# Hunting > Firearm Safety >  Response to the Law and Order Select committee

## Beavis

Good morning


Hon Paula Bennett 

Minister of Police

14 June 2017

      Media Statement

Government response to firearms select committee report

Police Minister Paula Bennett has today responded to the Law and Order Select Committee report on issues relating to the illegal possession of firearms.

The Select Committees terms of reference were to focus on how widespread firearms possession is amongst criminals  including gangs, how those people who dont have a firearms licence come into possession of firearms and what changes, if any, would restrict the flow of firearms to criminals, gangs and people who dont hold a licence.

The committee made 20 recommendations. After careful consideration Ive accepted seven, rejected 12, and recommended one proceed with changes, Mrs Bennett says.

 We needed to strike the right balance between public safety and the rights of legal firearms owners. Although the report was well intended, I believe many of the recommendations would not decrease the flow of firearms to criminals and gangs but would unduly impact on legally licenced firearms users.

I appointed two independent firearms experts to advise me. Ive listened to their advice, advice from Police, read the recommendations from the select committee and Ive taken on board feedback from the public.

 After careful consideration I have added two more recommendations to my response. One proposes the introduction of the power to suspend licences pending decision on revocation. This will give Police an alternative to cancelling a licence, for example in situations where someone has been charged with family violence, or where there are security issues that need to be resolved.

 Im also proposing a Ministerial direction to the Police to require consultation with the firearms community when considering changes to the Arms Act and the interpretation of it.

 Nobody wants firearms getting into the hands of violent gang members but we also dont want over the top rules and restrictions to be placed on hunters and shooters who manage their firearms responsibly.

 My response to the report has been tabled in Parliament. We will now begin a policy process around the recommendations we are progressing which will involve consultation, looking at costs and any regulatory impacts before coming back to Cabinet for approval later this year, Mrs Bennett says. 

 Summary of the Government Response

Recommendation Number

Summarised Recommendation

Government Response Summarised
Sale and supply of firearms and ammunition
1
A firearms licence required to possess ammunition
Reject
2
A dealers licence required to sell ammunition
Reject
3
Dealers required to keep records of ammunition sales
Reject
4
Registration process for websites facilitating trading in firearms, parts, or ammunition
Amend recommendation - Do not introduce registration  but clarify mail order process applies to online sales in Arms Amendment Bill
5
Permit to procure extended to cover all sales or transfers of firearms (i.e. include A category firearms)
Reject - but improve efficiency in current licensing and permitting processes.
Definition of military-style semi-automatics
6
Investigate the creation of a category of restricted semi-automatic rifle and shotgun
Reject 
Effectiveness of licensing, training, and registering firearms
7
Implement firearm prohibition orders
Accept - include in the Arms (Firearm Prohibition Orders and Firearms Licences) Amendment Bill
8
Codify the fit and proper criteria in the Arms Act
Reject
9
Implement a stand-down period after licence revocation
Accept - include a 12 month stand -own period in the Arms (Firearm Prohibition Orders and Firearms Licences) Amendment Bill
10
Clarify that gang members or prospects must not be considered fit and proper to possess firearms
Accept - include in the Arms (Firearm Prohibition Orders and Firearms Licences) Amendment Bill
11
Require Police to record serial numbers of all firearms upon renewal of licence or inspection of premises
Reject  voluntary process to continue
Criminal offending with firearms
12
Review the penalties in the Arms Act
Accept - progress in Arms Amendment Bill
13
Treat dealer offending as aggravated at sentencing
Reject
14
Determine appropriate security standards for A category licences
Accept - Police/firearms community advisory forum  already commenced this process
15
Secure storage confirmed before licence or endorsement received
Reject
16
Allow Police to enter premises to inspect security of A category firearms
Reject
17
Failure to comply with storage regulations to result in mandatory revocation
Reject - but note new suspension of licence

Reducing the number of grey firearms
18
Clarify and publicise the extent of amnesty provisions in the Arms Act 1983
Accept - to progress in Arms Amendment Bill
19
Police publicise amnesty provisions
Reject
20
Check that firearms brought in on visitors permit are exported or transferred legally
Accept (administrative)
Additional Government Recommendations
1
Provide the power to suspend licences
Include in the Arms (Firearm Prohibition Orders and Firearms Licences) Amendment Bill
2
Police to improve its consultative processes with the firearms community
Propose to give a Ministerial Directive to this end

----------


## Pengy

I am liking what I see here so far.
Just keep in mind that it aint over till the fat lady sings  :Thumbsup:

----------


## Savage1

At a glance that looks really good!

----------


## zimmer

> I am liking what I see here so far.
> Just keep in mind that it aint over till the fat lady sings


Dead right, maybe a battle won but the war will continue.....

----------


## JoshC

Dead right Zimmer. We all need to keep an eye on things and keep the foot on the throat so to speak  :Have A Nice Day:

----------


## Survy

Thumbs up, looks good. It could be worse, she could have strangled us on it,  but it seems sensible.
And it clarifys a couple of points too.

----------


## Jexla

I think this shows the power of social media.

----------


## Rushy

> I am liking what I see here so far.
> Just keep in mind that it aint over till the fat lady sings


She is the proverbial fat lady Pengy and as far as I am concerned she has demonstrated a bunch of good common sense in arriving at these conclusions.  Paula if you are reading this, on behalf of the wider firearms community I would like the opportunity to buy you a Waikato.  Be warned though that acceptance will expose you to the good looks and charming personality of a Jigilo extraordinaire.  Still, the offer stands.

----------


## paulyc

Yep looks good, So now can I get my gun list back from the Police ?

----------


## gadgetman

> She is the proverbial fat lady Pengy and as far as I am concerned she has demonstrated a bunch of good common sense in arriving at these conclusions.  Paula if you are reading this, on behalf of the wider firearms community I would like the opportunity to buy you a Waikato.  Be warned though that acceptance will expose you to the good looks and charming personality of a Jigilo extraordinaire.  Still, the offer stands.


No Rushy, we must retain her on our side. No point in punishment.

----------


## Sylvester

Naww, Cahill is upset that *his* lobbying of the Minister wasn't good enough. 

https://youtu.be/V6obdmfCOI8

----------


## Friwi

We ll see the development in the next few days, but I reckon that individually we should send her a good message thanking her for a wise decision, showing our support to her .
On my way back from work I could hear the radio NZ news saying how her descision "failed the police recommendation" and chris Cahill was all over it. But frankly she stood her ground and took a fairly just descision. Good on her and stuff the media!

----------


## gadgetman

> Naww, Cahill is upset that *his* lobbying of the Minister wasn't good enough. 
> 
> https://youtu.be/V6obdmfCOI8


I heard him on the news earlier. Think I shed a tear.

