece of evidence if the projectiles were recovered.
    Mate, I respect your opinion; and appreciate you need to tow the party line - I even accept that that "registration will not prevent all gun crime" is actually a straw-man argument....
    The problem that I do have, is that there is a non-sequitur argument being pursued by the Police - the proposed changes will not target the problem: criminals will continue to obtain firearms through any means until the incentive is skewed the other way. They don't care about serial numbers or other identifying features and will "modify" a firearm as they see fit.
    Chris Cahill (O'connor before him...) and others within the Police have seriously eroded any credibility, respect or relationship with some of the most vetted people (FAL holders) in the country. There is no reason to trust the Police given the track record of late.
    I accept that there are changes required to the security of A-Cat firearms.... but it has to be lawful.... and it would be better to consult in good faith - something that the hierarchy appear to have forgotten. I appreciate you trying to defend the indefensible - but the approach being taken is seriously flawed....
    gadgetman and timattalon like this.

  4. #34
    Member Beavis's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Posts
    3,210
    That is really the main issue here. We can have a discussion on security. But giving us less than a week to make submissions (and really why the hell are we making submissions to the police?! They don't make regulations), and trying to, again, bend the law around A cat semi autos, and proposing to make license applicants sign a contract of dubious legality... they clearly don't have any respect for due process and it is becoming increasingly concerning. It is sad to see the relationship between shooters and police deteriorate so rapidly.
    gadgetman, Ryan, Banana and 4 others like this.

  5. #35
    Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2013
    Posts
    515
    Quote Originally Posted by Beavis View Post
    That is really the main issue here. We can have a discussion on security. But giving us less than a week to make submissions (and really why the hell are we making submissions to the police?! They don't make regulations), and trying to, again, bend the law around A cat semi autos, and proposing to make license applicants sign a contract of dubious legality... they clearly don't have any respect for due process and it is becoming increasingly concerning. It is sad to see the relationship between shooters and police deteriorate so rapidly.
    ...the other part of what I was trying to say....

  6. #36
    JWB
    JWB is offline
    Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2017
    Posts
    80
    Quote Originally Posted by Nickoli View Post
    I accept that there are changes required to the security of A-Cat firearms.....
    There is the problem! The gun haters have already won. Through ignorance and stupidity you have joined the enemy if the changes that you accept are required, are anything other than the repeal of the 1992 amendment.
    Locking up your valuables does not lower the crime rate, make society safer, or make your valuables less desirable to thieves.
    The victim of a burglary, has not created a criminal being though failing to prevent theft. To prevent theft, one would have to abolish property, should you wish to continue along that line of thought. Oh!, right, lead on to universal registration and confiscation, because in that fantasyland there are no firearms left to steal.
    Tommy, Steve123 and Cordite like this.

  7. #37
    Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2013
    Posts
    515
    Quote Originally Posted by JWB View Post
    There is the problem! The gun haters have already won. Through ignorance and stupidity you have joined the enemy if the changes that you accept are required, are anything other than the repeal of the 1992 amendment.
    Locking up your valuables does not lower the crime rate, make society safer, or make your valuables less desirable to thieves.
    The victim of a burglary, has not created a criminal being though failing to prevent theft. To prevent theft, one would have to abolish property, should you wish to continue along that line of thought. Oh!, right, lead on to universal registration and confiscation, because in that fantasyland there are no firearms left to steal.
    True, and I'm not going to argue with this - but I have seen some abysmal security signed off as acceptable and when those same people have a sh!tload of money tied up in a single rifle - why would you not try your best to ensure it as hard as possible to steal....
    The onus always has to be on the thief/unlawful....perhaps if we had a robust deterrent, these scumbags would only rummage through your wife's underwear drawer because the disincentive to steal firearms would be too great...if only...

  8. #38
    Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2013
    Location
    Western BoP
    Posts
    1,247
    Part of the issue with this is the plods are again trying to make policy niceties and wrap them up in a bag and bow job to make it a legal requirement.

    If they have an issue with the Arms Act, PNHQ should make a solid case for the Act to be Amended as per legislative requirements. This trying to 'game the system' (their words) is just an embarrassment.

    I suspect they are trying to pull a swifty over the new government in amongst the confusion of Pike River re-entries, Tax reviews, trying to hold a 3-way coalition together etc etc. To be fair, I had quite high hopes with this new government but after 1-odd month it just looks like a cluster of little f**ks with nobody driving the outfit...
    timattalon, Steve123 and gonetropo like this.

