I'm in the process of joining both of these outfits. After all the shit going down in America I want to do my bit to make sure we don't end up like Aussie or worse.
Printable View
I'm in the process of joining both of these outfits. After all the shit going down in America I want to do my bit to make sure we don't end up like Aussie or worse.
NSA Member
I will be re joining NSA just gotta pay up. SSANZ is good for fuck all, their heart is in the right place but they have no clout. Have faded into obscurity.
But you do get the guns and hunting subscription with it for $5 more than it normally costs... S I'm dong that too.Quote:
Originally Posted by Beavis
Same boat as you, just gotta make the payment to the NSA. Their forum is basically empty so was wondering if they actually had anything going on.
The NSA make themselves look like crazy extremist assholes by having shit like
Quote:
For those wishing to prepare for the forthcoming police gun-grab. A product with the same preservative qualities as cosmoline is available here: PVC drainpipe can be obtained from Bunnings or any good plumbing outlet.
on their website. Yeah, "subtly" encouraging people to bury illegal guns. Good job retards, doesn't make the rest of us look like unbalanced idiots at all.
At least they got rid of all the US NRA inspired crap about having guns to overthrow the government, etc.
I'd like like my kids to grow up and have the option of owning firearms including semi autos. I'm joining the NSA :)
It must be a sheltered wee corner of the world that I live in a I have been sublimely ignorant of both of these organisations. Still am as the letters mean nothing to me.
Im in the same boat as rushy
Me too
Curious, but why would you choose to join an organisation that their own members don't participate in their own forum ?Quote:
Originally Posted by RimfireNZ
I think Gimp summed up the NSA succinctly :D
SSANZ - Sporting Shooters Association of New Zealand. Website is here.
NSA - National Shooters Association - website is here.Quote:
The Sporting Shooters Association of New Zealand was established in 1989 as the Shooter's Rights Association. Our aims and objectives are:
To promote safety and firearms in New Zealand.
To help promote the growth of all firearms clubs in New Zealand.
To assist and guide new firearms licence applications and existing licence holders with the new changes.
To attend firearms seminars and meetings on behalf of the members to express their views and concerns.
To help obtain the assistance of local Councils and Local Bodies for a public firearms range in your area.
To liaise with the elected M.P.s of your area for their help and co-operation in firearms related matters and to promote M.P.'s or candidate who are favourable to firearms.
To protect and enhance existing firearms laws and regulations for the benefit of lawful firearms users and their families.
To help and assist New Zealand Police for promotion and understanding of good firearms laws.
To campaign for tougher penalties for the unlawful misuse of firearms or weapons used in criminal acts of violence or robbery and to help promote counselling or compensation for victims of those crimes.
To foster a change through education in the attitudes of those who are not aware of the benefit of all firearms related sports and activities.
Quote:
The National Shooters Association (NSA) was formed, in 2009, by a group of people concerned at unlawful administration of the Arms Act 1986 by anti-gun extremists from police national headquarters. Richard Lincoln, the founding President of the NSA, initiated a legal challenge and a nation wide appeal for participation from all civilian gun owners to support the judicial review (the "Save Our Butts" campaign) opposing the illegal police reclassification of sporting rifles as military style firearms.
The group that formed as a result of the judicial review went on to become the National Shooters Association. Within 48 hours of its launch the NSA had over 100 members signed up and today many more have joined the NSA ranks. The NSA now stands firmly for the rights of all civilian gun owners; covering all genres of sport shooting.
The primary aim of NSA is to ensure that civilian gun owners receive the full protection of the law against police anti-gun extremist initiatives. NSA is involved in many projects that benefit civilian gun owners and lobbies the legislature for rational and sensible arms control law.
Well it was the NSA who (for better or worse) took NZ Poloce to court when they cheanged their "interpretation" of what was and wasn't a pistol grip as regards MSSAs. Was when they suddenly decided that SL8s were overnight E Cat. They took police to court and the judges ruled in favour of NSA. Told police they were there to interpret the law and a "Military Pattern Pistol Grip (as laid down in the regs was exactly that a Pistol Grip with a NATO or Mil Part number. Anything else was not the same, which is why you now have all these A Cat ARs on the market. This is also the reason for the police wanting changes to the arms act to become the same as their "interpretation"
So far it would apprear that the NSA are the teeth of the bear and Colfo (who always just advise gun owners to comply) have become something else
I fear will all be in vain those as all the while NZ firearms owner groups will sell each other down the river police/politicians laugh.
