Thread: The NSA has a warning and you won't believe it until you read this

I actually down loaded Justice mallons judgement where Mr lincoln &gundo cas his expert shoved it that far up police hq they'd need nugget to clean their bloody teeth .
Justice mallon did not mince her words either about these flash harrys playing judge jury and executioner,and a mam angered I suspect aint gonna be a pretty sight.
wonder if this was was eggy greegy oconnor got outta the fearsome fuzz when he did.
BTW-Imbackin pete dunne in that shit fight -them catholic boys always love to row and dunnes a cracker!

Originally Posted by kotuku

I actually down loaded Justice mallons judgement where Mr lincoln &gundo cas his expert shoved it that far up police hq they'd need nugget to clean their bloody teeth .
Justice mallon did not mince her words either about these flash harrys playing judge jury and executioner,and a mam angered I suspect aint gonna be a pretty sight.
wonder if this was was eggy greegy oconnor got outta the fearsome fuzz when he did.
BTW-Imbackin pete dunne in that shit fight -them catholic boys always love to row and dunnes a cracker!

Do you have a link for the download?

Originally Posted by Danger Mouse

Do you have a link for the download?

not offhand as im over in greymouth for a year and the doc is at home in CHCH.
if its of any help google R Grant vs Crown judgement ofJustice Mallon J Palmerston Nth High Court.
what I do know is it runs to 33 pages.
GUNDOC may be able to guide you directly as he was the expert witness whom funnily enough the crown had no comeback for IIRC

https://www.parliament.nz/resource/0000164074

There's some pretty impressive research and consideration in that judge's decision. Given they had no background in firearms, it would have taken considerable time and effort to gain enough knowledge to make an informed decision.

At least it shows the judiciary is still independent of Police in NZ.

Yes, totally not right the Pol Pol, picking on Mr Lincoln because he's running a fugly E~Cat, they should take into consideration that it is an H & K and most likely very well built German quality and stop being so judgemental in people's choices.

On a more serious note the
Police have some issues with getting shot at rather more regularly, their current method of addressing this a little school master~ish, and may struggle under our democracy and Laws.

Sigh, a sensible approach of working in with firearms owners and us even giving and taking some concessions that maybe better for both parties would I feel would achieve more than the battle that lies ahead in next few years.

Originally Posted by jackson21

\

Sigh, a sensible approach of working in with firearms owners and us even giving and taking some concessions that maybe better for both parties would I feel would achieve more than the battle that lies ahead in next few years.

Bugger that there is a history if you give them an inch they will take 100 miles.

Originally Posted by mikee

Bugger that there is a history if you give them an inch they will take 100 miles.

Yes unfortunately you are 100 % correct here and we need to thank this guy for putting a line in the sand. I quite likes previous Police minister who seemed quite pragmatic about things.

Current Police Union guy has shown he probably would prefer people didn't even own an air rifle but hey he's shown all ready not the smartest cookie also.

Current Police minister will probably swing backwards and forwards with how she thinks her decision is polling, probably out of that unfortunately poor rag they call the Herald.

what does stand out ,and im suprised it was not noted /acted upon by police earlier was the suggested mental state of both the perpetrators of these crimes,given it was on record they had licenses or a history with firearms.
add to that Stan graham , using bolt action WW@vintage weapons and a couple of others to shoot 3policemen &4 civilians ,;plus stephen anderson; 6persons shot dead at raurimu with a single barrel 12g shotgun (insecurely stored.)

Anderson an ex special patient in mental health was released by a bogus tranvestite polish psychiatrist(Linda Astor,)who under suspicion for its practise fled back to poland, so the police did not fail re him.

myself ,for years ive wondered and spoken of a glaring omission in the mental health act -provision to remove drivers licenses of compulsory patients ,not a sausage re firearms licenses.
Im involved presently in a case where i rate this an real bloody risk,but the light is very dim amongst others.
i hope to christ my nightmare doesnt actually happen.
sorry to sidetrack but i feel it need to be said.

the Timaru solicitors scribbling at the end of the last document does tell a tale though.

the last part of para33 of the mallon judgement encapsulates this whole subject spot on me thinks.

No it is quite valid, as putting a microscope to specific areas, i.e mental health, criminal activity, firearm security....practical firearms training, where needed.
Identifying actual cause and improvements in these areas rather than a naive approach of blanket rules on things that will not make any positive change to anything but sound good at the time broadcast to media.
This would come through a consultative approach from the firearms community. As pointed out by Mikee, fat chance of happening, so court cases like above is our only approach with an unreasonable, non pragmatic crowd on the other side.

Originally Posted by kotuku

what does stand out ,and im suprised it was not noted /acted upon by police earlier was the suggested mental state of both the perpetrators of these crimes,given it was on record they had licenses or a history with firearms.
add to that Stan graham , using bolt action WW@vintage weapons and a couple of others to shoot 3policemen &4 civilians ,;plus stephen anderson; 6persons shot dead at raurimu with a single barrel 12g shotgun (insecurely stored.)

Anderson an ex special patient in mental health was released by a bogus tranvestite polish psychiatrist(Linda Astor,)who under suspicion for its practise fled back to poland, so the police did not fail re him.

myself ,for years ive wondered and spoken of a glaring omission in the mental health act -provision to remove drivers licenses of compulsory patients ,not a sausage re firearms licenses.
Im involved presently in a case where i rate this an real bloody risk,but the light is very dim amongst others.
i hope to christ my nightmare doesnt actually happen.
sorry to sidetrack but i feel it need to be said.

the Timaru solicitors scribbling at the end of the last document does tell a tale though.

the last part of para33 of the mallon judgement encapsulates this whole subject spot on me thinks.