----------


## Jexla

For anyone that missed it:

Police: Rejection of firearms advice will mean &#39;more people being shot&#39;

He must have some pretty thick skin if he reads what we post, and what people comment on it lol.

----------


## inglishill

Cahill is the new Alpers, hopefully he will bugger off someplace else soon as well.

----------


## Scouser

> She is the proverbial fat lady Pengy and as far as I am concerned she has demonstrated a bunch of good common sense in arriving at these conclusions.  Paula if you are reading this, on behalf of the wider firearms community I would like the opportunity to buy you a Waikato.  Be warned though that acceptance will expose you to the good looks and charming personality of a Jigilo extraordinaire.  Still, the offer stands.


FFS Rushy don't get 'Big Al' out now and fuk it up........ :Sick:

----------


## Taff

You have to wonder if the police shot themselves in the foot by publishing the new arms code , without first getting ministerial permission ,and tryin to undermine the authority of the minister, or had her opinions been leaked to them and they were hoping for a "fait accompli" in some country's this would be considered treason, pity it's not hear.

----------


## keneff

> She is the proverbial fat lady Pengy and as far as I am concerned she has demonstrated a bunch of good common sense in arriving at these conclusions.  Paula if you are reading this, on behalf of the wider firearms community I would like the opportunity to buy you a Waikato.  Be warned though that acceptance will expose you to the good looks and charming personality of a Jigilo extraordinaire.  Still, the offer stands.


Jigilo, Rushy? Really?? As far asI'm concerned, Paula has done her job - actually listened to the electorate, And won't Cahill be having a hissy right about now. Hope it gives him a heart attack, along with the pom reformists at PNHQ. The back door isn't always open, bastards. Time to stop trying to sneak up on your fellow citizens.

----------


## stug

Send Paula Bennett an email to say thanks P.Bennett@ministers.govt.nz

----------


## jakewire

Already did.

----------


## mikee

> Jigilo, Rushy? Really?? As far asI'm concerned, Paula has done her job - actually listened to the electorate, And won't Cahill be having a hissy right about now. Hope it gives him a heart attack, along with the pom reformists at PNHQ. The back door isn't always open, bastards. Time to stop trying to sneak up on your fellow citizens.


Some times when you poke a hibernating bear enough it wakes up ........................

----------


## JWB

This exercise is called bait and switch. Those of you who have thanked the minister have scored an own goal. Licence holders have gained no respite from persecution. More controls are  about to be inflicted upon us. Past police policy and bullying is about to be legitimized. 

 My reply to the ministers statement,
"The minister keeps referring to "Arms (Firearm Prohibition Orders and Firearms Licences) Amendment Bill". This I know nothing about.
This report is a disaster for firearms owners, as it legitimises current illegal activities inflicted on us by police. Increases the potential for further persecution, while giving the public a sense of relief that, "well, that wasn't so bad after all".
The mail-order process doesn't need clarification. It is clearly set out in the legislation. The minister needed to instruct police to obey the law.
A stand-down period after licence revocation. Where the hell is that going? Given that most licence revocations are the result of acrimonious relationships or police punishment for a citizen insisting that police follow the law, will this be used to further intimidate the licence holder, should they show any semblance of developing a spine?
Recording of serial numbers- voluntary process to continue. There is no voluntary process. There is only the police assembling a dysfunctional registry to condition the public to accepting registration. Where is the secure storage for this illegal process and why are public funds supporting it.
Determine appropriate security standards for A licences. That is just weasel words for increasing the cost to licence holders  though increased security costs. Something the police are doing already through illegal policy and bullying. The legislation is quite clear as to the security requirements to deter children and opportunist thieves.
Licence suspension  Just another tool for the thugs and bullies to use against the dissenters to their vision of a police state. No proof required, just the word of the blue thug.
Require the police to consult with the firearms community! How do you do that, when there is no body that represents licence holders. FCAF? how well does that work out? There is a power imbalance. The police hold all the cards. Dissent is ignored and only agreement is allowed.
Nowhere in this report is there a rollback of the intrusive and  obscene conditions imposed upon licence holders by the 1983 act and it's amendments. The imposition of the need to prove ones innocence goes against the basis of our Westminster justice concept of innocent until proven guilty. The arms act  in itself is a direct affront to our justice system and society.
Nothing the minister is proposing will address criminal offending with firearms, or criminals acquiring firearms. The only thing that will achieve that, is for police to get back to catching burglars, instead of persecuting the victims of burglary. A return to the principles of policing as devised by Robert Peel might be in order as the police clearly lack direction."

----------


## kotuku

> This exercise is called bait and switch. Those of you who have thanked the minister have scored an own goal. Licence holders have gained no respite from persecution. More controls are  about to be inflicted upon us. Past police policy and bullying is about to be legitimized. 
> 
>  My reply to the ministers statement,
> "The minister keeps referring to "Arms (Firearm Prohibition Orders and Firearms Licences) Amendment Bill". This I know nothing about.
> This report is a disaster for firearms owners, as it legitimises current illegal activities inflicted on us by police. Increases the potential for further persecution, while giving the public a sense of relief that, "well, that wasn't so bad after all".
> The mail-order process doesn't need clarification. It is clearly set out in the legislation. The minister needed to instruct police to obey the law.
> A stand-down period after licence revocation. Where the hell is that going? Given that most licence revocations are the result of acrimonious relationships or police punishment for a citizen insisting that police follow the law, will this be used to further intimidate the licence holder, should they show any semblance of developing a spine?
> Recording of serial numbers- voluntary process to continue. There is no voluntary process. There is only the police assembling a dysfunctional registry to condition the public to accepting registration. Where is the secure storage for this illegal process and why are public funds supporting it.
> Determine appropriate security standards for A licences. That is just weasel words for increasing the cost to licence holders  though increased security costs. Something the police are doing already through illegal policy and bullying. The legislation is quite clear as to the security requirements to deter children and opportunist thieves.
> ...


theres always one party pooper eh what.!!! cuse me guvnor -ya middle moniker isnt pessimist by any chance -just askin. no reply neccessary.

----------


## kotuku

> Jigilo, Rushy? Really?? As far asI'm concerned, Paula has done her job - actually listened to the electorate, And won't Cahill be having a hissy right about now. Hope it gives him a heart attack, along with the pom reformists at PNHQ. The back door isn't always open, bastards. Time to stop trying to sneak up on your fellow citizens.


Sir I likes your style.
 now Rushy i hopes you aint been hoeing into them there horny goatweed pills they advertise as ala naturale for gettin the old bloke to stand to attention for a lady. wee know Paulas cute and cuddly and bugger me with a pineapple and call me augie ,shes a bloody poli with COMMONSENSE and a sense of FAIR PLAY,but until we get a centrefold of Paula in the camo with a trusty 12g on the hip and and ar15 tucked up under the armpit ,Im gonna hold my breath!