Mikee FYI but over at the 'other' forum when the NSA was starting up, they alienated a lot of shooters by proclaiming "you're either with us or against us" in regards to the thumbhole case and NSA membership. Let's not also forget they started with the blog "From My Cold Dead Hands" and were suprised at the negativity it created from other shooters. And encouraging FAL owners to use a pvc pipe and bury your firearm to prevent any (non-existant) confiscation goes beyond reckless, and is just plain moronic.
While I would totally agree Kscott, and every organisation has their muppets. They are also needed as they are the only ones who have had the balls to challenge the Police re the way they 'interpret" things I joined even though I don't agree with all their statements.Quote:
Originally Posted by Kscott
I especially disagree with the ' use a pvc pipe and bury your firearm to prevent any (non-existant) confiscation" statement even though I think this actually happened in the past. Hopefully they have learned from these PR mistakes.
I will be re-evaluating year by year regarding renewals.
I have a, b and e endorsements and am making the most of my sports while i can, it won't last . I think firearms groups in general will be tripping over each other to sell out each other out as the whole "well we don't mind if you ban these types cause we don't own/use em, what do you need them for anyway" deal takes hold.
So for better or worse they are here and they have had an impact. I paid COLFO for years as part om my Pistol NZ fees and what have they done for us. 3/8ths of bugger all as far as i can tell
The sooner we LFO's can realise we all need to stick together fr the sake of all of our hobby the better
Richard Prosser of NZ first actually coined the PVC down pipe from Bunnings quote during debate over AAB-285-2 in parliament.
There are two "senior" NSA members which throw around the hard core Libertarian rhetoric on the boards, there are also a whole bunch of other members, like myself that keep a lower key. I kind of face palmed in the earlier days of the organisation when they stirred up the fudds on fishncunt. Was some what of a PR shot in the foot.
The NSA website was recently overhauled and the old forum was deleted. The membership process is meant to have been streamlined, as people were complaining that they wanted to join but got no response. Mr Lincoln has been living in a bus (his house got creamed in the Christchurch quake) and trying to do a law degree, as well as take the authorities to court over a bunch of stuff, so has been v.busy.
I agree that the organisation could tone down the political rhetoric, but until I find an organisation with a better level of legal knowledge and willingness to take action for gun owners, I will carry on with them. Anybody interested in owning and shooting "black rifles", has a lot to thank them for. I can only speak for my SR club, but opinion towards them seems to be favourable. People generally think COLFO suck. COLFO's total failure to do anything during the thumbhole stock cluster fuck was really what necessitated the forming of the NSA.
Yep joined the NSA, still awating to pay up :-)
The NSA appear to be the only ones with a pair of balls who are actually prepared to stand up for us and take affirmative action against you know who.
having AR's flood the market like they have done so in recent months must have really kicked up a stink with certain members of the police....
Mr Dunne, where was your input on 285? thrown under the bus yet again
+1, well put Beavis. I'm a member of the NSA simply because the have done more for firearms owners than any other. If you are trying to join or are waiting for payment info, try to re join as their website as it has been redone.
Sent from my HTC Desire HD using Tapatalk 2
Well that sparked a lot of comments. While some of these organisations might have a few extremists and occasionally make a not so appropriate statements, as I said, I'm terrified to think that in ten years I wont be able to go out on the farm and shoot bunnies or targets for fun... let alone shoot anything bigger. So I have to join someone who's going to help. This has really been bugging me. I hate thinking about it.
These politicians, lobby groups and the police have no right to stop people owning guns because it doesn't agree with their sensibilities.
I was just about to say we're lucky here... we're not. We're not as badly pissed on as a lot of other countries. If it ever gets as bad as the UK or Australia here I think I'll pack it in and piss off to the states or somewhere more gun friendly.
There's a chocolate fish to the winner of who can find the number of times the phrase "anti-gun extremists" appears on the NSA website :D
4. How big is this fish? :)
Would have to be at least 25cms if it is a chocolate snapper, unless my wife caught it, in which case it would be around 22lb. I kid you not her first ever snapper caught all by her self was 22 bloody lb!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!Quote:
Originally Posted by Beavis
Here yah go.
http://www.lolly.com.au/media/catalo...i/file_9_6.jpg
Print and eat. :D
I think in light of this achievement I am entitled to a 22lb chocolate fishQuote:
Originally Posted by mikee
I have been an NSA adversary on other boards only because they keep stating that COLFO do nothing, well this is absolute BS!
