Thread: Required to justify the number of firearms you own?

I’ve just gone with Tower, don’t have to list any item under $10k.

Originally Posted by tommygun

You have to justify it, but there is no law about what constitutes a valid justification and what doesn't?
"Well ma'am, if I shoot any one too much I'll wear the barrel out, so I have 31 so I can shoot a different one each day of any month"

Because I want lots of guns.
Justified.

New Arms Code in the works right now

so will it be asked on a per owner or per household basis?
there could be multiple owners using a communal safe. its bureaucracy gone mad

I was asked that last time I renewed my licence, simply said it had been my passion and hobby since I was 13 yrs old. That's a fairly good commitment?

Originally Posted by mimms2

History never repeats but often rhymes eh

Epic thread dredge Batman!

So its interesting, They limit me to 4 rifles and I have to trim my collection (by heaps). Where do the ones I have to get rid of go? Are they going to purchase my collection, am I going to be taxed on the over quota, do they just get re circulated to those that dont have 4 yet, there would be a shitload going to the "other side" It solves SFA. Ya cant beat DUMB

My understanding is that under the A CAT license once a persons security is inspected. As in when it is first installed, The Police or arms officer has no right under current legislation to re inspect it. The only legitimate reason to re inspect is if the firearms owner moves addresses. They also have no right to inspect individual firearms or request any information regarding those firearms, including the number of firearms the license holder is in possession of.
Can someone please point me in the direction of the piece of legislation that says otherwise.

Originally Posted by zeropak

My understanding is that under the A CAT license once a persons security is inspected. As in when it is first installed, The Police or arms officer has no right under current legislation to re inspect it. The only legitimate reason to re inspect is if the firearms owner moves addresses. They also have no right to inspect individual firearms or request any information regarding those firearms, including the number of firearms the license holder is in possession of.
Can someone please point me in the direction of the piece of legislation that says otherwise.

It's in the Arms Act
24BGeneral conditions of firearms licence
(1) Every firearms licence is subject to the conditions that the holder of a firearms licence must,—
...
(c) permit a member of the Police to inspect all firearms in the licence holder’s possession, the place or places where the firearms are or will be kept, and the place or places where the ammunition is or will be kept, and, for those purposes, to enter at all reasonable times upon the premises where that place or those places are situated; and
...

Does a “member of the police” include a vetting person, who is not a police officer, probably on contract?

Originally Posted by Maca49

Does a “member of the police” include a vetting person, who is not a police officer, probably on contract?

Good point. pretty sure that in my area at least the AO is not a member of the police force.

Do rogue elephants and man eating tigers qualify or would that be deemed self defense?

Originally Posted by Maca49

Does a “member of the police” include a vetting person, who is not a police officer, probably on contract?

Arms Act definition = "member of the Police means a Police employee within the meaning of section 4 of the Policing Act 2008"

Section 4 of the policing act = "Police employee means a person employed under section 18 and, except in Part 4, includes a person seconded to the Police"

Originally Posted by NZscopes

New Arms Code in the works right now

Police can rewrite (and fuck it up like they did a few years ago) the arms code all they like. It means jack shit. The arms act on the other hand, is everything

If the Police are rewriting the Arms Code, it looks like the promised independent agency to administer the Act is as likely as 100,000 State homes being built and the light rail down Dominion Road running in my lifetime.