Provision is already there for the Police to remove a firearms license from someone no longer deemed 'fit and proper'. However in the cases that have been used as a basis for the MSSA laws they have known, and been informed, of the issues but chosen not to act. This is where the Police need to concentrate their efforts.

gadge -there is no mention of firearms in mental health act -whereas under it a committed patient(sec30MHA)has their drivers license revoked automatically ,and a process is detailed around how the person goes about getting said license back I was present earlier this week when a police sgt revoked a guys license ,and in a discussion later he agreed with me -it would be simpler.Of course persuading the braid brass &bullshitters @police ivory tower ,and the "Rambo gun'MPs in the sheepshed in wellington ,is an althogether different story.
out to you
Jackson21
-the Police brass could simply google Professor Gary Mauser of Simon Fraser university BC canada.this bloke is a world leader on the question of firearms laws and issues ,and has written extensively on the subject .
If anyone remembers the days of Jim Anderton as an Alliance MP in herr clucks labour govt and that syncophant of his Matt? who was made minister of disarmaments.

Anyhow good old UN having a talk fest on firearms issues -so this womble against all good advice sends the notorious ginga some" fairgo" reporter turned anti firearms bloke Philip bloody Alpers!
weel what a glorious waste of money as in the words of one wit
half didnt know WTF they were there for
and the other half wondered wondered when where the tea&coffee were being served.
at end of two weeks-single paragraph statement
WE HAVENT AGREED ON ANYTHING!!!

Idiot Alpers disappears;apparently to the USA where he spends years a a male orderly in a US AIDS clinic before reemerging across ditch as an associate professer some sydney varsity.
hohoho him and academic mate write a big paper on private arms ownership in NZ etc etc etc and the NZ govt of the day thinks wow we gotcha.new laws comin up.
wait up says a tiny voice "hadn't we better get this stuff checked out before we take it as valid and act on it"

IN rides one Professer Gary Mauser to peer review this and other papers these two have coauthored and blows the fucking things clean out of the water.

IIRC-info and stats taken from pacific islands where rebels regularly burgled police armouries for weapons, absolutely no stats from NZ, no verified/recognised research methods ever stated or determined ,it had never been peer reviewed before publishing ,and fankly youd get more accurate info out of a fresh cow turd.
In short take erroneous stats and with predetermined mindset reach your conclusions so the gullible will swallow them(NOT)

There is a givealittle page to help Richard Lincoln with his legal costs: https://givealittle.co.nz/cause/gunlawlegalfunding

Originally Posted by kotuku

gadge -there is no mention of firearms in mental health act -whereas under it a committed patient(sec30MHA)has their drivers license revoked automatically ,and a process is detailed around how the person goes about getting said license back I was present earlier this week when a police sgt revoked a guys license ,and in a discussion later he agreed with me -it would be simpler.Of course persuading the braid brass &bullshitters @police ivory tower ,and the "Rambo gun'MPs in the sheepshed in wellington ,is an althogether different story.

Because it is in the firearms act already it does not need to be in the mental health act.

27 Revocation and surrender of firearms licence

(1)

Where, in the opinion of a commissioned officer of Police,—
(a)

any person who has been issued with a firearms licence is not a fit and proper person to be in possession of a firearm or airgun; or
(b)

access to any firearm or airgun in the possession of the person to whom a firearms licence has been issued is reasonably likely to be obtained by any person—
(i)

whose application for a firearms licence or for a permit under section 7 of the Arms Act 1958, or for a certificate of registration under section 9 of the Arms Act 1958 has been refused on the ground that he is not a fit and proper person to be in possession of a firearm or airgun; or
(ii)

whose certificate of registration as the owner of a firearm has been refused under section 10 of the Arms Act 1958 on the ground that he is not a fit and proper person to be in possession of a firearm; or
(iii)

whose firearms licence has been revoked on the ground that he is not a fit and proper person to be in possession of a firearm or airgun; or
(iv)

who, in the opinion of a commissioned officer of Police, is not a fit and proper person to be in possession of a firearm or airgun—

the commissioned officer of Police may, by notice in writing under his hand, revoke the firearms licence, and the person to whom that firearms licence has been issued shall upon demand surrender the licence to a member of the Police.

(2)

Any person may at any time surrender a firearms licence held by him.

(3)

Where a licence is revoked under subsection (1) or surrendered under subsection (2), the person to whom the licence has been issued shall cease to be licensed to possess firearms, airguns, pistols, or restricted weapons by virtue of that licence or any endorsement on it.

The main issue is the police picking it up and running with it.

From a pure legal point of view the statement of claim is...bad.

the paragraphs below the subtitle "cause of action" are not really cause of actions, they are factual allegations. cause of action is a legal term that means a known applicable legal theory. For example, breach of contract, or tort of property damage, etc. Or in this case Tort of misfeasance of public office.

the paragraphs below the subtitle "damages" are not really damages either, they are again factual allegations. Damages is also a legal term which when used in Statement of claim, usually means a particular remedy that the plaintiff seeks. which is in fact listed under "where fore (sic) the plaintiff claims.

Misfeasance in public office is very hard to establish because the high threshold:

from a 2017 decision:
[36] The elements of the tort of misfeasance in public office are as follows:
(a) the defendant must be a public officer;
(b) the defendant must have acted deliberately and unlawfully in the
exercise or purported exercise of his or her office;
(c) the defendant must have acted with malice towards the plaintiff, or
with knowledge or reckless indifference that his or her conduct was
unlawful and was likely to injure the plaintiff;
(d) the plaintiff must have suffered damage caused by the defendant’s
actions.

Even if the tort is established, the damages of over 1 million bucks are very hard to justify.

Personally I think a calderbank with JR would have been more useful. But I wish Mr Lincoln best of luck.