COLFO's position is quite simple they have the ear of Politicians and certain Police and through these relationships they get to share their thoughts. They advised Police that changing the interpretation on thumb-hole stocks was wrong and that the legislation would not support their position. The Police had an opinion from crown law and the rest is history. COLFO This strengthened COLFO's postion because Police saw they actually knew what they were talking about. they also know that when they go to court against the Police the inside information and opportunities to to put the gun owners side of the case forward will be reduced. As such COLFO were keen to support someone having a crack at the Police but only after the the new AAB bill was passed. The reason for this is that there wasn't a whole lot in that bill that was worrying. (yes it was a compromise but the reality is that's what is sometimes necessary) They had an agreement with a third party to fund them to take the Police to court but only after the bill was passed. Instead we had Lincoln win, a victory? Perhaps. The upside was we got a lot of cheap AR's into NZ. The downside was is that the Police withdrew the existing Bill, dotted there I's and crossed there T's and foisted upon us the monstrosity we now have. One of the NSA mouth pieces is all for court challenges but the reality is that every time the Police lose they just get the Politicians to change the law to suit them, it really is a no win situation.
What COLFO offer is reasoned arguments that are supported by fact and statistics, that's what Politicians will listen to, they wont engage with the NSA because they see them as a bunch of nutters with guns; and yes that is a quote I heard first hand from an NZ First minister who must remain nameless. Legislating against firearms is really easy for politicians there's virtually no downside, so making them aware of things like how good our current laws actually are and how the balance between person freedoms and public safety are easily met without having to pander to Police desires for more power, is very powerfull.
The point I will make regarding the NSA is that the are not people who have mainstream views. Lincoln is being funded by Gun City and the chief mouth Piece for the NSA has taken the Police to Court on a number of occasions and as mentioned above when the lost they just had the law changed, the last time was in 1992 if any of you remember that debacle! I wont argue that NSA offer a compelling arguement, they tell you that they will fight them on the beaches etc etc. This makes you feel good but the simple facts are that NSA are a legal challenge organisation only and for the 3rd time this only results in new and harsher laws.
So in the end you may be wondering what has COLFO actually done, here a few things recently:
COLFO convinced Police that restrictions on magazine capacity for E cat licence holders were a waste of time. This was no easy sell as the Police Operations Exec (This is who actually makes Police Policy not just Joe Green) agreed that there would be nothing to be gained by reducing E cat licence holders to 10 rounds.
COLFO got Police to see that the hand in policy for E cat licence holders was over burdening and that as long as there was a genuine reason nothing had to be handed in. Again this is an Operations Exec decision so it is not able to be overturned on a whim.
COLFO have also made it clear and many senior Police and Politicians agree, that a pistol grip is not there for shooting from the hip but for better control of your firearm; they also agree that being in control of your firearm is a good thing.
What is still not clear is the Police position going forward. There is still the possibility they will push to ban all AR15 and AK style rifles along with any other MSSA. There are certainly enough senior Police who support this position. The influx of AR15's has only made some them even more determined. We are still not sure if all military style rifles will be made MSSA's or whether they will do as they have intimated and try and get back to the position they had prior to 2009. Thanks to Richard Lincoln's challenge we now have some fairly nasty laws to deal with and Police are holding all the cards. Your best hope is COLFO, they are the only one Police and Politicians listen to.
This is likely to be an unpopular post but the truth often is.
Herb, you well know my position on firearms orgs, so we won't go there. Even though I'm one of those "gun wielding nut cases" or what ever the pollies think we are, I do agree with the points you raise and commend COLFO for at least attempting to talk "them" round.