 Ok thats a tad radical ,so im gonna start a collection for a camo mankini for Rushy to wear when he meets Paula!!! 

Actually guys Im inclined to think Paula read  Justice Jillian Mallons scathing comments re police conduct in the hearing over the freestanding pistol grip issue,or shes actually had a wee chat with the Honourable judge in person.If Chris Cahill could take some time to read the same judgement he may well want to temper his tantrum somewhat ,cause again like minister Madam Judge pulled no bloody punches-it was a subtle as a boot in the nuts from an irate scrub bull!

----------


## gadgetman

> Sir I likes your style.
>  now Rushy i hopes you aint been hoeing into them there horny goatweed pills they advertise as ala naturale for gettin the old bloke to stand to attention for a lady. wee know Paulas cute and cuddly and bugger me with a pineapple and call me augie ,shes a bloody poli with COMMONSENSE and a sense of FAIRPLAY,but until we get a centrefold of paula in the camo with a trusty 12g on the hip and and ar15 tucked up under the armpit ,Im gonna hold my breath!
>  ok thats a tad radical ,so im gonna start a collection fro a camo mankini for rushy to wear when he meets paula!!!


Mate, having met Rushy, I won't be chipping in for the outfit.

----------


## kotuku

then you truly disappoint me you lithe version of a racing king crab!!!whaaaaat are you on the nightshift good sir???? or are you working on a crafty move to modify Chris Cahill into a clone of Donald Trump.
Ps 
be kind to our Syderrs-cause i wasnt,and  his ivory tower is unfortunately cheap taiwanese plastic.
 how TR still kicking butt i hope -go them kackhanders

----------


## timattalon

> This exercise is called bait and switch. Those of you who have thanked the minister have scored an own goal. Licence holders have gained no respite from persecution. More controls are  about to be inflicted upon us. Past police policy and bullying is about to be legitimized. 
> 
>  My reply to the ministers statement,
> 
> "The minister keeps referring to "Arms (Firearm Prohibition Orders and Firearms Licences) Amendment Bill". This I know nothing about.
> 
> This report is a disaster for firearms owners, as it legitimises current illegal activities inflicted on us by police. Increases the potential for further persecution, while giving the public a sense of relief that, "well, that wasn't so bad after all".
> 
> The mail-order process doesn't need clarification. It is clearly set out in the legislation. *The minister needed to instruct police to obey the law.
> ...


You do raise a number of very valid points. The one I have highlighted in bold is a _very_ good point. I did put some spaces between them to make them easier to separate too.

----------


## Sideshow

Yep it looks good but.....I don't know!

Can't trust these guys!

Don't give them an inch!

Here he is on the radio asking us to meet him halfway? Why? Why should we meet him halfway?

Looks like he's already done a back room deal with criminals and said you know what guys carry on! Your all good, I'll stick it to the law abiding!

And as for ZB radio where was the rebuttal? Why not let him lose on his high horse! Very poor reporting no preparation!
Did even ask a hard question! Very weak if you ask me, he mars well have rolled over and had him scratch his belly!

So where in deed dose it leave us?

----------


## Rushy

> FFS Rushy don't get 'Big Al' out now and fuk it up........


Scouser, big Al and the twins are always ready to stand up for a woman of Paula's capability and you just know that I will take one for this team any day.  Of course the peril would be that she could have the Rushy, go all mushy and then hang a selfie of her and me on the DPM' office wall and then all hell would break loose as all the female members start seeing through green eyes. Oh my god the questions across the floor in parliament would expose me to the wider female population and then ....... Oops rambling ha ha ha ha

----------


## 308

It leaves us well aware of what the police are after and that we have to implacably oppose their bullshit and vote accordingly

Once a traitor, always a traitor

----------


## Rushy

> Jigilo, Rushy? Really??


Someone has to do the job Keneff.  Ha ha ha ha

----------


## Rushy

> Mate, having met Rushy, I won't be chipping in for the outfit.


A fine display of good judgement GM.  I am far to much man for any kind of kini to contain.

----------


## Sideshow

It's a bit depressing.
Growing up trusting the Police!
And it's come to this! Really rather sad :Oh Noes:  
If this is the tip of the ice berg what's the rest look like :O O: 

I'm all for helping the man on the street, but if the party line is this?

----------


## Ryan

> If this is the tip of the ice berg what's the rest look like

----------


## Beavis

> Yep it looks good but.....I don't know!
> 
> Can't trust these guys!
> 
> Don't give them an inch!
> 
> Here he is on the radio asking us to meet him halfway? Why? Why should we meet him halfway?
> 
> Looks like he's already done a back room deal with criminals and said you know what guys carry on! Your all good, I'll stick it to the law abiding!
> ...


His meeting half way would probably mean an end to owning semi autos etc. He has stated that "nobody needs them". It's the way it always is with anti-gun lobbyists. We don't want to make life hard for "legitimate" gun owners. We just want to register everything, increase the cost of security, ideally ban or otherwise heavily restrict the ownership of semi autos, clamp down on gun imports, carry out warrentless inspections of peoples property. Can't see how any of this would be objectionable to any reasonable gun owner.

----------


## Taff

The only argument I have with some of the above comments is the gun storage, talking to people weekly who have had guns stolen, I find it strange that they don,t have a gun safe, they want quotes for guns stolen, usually with a value of  a grand or more, just for the gun. How many people leave that amount of money sitting in a wardrobe, they won,t pay to prevent the thefts, but spend more on increased insurance premiums.

----------


## PaulNZ

> This exercise is called bait and switch. Those of you who have thanked the minister have scored an own goal. Licence holders have gained no respite from persecution. More controls are  about to be inflicted upon us. Past police policy and bullying is about to be legitimized. 
> 
> Etc, etc.


I believe we should acknowledge steps in the right direction as much as we oppose steps in the wrong direction. Surely you agree that the action of the Police Minister in this instance could have worked out a lot worse for the shooting public? Of course it doesn't mean that everyone should relax thinking that commonsense has prevailed. But if the only response to a decision which actually worked reasonably in our favor is more complaints, then from a politicians viewpoint we become the group that "They're never going to be happy regardless of what we do, so why should we cost ourselves votes from the other end of the political spectrum trying? Screw them."

I for one am going to email Paula Bennett my thanks and support, along with the hope that the rights of law-abiding firearms owners will be upheld going forward.

