Thread: Trademe licence glitch

Originally Posted by TheWuce

Okay sounds fun, lets do it.




"There is no right to own or possess firearms under New Zealand law"
"A member of the Police (Arms Officer) may issue a license if he or she is satisfied that the applicant is a “fit and proper person"

Source: https://www.loc.gov/law/help/firearm...newzealand.php




"43A Mail order sale of firearm or ammunition

(1)Every person commits an offence and is liable on conviction to a fine not exceeding $1,000 who sells by mail order a firearm or any ammunition for a firearm or restricted weapon otherwise than pursuant to a written order—

(a) signed by the purchaser; and

(b) bearing an endorsement signed by a member of the Police and stating that the member of the Police—
(i) has inspected the purchaser’s firearms licence; and
(ii) is satisfied that the purchaser is a fit and proper person to purchase that firearm or ammunition."


Source: Arms Act 1983 No 44 (as at 01 October 2018), Public Act – New Zealand Legislation



"federal law doesn’t allow a person to order a firearm online and have it shipped to him or her across state lines directly. A person can shop online, do research online, identify a firearm, and even pay for it, but the transfer will still have to go through an FFL"

Source: https://www.nrablog.com/articles/201...ate-gun-sales/







"Only a “Police Form” from a Police email address, or the original, certified by a New Zealand Police District Arms Officer and mailed direct to the seller, will satisfy the Arms Actrequirement for the seller to take reasonable steps to ascertain whether you are a holder of afirearms licence, or in the case of an airgun, are of or over the age of 18 years old"

Source: http://www.police.govt.nz/sites/defa...ormation_0.pdf

...grabs popcorn....looking forward to this response...

I'm not sure a summary taken from the (American) Library of Congress is the best place for an definative answer about NZ firearms law.


Mainly because the answer quoted by TheWuce is wrong.

Originally Posted by systolic

I'm not sure a summary taken from the (American) Library of Congress is the best place for an definative answer about NZ firearms law.


Mainly because the answer quoted by TheWuce is wrong.

It is entertaining though.
As you point out, an incorrect source, a police policy statement, the inability to comprehend the written word from current legislation and applying federal law to state law.

It's either wanton stupidity, or deliberate mischievousness.

BUT,, this is the target audience for police policy, so it will all work out for the greater good in pest free NZ, where there will be no possible justification for citizens to have access to private firearms.
The Govt. and it's enforcement arm will assure your personal safety in Gun-Free NZ.

@TheWuce - If you pay your fee and are deemed "fit and proper" a licence shall be issued. Not may.

Originally Posted by TheWuce

Okay sounds fun, lets do it.




"There is no right to own or possess firearms under New Zealand law"
"A member of the Police (Arms Officer) may issue a license if he or she is satisfied that the applicant is a “fit and proper person"

Source: https://www.loc.gov/law/help/firearm...newzealand.php




"43A Mail order sale of firearm or ammunition

(1)Every person commits an offence and is liable on conviction to a fine not exceeding $1,000 who sells by mail order a firearm or any ammunition for a firearm or restricted weapon otherwise than pursuant to a written order—

(a) signed by the purchaser; and

(b) bearing an endorsement signed by a member of the Police and stating that the member of the Police—
(i) has inspected the purchaser’s firearms licence; and
(ii) is satisfied that the purchaser is a fit and proper person to purchase that firearm or ammunition."


Source: Arms Act 1983 No 44 (as at 01 October 2018), Public Act – New Zealand Legislation



"federal law doesn’t allow a person to order a firearm online and have it shipped to him or her across state lines directly. A person can shop online, do research online, identify a firearm, and even pay for it, but the transfer will still have to go through an FFL"

Source: https://www.nrablog.com/articles/201...ate-gun-sales/







"Only a “Police Form” from a Police email address, or the original, certified by a New Zealand Police District Arms Officer and mailed direct to the seller, will satisfy the Arms Actrequirement for the seller to take reasonable steps to ascertain whether you are a holder of afirearms licence, or in the case of an airgun, are of or over the age of 18 years old"

Source: http://www.police.govt.nz/sites/defa...ormation_0.pdf

The form being fill out is a legal requirement, however the act only requires as you quoted

(a) signed by the purchaser; and

(b) bearing an endorsement signed by a member of the Police and stating that the member of the Police—
(i) has inspected the purchaser’s firearms licence; and
(ii) is satisfied that the purchaser is a fit and proper person to purchase that firearm or ammunition."

