Thread: Leaving magazines loaded (legal issues?)

Originally Posted by P38

The Arms Regulations require you to empty the magazine before transportation and storage.

No they don't.

The Arms Regulations actually say that you CAN store ammunition with your firearms.

19 Conditions relating to security precautions
(1) (ii) shall ensure that, where the ammunition is stored with the firearm, the firearm is not capable of being discharged

Originally Posted by P38

It's also an offence under the arms act to carry a loaded firearm in a vehicle

No it isn't.

I've often just loaded up my new mags with spent cases to free up the springs etc to make loading easier

Sent from my SM-G935F using Tapatalk

I just use revolvers no need for magazines, the number of times people have arrived at the range without their mags is amazing

Originally Posted by Mauser308

The interesting case is the charger loading systems al-la Lee Enfield and Mauser, not a magazine but a hell of a lot quicker to load the firearm. If I have this correct, the original reason for the 7-round restriction in NZ is someone (that assisted with the technical details behind the original legislation when it was drafted) took a dim view of the Garand system with the 8-round chargers.

Year I remember something along those lines.

Who every did it must have been watching to many WW2 moves as we have bugger all of those Granada in NZ

Nothing stops you from filling a magazine with empty cases, or if you reload - just projectiles, no powder or primers.

Originally Posted by Savage1

I thought it was only an offence under the Land Transport Act, and reading that only appears to be an offence to have the loaded magazines in the firearm, it's talking about loaded firearms not loaded magazines.

There is nothing that I know of in legislation that states that you can't have loaded magazines in your home or car, providing that they're not attached to a firearm.

Quite right, a loaded magazine does not equate to a loaded gun when said magazine is not in the gun. I recall there was a US case recently (relevant as case law, even in NZ) where police charged someone with carrying a loaded firearm on the basis of having a loaded mag next to an ammunition-free pistol. Judge dismissed the charge with reference to an English dictionary!

Still, does not look good having had a loaded mag ready to insert and having shot someone. Preferable to be up for having used the unloaded gun as a club - unless in deed one likes the thought of sitting in the sun under a giant magnifying glass... sshhzzzsplut.

Originally Posted by Savage1

I thought it was only an offence under the Land Transport Act, and reading that only appears to be an offence to have the loaded magazines in the firearm, it's talking about loaded firearms not loaded magazines.

There is nothing that I know of in legislation that states that you can't have loaded magazines in your home or car, providing that they're not attached to a firearm.

That's interesting. I thought loaded magazines were not OK in a vehicle.

What about a rifle with a bolt in it in a vehicle? (No rounds or mag)
I thought it wasn't ok. But one shop I brought from said yeah leave it in, it's ok.

Originally Posted by bully

What about a rifle with a bolt in it in a vehicle? (No rounds or mag)
I thought it wasn't ok. But one shop I brought from said yeah leave it in, it's ok.

You don't have to remove the bolt.

Originally Posted by bully

What about a rifle with a bolt in it in a vehicle? (No rounds or mag)
I thought it wasn't ok. But one shop I brought from said yeah leave it in, it's ok.

How would we transport a semi-auto or a lever action if we had to remove the bolts?

Cheers
Pete

Originally Posted by P38

How would we transport a semi-auto or a lever action if we had to remove the bolts?

Cheers
Pete

Well yes, it makes sense to me and you.
But it was my understanding it was law or arms code, which often may not make sense.

Originally Posted by bully

Well yes, it makes sense to me and you.
But it was my understanding it was law or arms code, which often may not make sense.

True that.

Cheers
Pete

Originally Posted by bully

Well yes, it makes sense to me and you.
But it was my understanding it was law or arms code, which often may not make sense.

Does someone have a list of differences between NZ Arms Act 1983 vs. the NZ Police Arms Code? It is very interesting or curious situation.

Originally Posted by bully

What about a rifle with a bolt in it in a vehicle? (No rounds or mag)
I thought it wasn't ok. But one shop I brought from said yeah leave it in, it's ok.

While you may be able to have a rifle with the bolt in in you car why would you?
That makes it more easy for someone to steal a functional rfile.

Personally I transport my rifles with bolts out of the rifles, bolts in a separate locked box in a bag.
When I leave the vehicle rifles stay in the vehicle - illegal I think - but bolts in box in bag come with me.
My logic is a rifle without the bolt in the car isn't a functioning firearm and isn't illegal but I'd rather not test this hypothesis.

Carrying rifles into a petrol station, cafe or bank would seem like a way to get the AOS out of bed so I don't.

Originally Posted by Cyclops

While you may be able to have a rifle with the bolt in in you car why would you?
That makes it more easy for someone to steal a functional rfile.

Personally I transport my rifles with bolts out of the rifles, bolts in a separate locked box in a bag.
When I leave the vehicle rifles stay in the vehicle - illegal I think - but bolts in box in bag come with me.
My logic is a rifle without the bolt in the car isn't a functioning firearm and isn't illegal but I'd rather not test this hypothesis.

Carrying rifles into a petrol station, cafe or bank would seem like a way to get the AOS out of bed so I don't.

So much wrong here.

A rifle without a bolt is still a firearm and cannot be left unattended in a vehicle. In a locked vehicle in a petrol station forecourt is OK so long as you have eyes on it while inside paying or buying a pie or whatever. If the car is out of sight, you're in the wrong. If the car is at the bottom of a hill and you can see it from the top of the ridge a k away, you're in the wrong. You need to be able to intervene in a timely manner should someone attempt to break into your car.

Sent from my SM-T800 using Tapatalk