----------


## JWB

> I believe we should acknowledge steps in the right direction as much as we oppose steps in the wrong direction. Surely you agree that the action of the Police Minister in this instance could have worked out a lot worse for the shooting public? Of course it doesn't mean that everyone should relax thinking that commonsense has prevailed. But if the only response to a decision which actually worked reasonably in our favor is more complaints, then from a politicians viewpoint we become the group that "They're never going to be happy regardless of what we do, so why should we cost ourselves votes from the other end of the political spectrum trying? Screw them."
> 
> I for one am going to email Paula Bennett my thanks and support, along with the hope that the rights of law-abiding firearms owners will be upheld going forward.


You just don't get it do you? The minister is not upholding the rights of law-abiding firearms owners. 

There will be a new arms amendment which will include the illegal practices that police have previously carried out as policy.

There will be no addressing problems in the current act. No repeal of the reverse onus conditions in the current act.

Police will continue their current policy of inflicting the Thorp report upon licence holders through bully tactics. What works so well for them will not change.

Police will have additional tools to threaten and intimidate licence holders who insist that they follow the law.

Nothing in the amended act will stop criminals being criminals.

What is needed is for a repeal of the whole act. This will allow police to stop focusing on control of sporting equipment, and get back to dealing with violent assault, murder, theft and burglary, which are all amply provided for under the crimes act.

----------


## Beetroot

> The only argument I have with some of the above comments is the gun storage, talking to people weekly who have had guns stolen, I find it strange that they don,t have a gun safe, they want quotes for guns stolen, usually with a value of  a grand or more, just for the gun. How many people leave that amount of money sitting in a wardrobe, they won,t pay to prevent the thefts, but spend more on increased insurance premiums.


I agree on the storage.
I believe there should be stricter rules on A-Cat storage, which at a minimum would be a steel safe. Some of what has previously been allowed is a joke.
I know that the rules are to stop opportunist thieves, but some of the gun racks or trigger locks bolted/screwed to the wall barely stop someone armed with a screw driver/crow bar.

I definitely think that gun owners need to stand up for their rights, as there is no one else who is going to to do it. But I worry that if we just oppose any change and don't accept that there are areas that need improvement, then the Police and public are just going to think we are crazy gun people and will do what they want anyway.
Unfortunately there is an imbalance in power and guns are not popular with the general public, especially semi-auto guns.
So if we want to be seen as the good, sensible, responsible people and the Police as the bad guys we need to continue to point out wrong doings, but also accept that there needs change in some areas.

I believe some areas we can be happy to allow change is:
Security, an improvement on minimum standards are needed
Penalties, increased penalties for people who do break the law
Recording of serial numbers, I believe it should be a requirement that gun owners personally record serial numbers and information on firearms, so if their guns are stolen the police are able to tell for certain if the guns are found in subsequent investigations.

The angle the Police Association is coming from is that too many guns are being being stolen and used by criminals, so if we can come up with ways to address this problem, they will have little grounds to increase gun control. 
As I said, if the Police/Government decided they really wanted to ban semi-auto they could, if they put as much pressure as they do in Europe and the USA we don't have the NRA or enough people to oppose them.

----------


## Danger Mouse

> His meeting half way would probably mean an end to owning semi autos etc. He has stated that "nobody needs them". It's the way it always is with anti-gun lobbyists. We don't want to make life hard for "legitimate" gun owners. We just want to register everything, increase the cost of security, ideally ban or otherwise heavily restrict the ownership of semi autos, clamp down on gun imports, carry out warrentless inspections of peoples property. Can't see how any of this would be objectionable to any reasonable gun owner.


yip, make outrageous demands and then label you unreasonable for rejecting them.

----------


## JWB

> I agree on the storage.
> I believe there should be stricter rules on A-Cat storage, which at a minimum would be a steel safe. Some of what has previously been allowed is a joke.
> I know that the rules are to stop opportunist thieves, but some of the gun racks or trigger locks bolted/screwed to the wall barely stop someone armed with a screw driver/crow bar.
> 
> I definitely think that gun owners need to stand up for their rights, as there is no one else who is going to to do it. But I worry that if we just oppose any change and don't accept that there are areas that need improvement, then the Police and public are just going to think we are crazy gun people and will do what they want anyway.
> Unfortunately there is an imbalance in power and guns are not popular with the general public, especially semi-auto guns.
> So if we want to be seen as the good, sensible, responsible people and the Police as the bad guys we need to continue to point out wrong doings, but also accept that there needs change in some areas.
> 
> I believe some areas we can be happy to allow change is:
> ...


This is called "Appeasement", which means to try to conciliate or placate a potential aggressor by making concessions, at the sacrifice of ones principles. 
Exponents of appeasement are known as "Nevilles" after its most famous practitioner.
History has shown appeasement to be an unsuccessful strategy  in dealing with bullies.

----------


## Sideshow

> This is called "Appeasement", which means to try to conciliate or placate a potential aggressor by making concessions, at the sacrifice of ones principles. 
> Exponents of appeasement are known as "Nevilles" after its most famous practitioner.
> History has shown appeasement to be an unsuccessful strategy  in dealing with bullies.


So I guess that is this  "peace in our time" :Zomg:

----------


## Beetroot

> This is called "Appeasement", which means to try to conciliate or placate a potential aggressor by making concessions, at the sacrifice of ones principles. 
> Exponents of appeasement are known as "Nevilles" after its most famous practitioner.
> History has shown appeasement to be an unsuccessful strategy  in dealing with bullies.


It's not appeasement if there are areas that need/can be improved on.
I'm not suggesting we make a deal to give up something in order to leave us alone for a few years, I'm suggesting that we acknowledge areas that can be improved to show that we are willing to work with them to get the result we want.
I don't see making improvements in security sacrificing ones principles, if anything opposing change just because we don't want to co-operated when some change may be beneficial, would be sacrificing ones principles.

----------


## GravelBen

> You just don't get it do you? The minister is not upholding the rights of law-abiding firearms owners. 
> 
> There will be a new arms amendment which will include the illegal practices that police have previously carried out as policy.
> 
> There will be no addressing problems in the current act. No repeal of the reverse onus conditions in the current act.
> 
> Police will continue their current policy of inflicting the Thorp report upon licence holders through bully tactics. What works so well for them will not change.
> 
> Police will have additional tools to threaten and intimidate licence holders who insist that they follow the law.
> ...


Please tell us how you know what is going to be in the arms amendment bill that hasn't been written yet.

----------


## P38

> Sir I likes your style.
>  now Rushy i hopes you aint been hoeing into them there horny goatweed pills they advertise as ala naturale for gettin the old bloke to stand to attention for a lady. wee know Paulas cute and cuddly and bugger me with a pineapple and call me augie ,shes a bloody poli with COMMONSENSE and a sense of FAIR PLAY,but until we get a centrefold of Paula in the camo with a trusty 12g on the hip and and ar15 tucked up under the armpit ,Im gonna hold my breath!
> 
> 
>  Ok thats a tad radical ,so im gonna start a collection for a camo mankini for Rushy to wear when he meets Paula!!! 
> 
> Actually guys Im inclined to think Paula read  Justice Jillian Mallons scathing comments re police conduct in the hearing over the freestanding pistol grip issue,or shes actually had a wee chat with the Honourable judge in person.If Chris Cahill could take some time to read the same judgement he may well want to temper his tantrum somewhat ,cause again like minister Madam Judge pulled no bloody punches-it was a subtle as a boot in the nuts from an irate scrub bull!