Where we part ways is where I believe COLFO are kidding themselves if they think logic and reasoning is going to influence their desired end game - the whole sale crack down on A cat holders being able to own semi autos. Almost 300 submissions couldn't tell those mouth breathers that this AAB is a shitty law which will generate confusion and inevitably result in a judicial review. Call me a pessimist, but I saw the thumbhole debacle as another stepping stone towards taking semi auto's off the open market. I'm not kidding myself - I know EXACTLY what the intent of the '92 amendment was, and the thumbhole stock issue and now this amendment. They do not want modern, accurate, ergonomic and effective semi auto rifles from being available to the public at large. The fact that they have struggled to come up with a way to stop the whole sale import of undesirable rifles, due to poorly thought out legislation has been a real thorn in their side. The new bill addresses that issue by giving them the ability to name what they please as an MSSA, rather than making every semi auto fall under the requirement of an E endoresment. They know that would stir up too much resistance from more main stream gun owners at the moment.
And this is where I'm getting at - you can talk to them all you want, but the end game stays the same. What would the MSR scene be like in NZ right now had no action been taken by R.Lincoln? Pretty abysmal I reckon. Mini 14's and crappy trigger rear Saiga's would be about it. I can't speak for any other service rifle club but my own, but giving A catters access to decent quality rifles to start out with seems to have drummed up more interest in the sport. No longer do you start out with a grubby SKS, then save shitloads for a budget AR on E cat, at a highly inflated price. It is a real shame it will come to an end shortly. I have made heaps of new friends and had some great times, meeting all the guys with similar tastes, coming out of the wood work.
They are slowly grinding us down, the best we can do is lodge court action where applicable to give them a punch in the nose now and then. It boils down to the fact that people want these guns, the authorities don't so conflict is bound to result.
I know we all need to work together and stick together. United we stand. Not just Colfo and the NSA etc but all shooters...hunters, target shooters, clay, pistol, etc, etc.
You have a strange concept of the Truth,somehow you atempt to dride the NSA and at the same time tell everyone you have your hand up their back (think pupet) by somehow organising thier funding.And as for attempting to link them with the 1992 Legislation is very poor indeed.Then the new Legislation is somehow the NSA's fault because they chalenged the Police.Quote:
Originally Posted by Herbmiester
Then COLFO somehow have a major influence on Police policy but somehow forget to tell anyone that they have done such thing.Colfo is nothing but a group of people who have their snouts in the trouh and don't want to rock the trough in case some of it spills.A case of point was when the NZDA threatened to pull out ,then amazingly all of a sudden NZDA executive get on the train or is that in the trough.
And according to COLFO itself all they have done in the last 6 months is send some emails !!!!.
I have seen on the other forums the amount of passion in this argument.
At the time of the 2009 Thumbhole debacle I was keen to see a new organisation arise. The NZ Police had decided to change their interpretation of the pistol grip rules. But were taken to court, lost the case and then like bad sports ran away to mummy to get the law changed.
So I was pleased to see the NSA formed. There was alot of passion and people wanted a way to get their views put across to deaf and dumb politicans-who remain blind in the most case.
However I have seen Herb and others who support COLFOs style of operation get rucked and mauled and heckled on other forums and really its not good to see this happen.
I now see how COLFOs operation can be effective and I am pleased that COLFO is in the position to talk with Police and Politicians on firearm owners behalf's and I beleave they do have a positive effect in forming a form of relationship between us and the Police/Poli's and also have achieved some sound outcomes.
Part of the reason so many of us felt the NSA was needed was the lack of information us members of COLFO received from the executive. As being a member of a Pistol Club or Service Service Rifle Club we just didn't hear what was being done.
This does seemed to have changed lately and now we do get updates and see what is being done for us.
I personally felt that the NSA giving the police a fight and seeing the Police lose the high court case was a good thing in terms of showing how small and childish they were being. That they ran away to mummy Collins and cried to her was always going to happen. As is pretty clear the Police were always going to try to get semi's restricted, if not now then in 2 yrs, 4 yrs etc.
The big thing that I don't feel many people understood was that the original version of the AAB currently before parliament could have had some bolt rifles also restricted to MSSA. Luckily those who submitted against the bill were
able to stop that.
I do now see how COLFO has achieved positive results and that their style is quietly achieving and I now support them again- thanks to Herbs postings and a new publicity approach by COLFO in informing its members what is being done. Thanks Herb.
My wish would be for all firearm groups and organisations to come together sit down and move on forward together. As the more of us together and on they same side and united will make more Poli's sit up and listen. If we continue to fight each other the Police and Poli's will just love it.
To bury the hatchet and work together would be my wish for COLFO and the NSA in the new year. I see value in both these organisations.
