Thread: WE LOST

From NZAR15 on Facebook.

https://www.facebook.com/pg/nzar15/p...=page_internal

WE LOST.

Unfortunately the Auckland District Court judge ruled that an MSSA with a stock that collapses under 762mm is a pistol.

I hope to make the transcript of the judges ruling available over at Firearm Owners United NZ later today.

A gun which can shoot and is below 762mm length is a pistol. Waste of money and court time?

Originally Posted by Cordite

A gun which can shoot and is below 762mm length is a pistol. Waste of money and court time?

not when for a number of years the cops told us(and let us import) E cat guns could be under that length when folded. Nothing to do with this has anything to do with if the gun can shoot in its shorter state

Originally Posted by res

not when for a number of years the cops told us(and let us import) E cat guns could be under that length when folded. Nothing to do with this has anything to do with if the gun can shoot in its shorter state

That would be a dodgy ruling, considering that most bolt guns can be fired with the stock removed

Originally Posted by Beavis

That would be a dodgy ruling, considering that most bolt guns can be fired with the stock removed

Yes it's going to cause all sorts of headaches. I think the decision has been made by someone without a full enough understanding of firearms and it needs to be appealed

Originally Posted by Danger Mouse

Yes it's going to cause all sorts of headaches. I think the decision has been made by someone without a full enough understanding of firearms and it needs to be appealed

Surely if the judge made their decision without a full enough understanding of firearms, then that's the fault of the lawyers taking the case to court and their expert witnesses?

Originally Posted by res

not when for a number of years THE COPS TOLD US(and let us import) E cat guns could be under that length when folded. Nothing to do with this has anything to do with if the gun can shoot in its shorter state

Ahem, @res... methinks I hear ye ghostly echo of @ryancairns and his "verily-no-firearm-that-copper-saith-so!" pinfire import saga.

Break-open guns are irrelevant, the key word is "break". It can not be fired in its broken-open state.

NZ Police are of course at fault, what with changing lines of advice etc. etc. don't get me wrong on this, but still, here is my legal opinion on the merits of the court case:



Only outstanding question is, why does this make me think of @gadgetman?

Originally Posted by Cordite

Ahem, @res... methinks I hear ye ghostly echo of @ryancairns and his "verily-no-firearm-that-copper-saith-so!" pinfire import saga.

HaHaHa Ha, I can see where your coming from but there is worlds of diferance (at least in my mind) between published police policy with decades of import permits issued and a one off conversaion.

Break-open guns are irrelevant, the key word is "break". It can not be fired in its broken-open state.

nore can lots of guns with folding stocks-including one version of the test gun in this case. I very much hope your right though-but dont think its a given. We really need to wait for more info.

NZ Police are of course at fault, what with changing lines of advice etc. etc. don't get me wrong on this, but still, here is my legal opinion on the merits of the court case:

Attachment 99319

Only outstanding question is, why does this make me think of @gadgetman?

go go gadget legs?

end of the day I dont really care how this case plays out as long as we end up with a clear way fwd- Ill weild some stocks and replace parts on some others and it will only leave me with one rifle that will have to become C or preferably B, as long as no stupid wording catches other stuff out

Originally Posted by res

go go gadget legs?

end of the day I dont really care how this case plays out as long as we end up with a clear way fwd- Ill weild some stocks and replace parts on some others and it will only leave me with one rifle that will have to become C or preferably B, as long as no stupid wording catches other stuff out

What makes you think that PNZ will classify it as an approved pistol?
What makes you think your arms officer will give you permission to keep it on your B license?

Originally Posted by Cordite

A gun which can shoot and is below 762mm length is a pistol. Waste of money and court time?

Exactly....
As disappointed as everyone is this ruling should be no shock to anyone. The law is there for everyone to read, plain and simple Arms act 1983 "pistol means any firearm that is designed or adapted to be held and fired with 1 hand; and includes any firearm that is less than 762 millimetres in length" No mention of anything with a folding stock, min or max lengths...Just because police had a policy doesn't make it law...
The police do not make rulings on the law, and their view is not legal advice. Courts set the rulings on how the law is to be applied.


People are very quick to challenge a policy when it removes privileges from us but not many people decided to seek their own legal advice or put their own interpretation on it.

Originally Posted by Nugget connaisseur

not many people decided to seek their own legal advice or put their own interpretation on it.

not as clear cut as you make it if you look at past rulings around length, and people did get legal advice

I cant think of one that cant be fired without the stock if you realy wanted to.

Originally Posted by Marty Henry

I cant think of one that cant be fired without the stock if you realy wanted to.

Same applies for a lot of semi auto's, 22s in particular.

so if i was to remove a stock off my 10/22 for re oiling i'm now an illegal pistol owner ? i usually put a coat of oil on all my wood stocks once a year or so

Originally Posted by gonetropo

so if i was to remove a stock off my 10/22 for re oiling i'm now an illegal pistol owner ? i usually put a coat of oil on all my wood stocks once a year or so

I'd say yes if you took it out of the same room as the stock