 @kotuku 

 @Rushy has beaten you to it mate, I believe he has a whole collection of these things now.  :Wink: 



Cheers ( I think)
Pete

----------


## gadgetman

> @kotuku 
> 
>  @Rushy has beaten you to it mate, I believe he has a whole collection of these things now. 
> 
> Attachment 70604
> 
> Cheers ( I think)
> Pete


Ahhhh! A Rushy mini me.  :XD:

----------


## Sasquatch

> I don't see making improvements in security sacrificing ones principles, if anything opposing change just because we don't want to co-operated when some change may be beneficial, would be sacrificing ones principles.


I agree with what has been mentioned for raising the standards for security but there should always be the previous option as before and it shouldn't be taken away. Why not have both? A safe in the garage and a firearm locked up in a wardrobe/wall bracket may be a viable option for some people especially for _their_ security.

It would also be a shame if the security standards become so high that it then becomes a financial burden to FAL owners.

----------


## Jexla

> I believe some areas we can be happy to allow change is:
> Security, an improvement on minimum standards are needed
> Penalties, increased penalties for people who do break the law
> Recording of serial numbers, I believe it should be a requirement that gun owners personally record serial numbers and information on firearms, so if their guns are stolen the police are able to tell for certain if the guns are found in subsequent investigations.


Minimum security requirements don't require a law change, just common sense by gun owners and the vetting officers who check the security of gun owners.
Penalties for violent crime with a firearm are a joke as they stand, we all know and agree to that.
Recording of serial numbers. I agree, everyone SHOULD keep a personal record of their serial numbers, but instead of making more legislation (which is the last  thing any country needs), how about we aim for education?
Why do we not drum in to people (via MSC, police firearm safety campaigns, gun stores, COLFO, SSANZ, FOUNZ, NRA, PNZ etc etc)  that it is a great idea to personally record the serial numbers of their firearms in the case that they get stolen?




> As I said, if the Police/Government decided they really wanted to ban semi-auto they could, if they put as much pressure as they do in Europe and the USA we don't have the NRA or enough people to oppose them.


If that were the case, how did we not end up with so many of the recommendations in the report? You think that was blind luck?

A lot of people put in a lot of work to make this happen. So many people took part of the democratic process that is used to further restrict and take away gun owners freedoms and thanks to that, we ended up with a "not as bad as it could be" result.

----------


## kotuku

> The bit about suspension of licenses is actually a very practical solution to one of the major clusterf**ks in the current legislation.  There is no option to prevent someone who is involved in domestic violence or found to have a medical issue (like depression), from having access to firearms without fully REVOKING the person's firearms licence.  Currently, you either are fit and proper and can hold your licence, or you aren't.  Currently no chance to take a bit of time and see how things play out in the event of an issue with depression that stems from the loss of a family member or a major natural disaster like the CHCH earthquakes...
> 
> The ability to SUSPEND a licence for a temporary amount of time while information is gathered etc is actually a major step forwards without forcing someone who's licence is revoked to undergo the costs of a courts challenge to have it returned.  That's actually a major win both for owners and for the public at large, similar to what currently happens with driver's licences and a few other qualifications.  Kudos for the recommendation...


mauser old chap ive had depression for 30+yrs and all it required was a letter from the GP to allow me to retain the license.I frankly couldnt give a hoot if the whole world knows -Im a nurse in mental health ,ive a mental illness so what.i said to the vetting officer "go read my health file if ya want ,but dont blame me if youre asleep at the end of the first page-he laughed like hell and said no worries.
 actually was recently privvy to a case where an FAL is suspended infinitum at this point ,as opposed to revoked and all parties think its a commonsense solution.

 now i know its election year but hell its highly unusual to see polis from both sides of the house back wee Paulas decision.of course the drooping lip of Mr Christopher Cahill was also visible but reality Christopher old bean is in this case your policemen are in the minority ,and frankly if the article I read is correct maybe some more training is needed in actioning present firearms law correctly not as assorted AOs think it should be.
 i bet Greg O'connor had a quiet snigger at that own goal.
 of course as alluded to on here it remains to be seen if polis will listen to the FAL sector in future,but judging by statements made most were pretty impressed with the FAL constituents feedback.a bloody big thank you to all you guys -mighty bloody effort.

----------


## kotuku

> @kotuku 
> 
>  @Rushy has beaten you to it mate, I believe he has a whole collection of these things now. 
> 
> Attachment 70604
> 
> Cheers ( I think)
> Pete


faaaark hes almost as handsome as me and has a bloody puku to match!. :ORLY: .....be jasus is that a donald trump cowlick pokinout under his hat too?? :Zomg: now i is bloody jealous :Psmiley: 
PS paula will luv a rub of the green. :Psychotic:

----------


## JWB

> Please tell us how you know what is going to be in the arms amendment bill that hasn't been written yet.


 Certainly. By reading and comprehending the ministers report that she tabled in the house, and the ministers press release. Both confirm the actions being taken in the new "Arms (Firearm Prohibition Orders and Firearms Licences) Amendment Bill" as a response to the select committee report. I have no idea what else will be in there, but given that police are drafting this bill, be prepared for even more nasty surprises.

----------


## Taff

> This is called "Appeasement", which means to try to conciliate or placate a potential aggressor by making concessions, at the sacrifice of ones principles. 
> Exponents of appeasement are known as "Nevilles" after its most famous practitioner.
> History has shown appeasement to be an unsuccessful strategy  in dealing with bullies.


Actually as most historians will agree "Nevilles" or a "chamberlain" is a misinterpretation of what happened, Great Britain was in no position to go to war with Germany in 1938, having let its armed forces run down, the following two years enabled Great Britain to rebuild its forces and prepare for war.

----------


## gadgetman

> faaaark hes almost as handsome as me and has a bloody puku to match!......be jasus is that a donald trump cowlick pokinout under his hat too??now i is bloody jealous
> PS paula will luv a rub of the green.


  @kotuku, he might be almost as handsome as you, but he's twice your height.