Cheers.:thumbsup:
Just to clear a few things up; firstly there is room for the NSA, there is nothing wrong with a good cop bad cop approach. Please excuse the pun. However on other forums I have defended COLFO as many of the NSA supporters bag them for doing nothing, I see some people realise that working behind the scenes and giving solid clear advice is not doing nothing. Yes its a less in your face approach than the NSA but that's not necessarily a bad thing.
A few points for Tanked. I never stated that the NSA were involved in any of the 1992 legislation. It is a fact that Mr Jim Henry was part of a group who took the Police to Court and won when the Police initially took their stance on MSSA's after Aromoana. What resulted from that is the 1992 ACT. This was a response by the Police and Government at the time to close the loop opened by the loss of the aforementioned court case. Does this seem similar to what we are going through right now?
Also for the record no one is getting rich at COLFO, they volunteer their time and the NZSRA rep to COLFO puts in a huge amount of personal time and effort and he is one of the reasons Service Rifle Shooting is seen by the Police as a legitimate use for MSSA's. COLFO have a fighting fund, that's what all the cash is for. If they have to hire someone like Chen Palmer to counter a crown Law opinion then you can kiss goodbye to $20-30k in a heart Beat. Imagine what it would cost if they had to hire them for a full blown court case; COLFO funds emptied!
Part of the issue with COLFO is they cant always say what they are up to as this compromises there relationship with their Police and Government contacts. This pisses many people off as they believe COLFO are sleeping with the enemy. I guess you either trust them to do their job or you don't. I will say this however these people are passionate about firearms ownership, they own pistols, MSSA's and restricted firearms so the last thing they want is to see there hard won privileges eroded.
I am as little dog has mentioned sick of the arguments over NSA vs COLFO, the fact is that effective lobby groups have for centuries altered the political landscape and they have done so mostly outside the sphere of public knowledge. If you feel better about joining the NSA then great join them, just be clear about what they can do and what influence they actually have.
When we finally understand the full ramifications of the new legislation we can then decide if one victory in court is worth giving the Police "Orders in council". Because when you look at it in the cold hard light of day that's what was traded.
I think realistically, court action is a last ditch attempt to stop an erosion of privileges. In the case of the original amendment, the COP wanted an out right ban on the import of certain rifles - no special import permits - a flat out ban, not coming in ever again. Fortunately PSI, in a similar action to NSA thumbhole case took him to court, citing "ultra vires" behavior and fortunately for us agreed and slapped the ban down. I think this was a better out come than pandering to the wants of our police force and not rocking the boat. If it wasn't for that we would probably be shooting service rifle with Mosins and Enfields almost exclusively. If that were the case I wouldn't bother making the 4 hour + return trip to my club every month or two. So I think it stands to reason that court action is better than no action at all, but I know what you mean - court action inevitably results in legislative change. Pretty catch 22 if you ask me. A shit system.
Agreed.Quote:
Pretty catch 22 if you ask me. A shit system.
Thanks for your comments GIMP. NSA has not encouraged anyone to bury an illegal gun. It is not clear what you are refering to when you say "illegal gun." I have never heard of a gun being charged, convicted or serving a sentence.Quote:
Originally Posted by gimp
The law in New Zealand makes it illegal sometimes for a person to be in possesion of a gun. The law may change soon and thereby create more circumstances which criminalise a civilian gun owner for possession of gun that is their property. Under these circumstances the person is obliged to dispossess themself of their gun. They may wish to store their gun for some future time when the law is relaxed and a new government brings about gun control laws that are rational and decriminalise the possession of such a firearm. The current owner may therefore wish to dispossess himself or herself of their gun by burying in a safe place for the day that the repeal of the offensive law occurs. For that purpose we advise gun owners in that position to use cosmoline and bury their gun in order to obey the law and dispossess themself of it, until the law is repealed. Incidently, this is exactly what has occurred in Australia and now, as the draconian restrictions over there are relaxed, more and more stored guns are able to be reclaimed by displaced owners.
This is one of the inherent problems with the changeability and uncertainty of law. For example, if homosexuality was criminalised in New Zealand, I think you would be niave to expect that all homosexuals would suddenly become hetrosexual. At best they could be expected not to engage in homosexual practices until they succeed in having the law repealed. The situation with unstable gun control law is really no different.