  9. #39
    Member Sasquatch's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2014
    Posts
    680
    Once the submissions are in and lets say they are ignored then what? I along with other endorsed members of society will not be constructing a strong room around my safe and I don't expect acat FAL holders who own semi's to change their current setup either - Why should we?

    It's not in the act so therefore any "policy" implemented from here on out is unlawful.
    40mm likes this.

  10. #40
    Member Beavis's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Posts
    3,210
    I wouldn't sign that poxy contract

  11. #41
    Member Steve123's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2015
    Location
    What used to be Franklin
    Posts
    1,001
    What concerns me is that I only found out about this shit through social media.
    It would have been sensible for them to consult with shooting clubs before pulling this shit.
    gonetropo and Cordite like this.

  12. #42
    Member Jexla's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2015
    Location
    Napier
    Posts
    798
    Quote Originally Posted by Steve123 View Post
    What concerns me is that I only found out about this shit through social media.
    It would have been sensible for them to consult with shooting clubs before pulling this shit.
    No it wouldn't because then people would have time to submit.
    I'm glad some of you are asking the right questions, why the hell are we submitting to the police? They're not legislators.
    I thank you guys for passing on info to the forum from social media, sometimes I get too busy to get on the forums
    gadgetman, Steve123 and 40mm like this.

  13. #43
    Member Danny's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Location
    Rotorua
    Posts
    2,796
    I'm just greatfull I've sold all my rifles now.
    Whew.

    Sent from my SM-N920I using Tapatalk
    Dan M

  14. #44
    Member Savage1's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Posts
    2,368
    I actually worded that post quite poorly, I think I was running on two hours sleep, two more than I'm running on now.

    I'm neither for nor against registration, it does seem to be doing a good job with BCE cat weapons however I'm not sold on it being worth it for the A cats.

    I'm not towing any party line, I just can't stand people putting out stupid strawman arguments which are easily debunked, they do more harm for their cause and will never convince a reasonable person.

    I just read the proposed policy, I don't really care about the A-cat stuff, I think a steel cabinet should be the minimum anyway. Surely they aren't trying to misrepresent S28 of the Arms Regulations 1992 though?! That's pretty clear cut, I'm not building a strong room.
    gadgetman, Nickoli, Tommy and 2 others like this.

  15. #45
    Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2015
    Location
    christchurch
    Posts
    2,288
    Quote Originally Posted by Savage1 View Post
    I actually worded that post quite poorly, I think I was running on two hours sleep, two more than I'm running on now.

    I'm neither for nor against registration, it does seem to be doing a good job with BCE cat weapons however I'm not sold on it being worth it for the A cats.

    I'm not towing any party line, I just can't stand people putting out stupid strawman arguments which are easily debunked, they do more harm for their cause and will never convince a reasonable person.

    I just read the proposed policy, I don't really care about the A-cat stuff, I think a steel cabinet should be the minimum anyway. Surely they aren't trying to misrepresent S28 of the Arms Regulations 1992 though?! That's pretty clear cut, I'm not building a strong room.
    a light steel cabinet lined with mdf or play is damn nasty to break into, or vice versa a mdf cabinet lined with light steel. the dissimilar types of materials involve make entry harder
    Savage1, gadgetman and Cordite like this.

 

 

Similar Threads

  1. E-CAT Endorsement Requirements
    By cambo in forum Firearms, Optics and Accessories
    Replies: 168
    Last Post: 26-11-2017, 07:41 AM
  2. FS: Surplus to requirements
    By Reindeer in forum Buy, Sell or Swap
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: 27-04-2017, 11:16 AM
  3. Replies: 4
    Last Post: 20-11-2016, 03:33 PM
  4. E-Cat requirements
    By Steve123 in forum Firearms, Optics and Accessories
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: 21-04-2016, 11:31 AM
  5. Firearm Storage Requirements
    By rs200nz in forum Firearm Safety
    Replies: 67
    Last Post: 30-03-2015, 08:07 PM

Tags for this Thread

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
Welcome to NZ Hunting and Shooting Forums! We see you're new here, or arn't logged in. Create an account, and Login for full access including our FREE BUY and SELL section Register NOW!!