----------


## kotuku

> Certainly. By reading and comprehending the ministers report that she tabled in the house, and the ministers press release. Both confirm the actions being taken in the new "Arms (Firearm Prohibition Orders and Firearms Licences) Amendment Bill" as a response to the select committee report. I have no idea what else will be in there, but given that police are drafting this bill, be prepared for even more nasty surprises.



hello we have chris cahill posting under a bloody covert entity or mate are you a psychic.coppers drafting the bill-GO READ JUSTICE MALLONS JUDGEMENT AND COMMENTS TO THE COPPERS fFS.they do not draft this countries laws ,full bloody stop despite what you or jesus h christ may think!

----------


## 10-Ring

> Minimum security requirements don't require a law change, just common sense by gun owners and the vetting officers who check the security of gun owners.....


Abysmal A-Cat security is rampant, particularly among the older generation. In many ways you can't blame them as their flimsy MDF and similar wooden gun cabinets with gaps and a tiny lock passed muster ten years ago and prior. One senior gentleman said to me today, "I've had this gun safe for thirty years and it's done the job so I don't see why I should have to change it". His gun cabinet would take even the dumbest of thieves about twenty seconds to break open. Of course, he's never had the misfortune of being burgled.

Vetting personal need solid, straight forward standards that aren't open to interpretation for A-Cat security. The only way to achieve that is to make a law change that everyone understands. Counting on common sense is a lost cause because many people don't possess it.

----------


## Rushy

> @kotuku 
> 
>  @Rushy has beaten you to it mate, I believe he has a whole collection of these things now. 
> 
> Attachment 70604
> 
> Cheers ( I think)
> Pete


You bastard Pete.  Have you been taking photos over my fence?  Ha ha ha ha.

----------


## Danger Mouse

> Abysmal A-Cat security is rampant, particularly among the older generation. In many ways you can't blame them as their flimsy MDF and similar wooden gun cabinets with gaps and a tiny lock passed muster ten years ago and prior. One senior gentleman said to me today, "I've had this gun safe for thirty years and it's done the job so I don't see why I should have to change it". His gun cabinet would take even the dumbest of thieves about twenty seconds to break open. Of course, he's never had the misfortune of being burgled.
> 
> Vetting personal need solid, straight forward standards that aren't open to interpretation for A-Cat security. The only way to achieve that is to make a law change that everyone understands. Counting on common sense is a lost cause because many people don't possess it.


agreed, must be wood of x thickness, with a   padlock meeting x standard. No mdf or weetbix.

----------


## Jexla

> Abysmal A-Cat security is rampant, particularly among the older generation. In many ways you can't blame them as their flimsy MDF and similar wooden gun cabinets with gaps and a tiny lock passed muster ten years ago and prior. One senior gentleman said to me today, "I've had this gun safe for thirty years and it's done the job so I don't see why I should have to change it". His gun cabinet would take even the dumbest of thieves about twenty seconds to break open. Of course, he's never had the misfortune of being burgled.
> 
> Vetting personal need solid, straight forward standards that aren't open to interpretation for A-Cat security. The only way to achieve that is to make a law change that everyone understands. Counting on common sense is a lost cause because many people don't possess it.


Like I already said, we do not need more legislation. Legislation is not the answer to everything. Like you said yourself, the inspectors need easy to understand guidelines that make it clear that a shitty wooden box wouldn't be okay.

I will note that I have a friend who made a safe out of wood and some brick that goes on the wall behind a fire place and I have no doubt it would have been harder to get into than some A category safes sold commercially. (He replaced this as soon as he could afford to with an E category compliant safe even though he has no endorsements).

Therefore I don't think it's okay to just outright ban the use of wood itself.

----------


## gadgetman

> Abysmal A-Cat security is rampant, particularly among the older generation. In many ways you can't blame them as their flimsy MDF and similar wooden gun cabinets with gaps and a tiny lock passed muster ten years ago and prior. One senior gentleman said to me today, "I've had this gun safe for thirty years and it's done the job so I don't see why I should have to change it". His gun cabinet would take even the dumbest of thieves about twenty seconds to break open. Of course, he's never had the misfortune of being burgled.
> 
> Vetting personal need solid, straight forward standards that aren't open to interpretation for A-Cat security. The only way to achieve that is to make a law change that everyone understands. Counting on common sense is a lost cause because many people don't possess it.


I think the current law is reasonably good in it's description as it says what the design intention is. That design intention is insufficient however for today's world.

----------


## GravelBen

> Like I already said, we do not need more legislation. Legislation is not the answer to everything. Like you said yourself, the inspectors need easy to understand guidelines that make it clear that a shitty wooden box wouldn't be okay.
> 
> I will note that I have a friend who made a safe out of wood and some brick that goes on the wall behind a fire place and I have no doubt it would have been harder to get into than some A category safes sold commercially. (He replaced this as soon as he could afford to with an E category compliant safe even though he has no endorsements).
> 
> Therefore I don't think it's okay to just outright ban the use of wood itself.


Have to agree with that. You could have a safe/gun room built into the house with reinforced concrete on 3 sides and a wooden door but a "metal safes only" rule would make it fail, sure you could hack through the door with an axe but it wouldn't be any quicker or easier than opening many commercial A-cat safes with the same axe.

Maybe AOs need clearer guidelines because you do hear of some strange interpretations of what is acceptable or not, but every time I've had gun security examined the AO has been practical and interested in it being fit for purpose rather than just ticking off a checklist of 'features'.

Had a good chat with one of them about racks/chains etc, his attitude to that was that they're ok for occasional use but he doesn't like the idea of people using them for permanent long-term storage, especially with multiple guns. Mind you I knew someone who used a chain around a rafter to secure an old shotgun that only got used about once a year, it was probably safer than most safes because any would-be thief would have to climb into the ceiling cavity to find it!

----------


## timattalon

I have had a rack built for Mums place. AO was happy. It is only so when I go up that end of the country I have somewhere to put  my shooter(s) if I need to do some grocery shopping etc. It is OK for a few days etc but I would never leave one there if I was not staying there at the time.

----------


## zimmer

> Have to agree with that. You could have a safe/gun room built into the house with reinforced concrete on 3 sides and a wooden door but a "metal safes only" rule would make it fail, sure you could hack through the door with an axe but it wouldn't be any quicker or easier than opening many commercial A-cat safes with the same axe.
> 
> Maybe AOs need clearer guidelines because you do hear of some strange interpretations of what is acceptable or not, but every time I've had gun security examined the AO has been practical and interested in it being fit for purpose rather than just ticking off a checklist of 'features'.
> 
> Had a good chat with one of them about racks/chains etc, his attitude to that was that they're ok for occasional use but he doesn't like the idea of people using them for permanent long-term storage, especially with multiple guns. Mind you I knew someone who used a chain around a rafter to secure an old shotgun that only got used about once a year, it was probably safer than most safes because any would-be thief would have to climb into the ceiling cavity to find it!


