Thread: Sad Commentary on Life and Balance.

Originally Posted by Husky1600#2

Your car is for all intents and purposes the same as your house - they cannot search it without a warrant unless they suspect a reasonably serious crime has been committed, not a speeding ticket or minor traffic violation. And they need to give 7 days notice of doing so. COLFO and Nick Taylor the solicitor have posted comprehensive info on what Plod can and cant do, and what your rights are.

Him suggesting they need a warrant to search his car is reason enough for them to have a look see under the arms act.
Like Tahr said nothing to hide full ya boots

Originally Posted by Tahr

Surely no one thinks that we don't have an illicit gun problem? And a gun crime problem? Don't get distracted by the numbers. They are just numbers. 17K? 10K? 5K? Whatever. There are too many guns in the wrong peoples hands. Yes?

What to do about it is the problem. Targeting us is targeting the wrong people. We might have the odd miscreant amongst us (curse them) but overall it seems licensed owners are pretty good, and clean.

The focus needs to turn on the underworld, not us. We are easy picking, but pretty blameless.

There are no consequences for using illegal firearms, due to our concurrent sentencing laws.

Have an AK in a crack lab? The crack lab bit carries the higher sentence, so having an AK or not doesn't reeaally affect how much time you get. But crack labs are a dangerous business, so of course Joe Crook will opt to have one if possible, the gun is free come prison sentence time.

Home D for everything is what needs to change, sentence reductions on sentence reductions also. NZ needs to harden the fuck up and give crooks something to worry about, locked up away from the rest of us, it's turned into a fucking zoo

Originally Posted by BRADS

They don't need a seach warrant for a car, doesn't apply to vechiles.
The police can enter and search any place or vehicle, if they have reason to suspect that there are firearms, ammunition, explosives or restricted weapons that are there in violation of the Arms Act 1983.

Yeah, and merely having a license doesn't give them that right

Him suggesting they need a warrant to search his car is reason enough for them to have a look see under the arms act.

Bullshit.

Id say its more about knowing your rights. Heading down a pretty shitty street if just let them do as they please. Laws apply to the police as well.....

Originally Posted by gundoc

I see Counties Manukau tops the list for shootings, yet it does not have a very high percentage of licensed firearms owners. The area does have a very high percentage of unmentionables, however.

Surely this is an anomaly in the data. There can't possibly be a link.

It's been said before - shipping containers and shipping containers. Drugs and firearms and what else you wish to throw in. Bugger all are being searched at point of entry. Anyone can place an order to have a shipping container brought into the country and delivered to your preferred address by truck. Ships carry thousands of containers on each delivery to port. Customs cannot and do not search/x-ray every container - its impossible. Mr Cargill knows this but won't discuss how big this issue really is. His focus is elsewhere.

This link opens up a pdf of a guide for firearms related interactions with Police put together by Nicholas Taylor.
https://tsnz.nz/function/file/2C3F83...4-EF2EC26436B9

Section 6 – The police stop your vehicle when you are the driver - - - - - - Recent law changes mean that the police have full access and connection between Land Transport NZ and the Firearms Licencing records.

If you are stopped by the police, for example driving away from a shooting area, gun range or hunting ground - You must give them your driver’s licence and give them your name, address and date of birth. Your passengers do not have to give any details or answer any questions at all.

You do not have to answer any questions about if you have firearms in your car, or any other surrounding questions at all.

In a vehicle you are transporting firearms, you are NOT carrying them (24 B(1)(b)) (see Section 1 above).

The police have no right to search your vehicle without evidence that a potential crime has been committed. Simply adhering to your rights by stating (vii) above, and stating “no comment” or “there is no legal requirement for me to answer that question”, cannot be a reason to invoke a warrantless search on your vehicle; this would be an unlawful police search.

The police can ask to inspect your firearms and ammunition and where they are kept and view your security arrangements in your vehicle (24B(1) (d)), but they must give you 7 days notice of their desire to do this (24B (3) (a)).

The police cannot stop your vehicle and demand to inspect your firearms on the roadside. Say “you must give me 7 days notice of this inspection occurring” and make a time after that with them if they wish.

REMEMBER: A fit and proper person should be one who co-operates with the police within the requirements of the law, but not beyond it.

This, spare us the bUt iF yOu haVe noThInG tO hIdE nonsense, give up your own rights by all means, but don't expect others to

Originally Posted by Tommy

This, spare us the bUt iF yOu haVe noThInG tO hIdE nonsense, give up your own rights by all means, but don't expect others to

Being polite and cooperating when it will cause no one harm is not giving up your rights. And regardless, we always maintain the ability to enforce our rights when we really do need to. No one likes a smart arse, so why be one for no good reason.

Originally Posted by Tahr

Being polite and cooperating when it will cause no one harm is not giving up your rights. And regardless, we always maintain the ability to enforce our rights when we really do need to. No one likes a smart arse, so why be one for no good reason.

There's nothing smartarse about refusing a warrantless search when you've done nothing wrong. In fact, trying on a warrantless search on the assumption that people are unsure of their rights, that would be pretty smartarse carryon wouldn't it?

Originally Posted by Tahr

Being polite and cooperating when it will cause no one harm is not giving up your rights. And regardless, we always maintain the ability to enforce our rights when we really do need to. No one likes a smart arse, so why be one for no good reason.

Cooperating with an unlawful police search?
This is an exceedingly slippery slope.

Originally Posted by Hunteast

It's been said before - shipping containers and shipping containers. Drugs and firearms and what else you wish to throw in. Bugger all are being searched at point of entry. Anyone can place an order to have a shipping container brought into the country and delivered to your preferred address by truck. Ships carry thousands of containers on each delivery to port. Customs cannot and do not search/x-ray every container - its impossible. Mr Cargill knows this but won't discuss how big this issue really is. His focus is elsewhere.

If you have a look at the reports out of the Tauranga port customs area, I think they lose 2 or 3 containers a year from what's in the media that just get 'removed' without the official process being followed. I recall 2 of these cases coming up in the media recently, the missing containers were not located. It's a dodgy 'volume' business but the notion that the borders are more porous than the official line would like us to believe is plausible.

Originally Posted by No.3

If you have a look at the reports out of the Tauranga port customs area, I think they lose 2 or 3 containers a year from what's in the media that just get 'removed' without the official process being followed. I recall 2 of these cases coming up in the media recently, the missing containers were not located. It's a dodgy 'volume' business but the notion that the borders are more porous than the official line would like us to believe is plausible.

I'm shocked and surprised by this.....

I'd say that a constable trying to do a warrantless search is not polite. If they have a whine then that's them being a smart arse.

Originally Posted by Tommy

There's nothing smartarse about refusing a warrantless search when you've done nothing wrong. In fact, trying on a warrantless search on the assumption that people are unsure of their rights, that would be pretty smartarse carryon wouldn't it?

[QUOTE]Quote Originally Posted by Tahr View Post
Being polite and cooperating when it will cause no one harm is not giving up your rights. And regardless, we always maintain the ability to enforce our rights when we really do need to. No one likes a smart arse, so why be one for no good reason./QUOTE]

I think you are both correct. Me personally most days Id just say sure, look away. But if I caught an attitude or felt the motive was insincere, it would be more likely to be a no with the question Reason?