It is being challenged because the law requires a signed verified form stating the buyer has a license that the seller can rely on that a police officer has checked and the buyer is a legitimate FA license holder who you can send the firearm to.

The law does NOT require

a) the sellers Name, address or license details to be checked.
b) The details (or ANY details) of the firearm being purchased- (Though checking it is not stolen could be a good idea.)
c) And the law states it can be signed and checked by ANY warranted Police personnel- It does not need to go to the Arms office for checking.

These are additions that have been added by the police and the argument is whether they are allowed to legally require these when the law itself does not.

Essentially it is really only a statement of fact for the buyer that the seller does indeed have a licence. The Police form CAN have space for those other details IF NEEDED but they are not a LEGAL REQUIREMENT for the form to be processed. This is where the breaches are occurring when the officer tells a buyer that the form is incomplete and he cannot sign it, as long as it has the buyers name, address (?) and firearms license details and a stamped signature of a police officer, it is complete.

Originally Posted by timattalon

The form being fill out is a legal requirement, however the act only requires as you quoted

(a) signed by the purchaser; and

(b) bearing an endorsement signed by a member of the Police and stating that the member of the Police—
(i) has inspected the purchaser’s firearms licence; and
(ii) is satisfied that the purchaser is a fit and proper person to purchase that firearm or ammunition."

It is being challenged because the law requires a signed verified form stating the buyer has a license that the seller can rely on that a police officer has checked and the buyer is a legitimate FA license holder who you can send the firearm to.

The law does NOT require

a) the sellers Name, address or license details to be checked.
b) The details (or ANY details) of the firearm being purchased- (Though checking it is not stolen could be a good idea.)
c) And the law states it can be signed and checked by ANY warranted Police personnel- It does not need to go to the Arms office for checking.

These are additions that have been added by the police and the argument is whether they are allowed to legally require these when the law itself does not.

Essentially it is really only a statement of fact for the buyer that the seller does indeed have a licence. The Police form CAN have space for those other details IF NEEDED but they are not a LEGAL REQUIREMENT for the form to be processed. This is where the breaches are occurring when the officer tells a buyer that the form is incomplete and he cannot sign it, as long as it has the buyers name, address (?) and firearms license details and a stamped signature of a police officer, it is complete.

Close, but not quite!

The Act and Regulations do not require a police generated form. Because there is not a requirement for a police generated form, the fact that police have produced one makes it illegal. The fact that the form asks for information that is not required by the Act and Regulations makes this an illegal request by police. The question is who authorized this bogus form and the accompanying time allocated to it's production and processing. Insisting that the form can only be signed by a designated arms officer is a direct contradiction of the Act.
Police may only do that which is specified in Law. They may not make shit up.

You may produce your own form, which may be any grubby piece of paper, stating that you are purchasing a firearm or ammunition, and that you are a fit and proper person to purchase that firearm or ammunition. You are then required to take that form to any member of police and have them sign it after they have inspected your licence to check that you are the person in the photo. There is no provision for the recording of firearms licence details. No stamped signature. You sign it and the member of police signs it. Done.

The whole point of the exercise is that because the seller can't sight your firearms licence personally, that a member of police can sight the licence as the sellers proxy. It is not designed to add layers of difficulty to a sale.

A refusal by a member of police to sign the form when you have a current licence is a dereliction of statutory duty for which there are penalties. The barrister, Nicholas Taylor wants to hear from any firearms owner who has been obstructed by police in this way and told to use the police form. Please record identifying details of the police member concerned and pass on to Mr Taylor.
He has even produced a generic form for the use of firearms owners who do not wish to produce their own.