This is what amazes me about vetter's and AO's opinions/interpretations/attitudes  - why would a rack be OK for occasional but not long term when the opportunist thief could happen to be in your premises on day one of your short term use of a rack. The rack is either a tick or a cross, time in use shouldn't come into it.

And yes, strong guidelines/standards are required to overcome this vetter variability. Said standards would turn into a nightmare but there has to be a better system than exists now.

I also perceive that the newer vetters and AO's are less likely nowadays to have a mechanical or practical background.

----------


## Maca49

When you have some nice older rifles that rarely get used, to have them on display is a lot better than in the back of some dark safe. Trying to find ammo would be hard for me, let alone some loser who stole one. Money wise would be the prob.

----------


## timattalon

> This is what amazes me about vetter's and AO's opinions/interpretations/attitudes  - why would a rack be OK for occasional but not long term when the opportunist thief could happen to be in your premises on day one of your short term use of a rack. The rack is either a tick or a cross, time in use shouldn't come into it.
> 
> And yes, strong guidelines/standards are required to overcome this vetter variability. Said standards would turn into a nightmare but there has to be a better system than exists now.
> 
> I also perceive that the newer vetters and AO's are less likely nowadays to have a mechanical or practical background.


I do see your point. In the some situations the rack is there to comply with the security requirements as required by the current law- That is to secure against people who are in the dwelling who you need to make sure are unable to access or play with said firearm. The law around A cat security is NOT aimed at preventing burglars to access but stopping opportunistic or curious hands  from causing harm to those nearby. (Think visitors, children etc rather than burglar) This is because these situations were the ones most likely to cause harm. Whether this is the best position moving forward, that is not the point. The point is a rack that secures a rifle to the wall so it cannot be easily removed and discharged is the law as it stands. 

Long term a safe to protect against theft is common sense, and warranted given the value of some firearms and the lengths to which some will go to get them, nut if traveling to go hunting away from home, do you put a 6mm safe in the boot so you can secure your firearms at your unlicenced mates place on the way? Its not practical and likely not to happen.

----------


## jakewire

I'll be ok now 
The Minster wishes me the best.

Dear ............*
Thank you for writing to Minister Bennett on the recent Government response to firearms select committee report.
*
The Minister has noted your email and asked me to pass on a quick note to thank you for taking the time to write in.* She really appreciates the feedback and passes on her best wishes.** 
*
Kind regards
*
Salote 
Ministerial Secretary | Office of Hon Paula Bennett
Deputy Prime Minister | Minister for Climate Change Issues | Minister of Police
Minister of State Services | Minister of Tourism | Minister for Women | MP for Upper Harbour 
Executive Wing 7.6 | Private Bag 18888 | Parliament Buildings | Wellington 6160 | New Zealand

*

----------


## GravelBen

> This is what amazes me about vetter's and AO's opinions/interpretations/attitudes  - why would a rack be OK for occasional but not long term when the opportunist thief could happen to be in your premises on day one of your short term use of a rack. The rack is either a tick or a cross, time in use shouldn't come into it.


I disagree, if a gun is only there occasionally then the probability of an opportunist thief happening to be there at the same time is massively lower than if guns were there regularly.

Lets make some simplified numbers up and assume there is a chance any house will be burgled once a year... so call it a 1/365 chance of a burglary happening on any given day (reality would be a far lower chance but for arguments sake).

If a gun is there 360 days of the year then the probability of a burglary when its there is (1/365)*(360/365) = 1/370 chance the burglary will happen when the gun is there.
If a gun is there 5 days of the year then the probability of a burglary when its there is (1/365)*(5/365) = 1/26645 chance the burglary will happen when the gun is there.

Its quite reasonable that the level of risk mitigation is related to the probability of being needed.

----------


## Friwi

Yeah, but you know murphy , he always strikes when you forgot  to lock door , or chain your gun up or anything like that...

----------


## Steve123

> When you have some nice older rifles that rarely get used, to have them on display is a lot better than in the back of some dark safe. Trying to find ammo would be hard for me, let alone some loser who stole one. Money wise would be the prob.


Problem is the loser who knicks it won't have a clue. Your antique 16 ga hammer shotty would have the hacksaw on it in no time. End up as a crappy "stand and deliver" type pistol and swapped to it's meth dealer for fuck all. Meth dealer then uses it as a patu to beat loser when he can't fit the 12 ga shells into it.

----------


## jakewire

Horse.
Flog
goddam

----------


## Bugsplat

> Yep looks good, So now can I get my gun list back from the Police ?


That should be quite straight forward, 'sell' them to a trusted licensed friend.

Submit an Official information act request for the records. Submit an update request based on the previously  mentioned 'sale' submit another OIA request to confirm record of your holding's has been updated and perhaps subsequently re-acquire ?

----------


## Maca49

> Problem is the loser who knicks it won't have a clue. Your antique 16 ga hammer shotty would have the hacksaw on it in no time. End up as a crappy "stand and deliver" type pistol and swapped to it's meth dealer for fuck all. Meth dealer then uses it as a patu to beat loser when he can't fit the 12 ga shells into it.


There's a film on that!

----------


## stug

Yep, and a bloody good one it is! Northern Monkeys!

----------


## veitnamcam

I have 2 steel safes one E cat rated one not.
With my tools of choice either of them would be empty in under 2 minutes.
I am not a safe cracker and do not have any superpowers. The skills and knowledge required are nothing that would not be learned in a prison workshop.

One has to be realistic about security. You can ONLY stop the opertunist thief. 

Sent from my SM-G800Y using Tapatalk

----------


## Nathan F

I've seen some shocking security arrangements. I will never understand why some of us are so flippant about security. Personally I wouldn't leave 25 grand lying around in a shitty old cabinet that will  take two seconds  to Smash into. 
It's irresponsible not to have a decent safe. I'm ok with the rest of the recommendations.

----------


## 7mmwsm

> I have 2 steel safes one E cat rated one not.
> With my tools of choice either of them would be empty in under 2 minutes.
> I am not a safe cracker and do not have any superpowers. The skills and knowledge required are nothing that would not be learned in a prison workshop.
> 
> One has to be realistic about security. You can ONLY stop the opertunist thief. 
> 
> Sent from my SM-G800Y using Tapatalk


That's my opinion too. 
There needs to be some serious consequences for thieves. (old school consequences)

----------


## madjon_

> I'll be ok now 
> The Minster wishes me the best.
> 
> Dear ............*
> Thank you for writing to Minister Bennett on the recent Government response to firearms select committee report.
> *
> The Minister has noted your email and asked me to pass on a quick note to thank you for taking the time to write in.* She really appreciates the feedback and passes on her best wishes.** 
> *
> Kind regards
> ...


I got the same,wonderful

----------


## GravelBen

> 100 lashes in public?


