Thread: Colfo Announce Firearms Registry Review

@Ben Waimata
Good on ya for trying to see the positive in the situation and I would like to be able to agree with you but I just don't trust Popo because they have screwed up , not listened and generally fucked us around for so long that if Cahill told me that grass is green and water is wet, I'd go outside to check for myself

Originally Posted by Micky Duck

close but no cigar.........gun can be registered to joe X and continue to be registered to joeX yet it may now be long gone and moved off to darker pastures...untill such time as its found,with serial number,serial numberless..oops even then its no longer tracable back to joeX and nobody will ever check if joeX has or has not still got it

How dare you to counteract narratives with common sense and facts!

Originally Posted by Ben Waimata

Idiots like this give us all a bad name. This is actually the one and only thing the register will be good for, stopping these fools selling firearms to gangs. And yes the irony of the fact that the firearm could be traced back without a register is not lost on me, but registered firearms will act as strong incentive to stop this happening in future. A year ago I would have never dreamed I'd ever be suggesting positives from the register on this forum!

The media (propaganda outlets), and ideologues are giving us a bad name, or at least are trying to.

Occurrences like this one only mean they have to invent less and might only have to slightly "adjust" the facts to work in their favor.

How is the register going to actually stop someone selling a gun to a gang member. Tell me please I need a good laugh...

Originally Posted by blip

How is the register going to actually stop someone selling a gun to a gang member. Tell me please I need a good laugh...

If the registry stopped gang members from aquiring firearms the left wingers would not be so adamantly in favor of it...

Originally Posted by Micky Duck

close but no cigar.........gun can be registered to joe X and continue to be registered to joeX yet it may now be long gone and moved off to darker pastures...untill such time as its found,with serial number,serial numberless..oops even then its no longer tracable back to joeX and nobody will ever check if joeX has or has not still got it

Just attach a NAIT tag to guns Micky. Well obviously it would be called a NGIT tag because it is a gun not a animal. Then problem solved.
Cause the NAIT system works so well.
Oh that's right. Forget I said anything.

Originally Posted by Cyclops

An extract from the article
A semi-automatic rifle suspected of being fired in an Auckland gang shooting was traced back to a licenced gun owner who legally purchased the gun four years earlier.

The Beretta CX4 Storm found in the possession of a Head Hunter in February 2022, just days after a shooting involving a rival gang, was one of 15 firearms purchased by the firearms licence holder over an 18-month period starting in 2017.

He then illegally sold the guns to criminal associates who didn’t have licences.

As well as the semi-automatic Beretta – later banned completely after the Christchurch terrorist attacks – one of the 10 shotguns the 37-year-old bought was later discovered in the possession of a Black Power prospect.

The licence holder has now pleaded guilty to a representative charge of unlawful possession of firearms and will be sentenced in August.

In a separate investigation, another licensed gun owner has recently admitted illegally supplying ammunition to Texas Doctor, a patched member of the Rebels motorcycle gang.

Why was he declared to be 'fit and proper' when he applied for his Firearms license if he associated with criminals......

He should never have been licensed in the first place...

Well, you can associate with criminals without knowing they are criminals to be fair. And there is a fair bit of go forwards to your argument that people who shouldn't have been licensed were allowed to get them - that I don't think anyone will dispute!

Originally Posted by No.3

A lot of the initial applicants got denied - and were loud about it. .

@No.3 Do you know this for a fact? I ask because I heard the same stories, but did not know the people involved or all the details. It is possible the applicants did not fit the strict legislative requirements, eg "pest control on mates place" does not fit the legislation, "significant economic and/or ecological damage from pests eating my crops and/or forest and/or native reserve" does. I have spoken to the guys at PNHQ about this and got the distinct impression they have had very few applications in the land manager category, and accept the majority that come in that fit the requirements, sometimes after re-application to get the wording right. I don't personally know many people who have applied for P for farms but every one was accepted. Most of the applications I have heard of that were declined appear to be because they did not meet the even stricter "fit and proper" status required for P than for A, ie criminal record, history of violence etc, or did not otherwise fit the criteria;

a person who is the owner or manager, or is an employee, of an agricultural, a horticultural, or a silvicultural business, if there is a real possibility that the commercial viability of the business would be detrimentally affected to a significant extent by the presence of prescribed wild animals or animal pests on any land used for that business (subject to prescribed limits, if any). Arms Act 4A, (1), (j).