Those who play on Trademe and accept their conditions are acting against firearms owners and participating in the enemies programme.
Those who use the police form 43a are acting against firearms owners and participating in the enemies programme.

I just use the police form provided and get my guns immediately rather than fuck around trying to buck the system for the sake of it.

Done it twice in the last month. Both time with guns brought off Trademe. I'm planning on doing it again in a few days if I don't get outbid.

And I don't give a fuck if you think that anyone who uses Trademe or a form 43a is "acting against firearms owners and participating in the enemies programme." I think you are weird.

Originally Posted by JWB

Because there is not a requirement for a police generated form, the fact that police have produced one makes it illegal.

It does not make the form illegal at all, it is simply not a legal requirement to use that form.

The arms officer asked me what kind of scope I was going to put on one of the rifles I brought off Trademe.

Is he required to do that? Or is he acting illegally by asking?

Do I report him to Nick Taylor or straight to the Chief of Police or IPCA?

I'm really worried because I told him it would be a new Leupold scope, but in the end I put on an old Redfield that I already had because I had a couple of bills to pay.

Originally Posted by gadgetman

It does not make the form illegal at all, it is simply not a legal requirement to use that form.

If you had produced that form(assuming that you are a private citizen) it would not be an illegal form, as you, being a private citizen may do anything that the law does not forbid.

Police in the other hand, being agents of the state may only do that that the law allows. If you cannot find the legislation permitting an action by an agent of the state then that action is illegal.

Fairly cut and dried, I would have thought!

I talked about this with Robbie Tiffin one day (who was also a lawyer) and I think he said something about the word "order" in the legislation meant there was some legal basis for the police form.

Originally Posted by stug

I talked about this with Robbie Tiffin one day (who was also a lawyer) and I think he said something about the word "order" in the legislation meant there was some legal basis for the police form.

What you "think he said", or even if this was in fact his reasoned "legal" opinion, doesn't make it so! Not even close.
We have a practicing barrister, who specializes in firearms law, that is prepared to argue the opposite on behalf of firearms owners. Mr Tiffin was a firearms retailer who would not have wished to get into any drama with the police as there is no profit to him, but he may well have had a slight conscience over the matter and sought to excuse his compliant actions.

Originally Posted by JWB

If you had produced that form(assuming that you are a private citizen) it would not be an illegal form, as you, being a private citizen may do anything that the law does not forbid.

Police in the other hand, being agents of the state may only do that that the law allows. If you cannot find the legislation permitting an action by an agent of the state then that action is illegal.

Fairly cut and dried, I would have thought!

So by that it would be illegal for any 'agent of the state' to breathe while at work, unless you can find a law stating that they are able to do so?

Originally Posted by JWB

What you "think he said", or even if this was in fact his reasoned "legal" opinion, doesn't make it so! Not even close.
We have a practicing barrister, who specializes in firearms law, that is prepared to argue the opposite on behalf of firearms owners. Mr Tiffin was a firearms retailer who would not have wished to get into any drama with the police as there is no profit to him, but he may well have had a slight conscience over the matter and sought to excuse his compliant actions.

And how much would it cost to have a barrister argue in court about something that doesn't matter in the slightest to me, or I'd imagine many other gun owners? He'll want to be paid, win or lose. Over what piece of paper you fill in when buying a gun.

Originally Posted by systolic

I just use the police form provided and get my guns immediately rather than fuck around trying to buck the system for the sake of it.

Done it twice in the last month. Both time with guns brought off Trademe. I'm planning on doing it again in a few days if I don't get outbid.

And I don't give a fuck if you think that anyone who uses Trademe or a form 43a is "acting against firearms owners and participating in the enemies programme." I think you are weird.

People are different. Some will queue for the cattle-car, while others have to be dragged, kicking and screaming into the cattle car.

Of course it’s important to recognize the cattle car from a passenger-car, so as not to join the queue through ignorance. Once the distinction is pointed out, it’s up to you as to your actions.