Put in the stocks and pelted with rotten fruit by passers-by?

----------


## muzza

[QUOTE][I got the same,wonderful/QUOTE]

At least you got a response - as did I

----------


## gadgetman

> I have 2 steel safes one E cat rated one not.
> With my tools of choice either of them would be empty in under 2 minutes.
> I am not a safe cracker and do not have any superpowers. The skills and knowledge required are nothing that would not be learned in a prison workshop.
> 
> One has to be realistic about security. You can ONLY stop the opertunist thief. 
> 
> Sent from my SM-G800Y using Tapatalk


And I already have all the tools they'd ever need on the premises.

----------


## 10-Ring

> I have 2 steel safes one E cat rated one not.
> With my tools of choice either of them would be empty in under 2 minutes.
> I am not a safe cracker and do not have any superpowers. The skills and knowledge required are nothing that would not be learned in a prison workshop.
> 
> One has to be realistic about security. You can ONLY stop the opertunist thief.



Absolutely correct. You're never going to stop a determined pro. Just as well most firearms thefts are of the opportunistic kind or at least they are in my district.

----------


## 7mmwsm

> And I already have all the tools they'd ever need on the premises.


So do I. But that all gets locked in another safe. It would really piss me off if they used my gear to break in to my safe.

----------


## 10-Ring

> Like I already said, we do not need more legislation. Legislation is not the answer to everything. Like you said yourself, the inspectors need easy to understand guidelines that make it clear that a shitty wooden box wouldn't be okay.
> 
> I will note that I have a friend who made a safe out of wood and some brick that goes on the wall behind a fire place and I have no doubt it would have been harder to get into than some A category safes sold commercially. (He replaced this as soon as he could afford to with an E category compliant safe even though he has no endorsements).
> 
> Therefore I don't think it's okay to just outright ban the use of wood itself.


There seems to be about one decent wooden gun cabinet for about every forty or more crap ones. Therein lies the problem. I'm pretty sure that any law change made for A-Cat security re gun cabinets will require a construction of a minimum of 2mm mild steel. Regarding security gun racks nearly all I've come across offer good security against opportunistic thieves.

----------


## gadgetman

> So do I. But that all gets locked in another safe. It would really piss me off if they used my gear to break in to my safe.


But a bit hard to do with a couple of welding plants/plasma cutter/grinders/saws/....

----------


## gadgetman

> What do you need that for in IT? Serious hard drive rebuilds???


It's a funny old world. I wanted to do Mechanical Engineering but through a bit of a blunder (I did way too well in exams) I ended up in the even harder to get into Electrical and Electronic Engineering. Part of that course was working in a mechanical workshop where I learned to weld (the offered to pay me to get my ticket) and operate all the machinery (mills, lathes, radial arm drill, shaper, ...) and they offered me an apprenticeship. I stuck to my degree but did buy a heavy duty welding plant and lathe.

Do you use firearms for your work?  :Grin:

----------


## 7mmwsm

> But a bit hard to do with a couple of welding plants/plasma cutter/grinders/saws/....


True. But I just lock up key bits like cutting tips, discs etc.

----------


## shooternz

> I got the same,wonderful


Me too not much effort put in by anybody

----------


## madjon_

> I'll be ok now 
> The Minster wishes me the best.
> 
> Dear ............*
> Thank you for writing to Minister Bennett on the recent Government response to firearms select committee report.
> *
> The Minister has noted your email and asked me to pass on a quick note to thank you for taking the time to write in.* She really appreciates the feedback and passes on her best wishes.** 
> *
> Kind regards
> ...


I got the same,wonderful

----------


## GravelBen

> 100 lashes in public?


Put in the stocks and pelted with rotten fruit by passers-by?

----------


## muzza

[QUOTE][I got the same,wonderful/QUOTE]

At least you got a response - as did I

----------


## gadgetman

> I have 2 steel safes one E cat rated one not.
> With my tools of choice either of them would be empty in under 2 minutes.
> I am not a safe cracker and do not have any superpowers. The skills and knowledge required are nothing that would not be learned in a prison workshop.
> 
> One has to be realistic about security. You can ONLY stop the opertunist thief. 
> 
> Sent from my SM-G800Y using Tapatalk


And I already have all the tools they'd ever need on the premises.

----------


## 10-Ring

> I have 2 steel safes one E cat rated one not.
> With my tools of choice either of them would be empty in under 2 minutes.
> I am not a safe cracker and do not have any superpowers. The skills and knowledge required are nothing that would not be learned in a prison workshop.
> 
> One has to be realistic about security. You can ONLY stop the opertunist thief.



Absolutely correct. You're never going to stop a determined pro. Just as well most firearms thefts are of the opportunistic kind or at least they are in my district.

----------


## 7mmwsm

> And I already have all the tools they'd ever need on the premises.


So do I. But that all gets locked in another safe. It would really piss me off if they used my gear to break in to my safe.

----------


## 10-Ring

> Like I already said, we do not need more legislation. Legislation is not the answer to everything. Like you said yourself, the inspectors need easy to understand guidelines that make it clear that a shitty wooden box wouldn't be okay.
> 
> I will note that I have a friend who made a safe out of wood and some brick that goes on the wall behind a fire place and I have no doubt it would have been harder to get into than some A category safes sold commercially. (He replaced this as soon as he could afford to with an E category compliant safe even though he has no endorsements).
> 
> Therefore I don't think it's okay to just outright ban the use of wood itself.


There seems to be about one decent wooden gun cabinet for about every forty or more crap ones. Therein lies the problem. I'm pretty sure that any law change made for A-Cat security re gun cabinets will require a construction of a minimum of 2mm mild steel. Regarding security gun racks nearly all I've come across offer good security against opportunistic thieves.

----------


## gadgetman

> So do I. But that all gets locked in another safe. It would really piss me off if they used my gear to break in to my safe.


But a bit hard to do with a couple of welding plants/plasma cutter/grinders/saws/....

----------


## gadgetman

> What do you need that for in IT? Serious hard drive rebuilds???


It's a funny old world. I wanted to do Mechanical Engineering but through a bit of a blunder (I did way too well in exams) I ended up in the even harder to get into Electrical and Electronic Engineering. Part of that course was working in a mechanical workshop where I learned to weld (the offered to pay me to get my ticket) and operate all the machinery (mills, lathes, radial arm drill, shaper, ...) and they offered me an apprenticeship. I stuck to my degree but did buy a heavy duty welding plant and lathe.

Do you use firearms for your work?  :Grin:

----------


## 7mmwsm

> But a bit hard to do with a couple of welding plants/plasma cutter/grinders/saws/....


True. But I just lock up key bits like cutting tips, discs etc.

----------


## shooternz

> I got the same,wonderful


Me too not much effort put in by anybody

----------