NSA members are a diverse range of people. Private professionals, lawyers and even a few police officers. I don't know any of our members who I would say is a crazy extremist asshole or a retard.
We have never encouraged or endorsed anyone to take up arms against the government. You may be confusing the NSA with the group responsible for the training camps in the Urewera; that was nothing to do with NSA or any of its members.
Kind regards
Richard Lincoln
National Shooters Association
Thankyou for your series of Replys KSCott.Quote:
Originally Posted by Kscott
Civilian gun owners widely supported and financed the resistance and court case which ruled against the police attempts to legislate sporting firearms into an MSSA category. A small minority criticised the legal action I took against police. I respect the right of anyone to acquiescence but it is not something I would do. I think the judgment of the High Court is sufficient to settle any argument about the rights and wrongs of the 'save our butts' court case. I was in fact surprised by the positivity and saw very little in the way of negativity.
We agree with you that there is no direct order of confiscation on the agenda. We did not suggest that there was. We believe that civilian gun owners will face restrictions in 2013 and many will be faced with the choice of dispossesing themself of their firearm(s). If they hand the firearms to police (as police will surely suggest) there will almost certainly be no compensation and the firearms will be destroyed and therefore unable to be reclaimed once the regulations are struck out by the High Court or the law is changed after the next election. We therefore encourage people to comply with the law by dispossessing themself of their firearm by storing it buried out of harms way and presevered for saftey in cosmoline. Once NSA has succeeded in getting the regulations struck off or the law changed, gun owners will be able to repatriate their firearms. It is worth mentioning that there is no government warehousing option that has been made available; all guns surrendered to police in these circumstances are permanently surrendered and destroyed: too late to get the family heirloom or favourite sentimentally valued rifle back once its been through the police crusher in the Lower Hutt armoury.
This is not like the land taken in Zimbabwe by Mugabe. Once Mugabe has gone the white farmers can return home and reclaim their titles. In our case the property taken is destroyed forever. Rivers, Perry and Taylor and co will eventually go, but that will not return the rifle that I bequeath to my son or grandson.
If you have some other useful suggestion as to what effected civilian gun owners ought to do to comply with the pending regulations, we would be grateful for your constructive comments.
Kind Regards
Richard Lincoln
So your saying people can legally bury firearms in pvc pipes to comply with the pending regulations?
Im not trying to be a smart arse, just trying to get my head around your statement
Quote:
Originally Posted by savage270
Tbh I thought that in a way is still in your possession
Well, no - not in my opinion.Quote:
Originally Posted by Toby
"Possession is 9/10th's of the law". You can't get arrested for something you don't have. If universal registration of firearms in NZ had succeeded, then yes, perhaps there'd be a case to answer for because the police would have the firearm and owner's details on record and if one wasn't able to account for that firearm then they could be charged with negligence or whatever the legally appropriate term might be.
Quote:
Thanks for your comments GIMP. NSA has not encouraged anyone to bury an illegal gun. It is not clear what you are refering to when you say "illegal gun." I have never heard of a gun being charged, convicted or serving a sentence.
The law in New Zealand makes it illegal sometimes for a person to be in possesion of a gun. The law may change soon and thereby create more circumstances which criminalise a civilian gun owner for possession of gun that is their property. Under these circumstances the person is obliged to dispossess themself of their gun. They may wish to store their gun for some future time when the law is relaxed and a new government brings about gun control laws that are rational and decriminalise the possession of such a firearm. The current owner may therefore wish to dispossess himself or herself of their gun by burying in a safe place for the day that the repeal of the offensive law occurs. For that purpose we advise gun owners in that position to use cosmoline and bury their gun in order to obey the law and dispossess themself of it, until the law is repealed. Incidently, this is exactly what has occurred in Australia and now, as the draconian restrictions over there are relaxed, more and more stored guns are able to be reclaimed by displaced owners.
This is one of the inherent problems with the changeability and uncertainty of law. For example, if homosexuality was criminalised in New Zealand, I think you would be niave to expect that all homosexuals would suddenly become hetrosexual. At best they could be expected not to engage in homosexual practices until they succeed in having the law repealed. The situation with unstable gun control law is really no different.
NSA members are a diverse range of people. Private professionals, lawyers and even a few police officers. I don't know any of our members who I would say is a crazy extremist asshole or a retard.
