Thread: Restrictions and conditions on an 'A' Category 50BMG?

Originally Posted by Chilli_Dog

Yes, my only point was that it appears the Police have been building a register for some time. My personal opinion is that since it is not a legal requirement the vetting officer (or arms officer) should make it clear that it is voluntary to give serial numbers of A-cat firearms, not imply it is a legal requirement.

Quote from NZ Herald "The crown allege that it was a bullet fired from a weapon that Winders was registered as owning when he went for his firearms licence in 2008."
Taiaroa shooting: microscope key in revealing rifle's history - National - NZ Herald News

From reading that, the serial number should have given them a little bit of circumstantial evidence at best, at worst its saying that any one of potentially hundreds of other rifles could have been the one.

"Murphy told the court it not only had the same shipment details but after analysing its serial number, they also had the same format and distinguishing features including marks from when it was pressed into the metal."

How could they compare format and pressing marks of the serial number when they never recovered the firearm he owned? Did they analyse and record his rifle to that level of detail when it was imported? As you say, all it seems to show is that it could be a rifle from that manufacturer around that time. Not to mention that if his claim that it was stolen was true then whether it was the rifle he had owned or not wouldn't mean it was him that used it.

Sounds flaky as hell based on what has been reported, presumably either the media are leaving things out or the other evidence must have been a lot stronger than that.