Agree. First off, Macca, thanks for starting this thread, well worth talking about.
Security depends on so much more than the safe itself, several here having already raised points about sanding discs, etc etc for the determined. Hiding the safe in plain sight is massively valuable. Also avoiding blabbing about your guns (club membership may be a double edged sword in this regard). Separating out ammo and bolts from the a-cat firearm too (and why not separate bolts from ammo while we are at it?). I think the better approach is not to go the legislative way (give an inch and someone will take it a mile) but to just foster excellent security in excess of what is required of us -- while still allowing beginners a low-cost start-up in the sport. After all, an upright gun safe is a lot less hassle than a bracket and people eventually buy one if they have more than a few guns.
The point, re excempting .22s from the proposed E-cat storage requirements is not based on fact but springs from a misperception of them as purely sport weapons, maybe even less dangerous than say a .308 bolt action. Sure, it is unsuitable for stalking presidential cavalcades from book repository buildings, yet a silenced .22 semi is probably the one gun you don't want sick evil bastards to have, going out and about from house to house, room to room, killing people without the alarm getting raised too early: think David Gray (Aramoana) and Bain (Dunedin).
The ubiquity of the silenced .22 semi-auto in NZ is chilling, and you will not get a competent cop investigating a burglary draw a sigh of relief if you tell him, "It's only my suppressed Ruger 10/22 that's missing, just as well they left the powerful rifles!" There is really no case for excepting such guns, any guns, from such a proposed E-cat-safe-for-all idea. But then again, legislation is not always based purely on reason, it just has to appear reasonable.
Bookmarks