We have never encouraged or endorsed anyone to take up arms against the government. You may be confusing the NSA with the group responsible for the training camps in the Urewera; that was nothing to do with NSA or any of its members.
Kind regards
Richard Lincoln
National Shooters Association
Don't be so stupid, encouraging people to bury a prohibited weapon is an offence, enough of an offence to get your FAL revoked.
Burying a weapon in the ground doesn't "dispossess" it from you. I suggest you look up the definition of possession before making such stupid statements. Look up the case law Sullivan v Earl of Caithness (1976) while you are at it.
I remember when Canada's LGR got shredded there were threads on CGN and CGS about what guns you were finally digging up after x number of years. Pretty hard case.
In answer to the last few replies to this thread:
@Savage1: Im not sure what in your opinion is a 'prohibited weapon'. As far as I am aware, the only weapons that are prohibited in NZ are anti-personnel mines and cluster munitions. NSA does not encourage people to bury anti-personnel mines or cluster munitions. Anyone in possession of such prohibited weapons ought to hand them into the nearest arms office or MoD bomb disposal unit.
I am not aware that it is an offence to encourage a person to bury something. If you can direct me to the section of the Summary Proceedings Act, Arms Act or Crimes Act that sets out a penal offence for encouraging a third party to bury something I would be interested to check that out. I am not aware that a firearms licence can be revoked for any reason other than the licence holder being considered not fit and proper to hold such a licence.
Most DC case and all High Court cases involving the Arms Act are reviewed by me as the president of NSA and I have never seen any case where a judge has convicted a person for unlawful possession of a firearm that they have preserved in cosmoline and buried in the ground.
@Ryan, Toby, Savage 270 & Savage1: The term "possession" has a complex, somewhat flexible but certainly unique meaning for the purposes of the Arms Act 1983. New Zealand cases such as Coorey v Police and Roberts v Police have established, for example, that "possession" has a different meaning for the purposes of the Misuse of Drugs Act and the Arms Act. Sullivan v Earl of Caithness (1976) is presumably a UK case that does not concern the NZ Arms Act; it is therefore not applicable.
There is no hard and fast meaning as to 'possession' for the purpose of the NZ Arms Act. An indicator may be a case (I have forgotten the citation but its widely known) about a civilian gun owner that had a sporting semi-automatic in his safe and a couple of normal capacity 30 round magazines were discovered in a space above his HWC. He was found guilty of unlawful possession of a MSSA. The Judge noted that the material fact on which the case turned was that both the rifle and the magazines were found in the same residential property. The Judge noted that had the rifle and the magazines been stored in different locations, so they were not immediately 'at hand' then the charge of possession of an MSSA would almost certainly not be sustained. This case would seem to indicate that even if a person has ownership of a firearm or parts thereof, and knows where to retrieve it from, if that is a remote location; such that the firearm or parts are not immediately at hand, then there is no possession.
All NZ legislation is required to be interpreted purposively (s5.1 IA 1999) and the purpose of the Arms Act is to control firearms and ensure public saftey. The primary concern which is repeated by members of our legislature ad nauseum is keeping guns out of the wrong hands. That of course strongly suggests that guns in the right hands or no hands at all are not the mischief which the Arms Act and it's regulations are aimed at. If the right hands disposses themselves of a gun pending a change in the legal landscape, and the right hands then repatriate that gun, it would seem that the working purpose of the Arms Act is met.
Hope this helps explain the position
Kind regards
Richard Lincoln
Sorry I was talking about restricted weapons. Telling people to bury restricted weapons in the ground to hide from the Police would be an offence under section 50 of the Arms Act and section 66(1)(d) of the Crimes Act.Quote:
Originally Posted by krewzr
Your right, a FAL cannot be revoked unless the holder is deemed not to be an unfit or proper person. Inciting people to commit an offence against the Arms Act would be than enough to show you to not be a fit or proper person.
NZ does use case law from other countries, especially the UK since our legal system was based on theirs. Possession generally means they have knowledge of the object and have physical control over it. Hence the case law I outlined earlier where the defendant was over 100km from the firearms and they weren't stored on his property but was convicted because he had knowledge of them and physical control of them.
How could you possibly think that hiding restricted weapons could be anything but illegal?!
How about you do something responsible and legal, and encourage people to obtain the appropriate endorsements if they want to possess restricted weapons rather than illegally bury them to hide them from the Police just in case there is a law change.