Originally Posted by Ben Waimata

@No.3 Do you know this for a fact? I ask because I heard the same stories, but did not know the people involved or all the details. It is possible the applicants did not fit the strict legislative requirements, eg "pest control on mates place" does not fit the legislation, "significant economic and/or ecological damage from pests eating my crops and/or forest and/or native reserve" does. I have spoken to the guys at PNHQ about this and got the distinct impression they have had very few applications in the land manager category, and accept the majority that come in that fit the requirements, sometimes after re-application to get the wording right. I don't personally know many people who have applied for P for farms but every one was accepted. Most of the applications I have heard of that were declined appear to be because they did not meet the even stricter "fit and proper" status required for P than for A, ie criminal record, history of violence etc, or did not otherwise fit the criteria;

a person who is the owner or manager, or is an employee, of an agricultural, a horticultural, or a silvicultural business, if there is a real possibility that the commercial viability of the business would be detrimentally affected to a significant extent by the presence of prescribed wild animals or animal pests on any land used for that business (subject to prescribed limits, if any). Arms Act 4A, (1), (j).

A lot of these people as I heard it were not 'commercial' but were family or otherwise closely associated with the operation of the farm. So, in that case - not employed, not a direct owner of the land in the narrow description so failed the first element of the test. When business doesn't operate in the same fashion that the legislative people dictate it creates something hard to fight against. These same farms are now reporting a noticeable increase in non-business animal spread and also in expansion of species that haven't been reported in those areas before. I note several farms in the king country are reporting small herds of red deer with fallow making an appearance as well where they have never been recorded before, and there are reports I've heard of Sika a lot further from their 'traditional' areas than what is their reported range. Closer to home (apparently no deer in the Kaimais), wallaby are spreading slowly and we have more deer of several species to chose from and numbers of pigs are going up as well.

Originally Posted by No.3

A lot of these people as I heard it were not 'commercial' but were family or otherwise closely associated with the operation of the farm. So, in that case - not employed, not a direct owner of the land in the narrow description so failed the first element of the test. When business doesn't operate in the same fashion that the legislative people dictate it creates something hard to fight against. These same farms are now reporting a noticeable increase in non-business animal spread and also in expansion of species that haven't been reported in those areas before. I note several farms in the king country are reporting small herds of red deer with fallow making an appearance as well where they have never been recorded before, and there are reports I've heard of Sika a lot further from their 'traditional' areas than what is their reported range. Closer to home (apparently no deer in the Kaimais), wallaby are spreading slowly and we have more deer of several species to chose from and numbers of pigs are going up as well.

Yeah this is the problem, and exactly why we need ACT to reform the firearm laws before the country needs to start spending billions of dollars on catch-up pest control. I have heard that wallabies are the pest problem that gets access to semi autos more easily, due to pressure on PNHQ from Regional Councils. All my dealings with PNHQ have been very helpful, I feel like they understand the issues very well and are only held back by the legislation. Which is why it's so annoying that so many farmers with pest problems are not applying, just saying "it's too hard" without making any effort to even try.

Yes and no, theres a huge amount of other pressures on a lot of these guys and they (in a lot of cases anyway) just don't have the energy to devote to that. Staffing woes, can't get staff or when they do turn into a bloody nightmare (drugs, attendance, theft, hangers on creating damage etc, not doing the damn job when they do turn up), mechanical issues with gear, contractors pissing the world off, suppliers not doing the job, Fonterra etc (nuff said), council and regulatory hurdles, blah blah blah blah blah.

I know of one outfit where their answer was build a trickier fence by digging out and supporting their land side of the boundary fence. I looked sideways at the fella, and said it won't stop them jumping in???? What you up to Willus? He replied I know, I want them to jump in. Then I can shoot them at my convenience during the daytime so I don't have to be on the farm 14-16 hours a day and again 6 hours at night doing pest control... Roger, right you are...

I've taken a few pesky thieves off a few local places as a favour - but no way I'd meet the definition as a 'P' operator with that but there is a real shortage of people A) willing to do the work and B) able to put safety plans in place to meet the health and safety requirements.

The ting is a simple dremmel followed by a centre punch makes the info useless.

Originally Posted by 300CALMAN

The ting is a simple dremmel followed by a centre punch makes the info useless.

Geez - you're neat and tidy aren't you? Apparently a couple of seconds with an angle grinder removes the identifiers, increases portability at the loud end and removes the problematic lump of wood at the back that prevents you from unlawfully concealing the thing inside your jacket on the way to your (helpfully prior arranged and publicly notified for everyone's safety) criminal shootout. Where's the Tui can emoji when you need it haha.

Originally Posted by No.3

I know of one outfit where their answer was build a trickier fence by digging out and supporting their land side of the boundary fence. I looked sideways at the fella, and said it won't stop them jumping in???? What you up to Willus? He replied I know, I want them to jump in. Then I can shoot them at my convenience during the daytime so I don't have to be on the farm 14-16 hours a day and again 6 hours at night doing pest control... Roger, right you are...
.

Not very sporting but I've been thinking about how to set up something like that too.... some kind of deer trap or pit to corral them until I'm ready, rather than knocking them over on their terms. They're pests here.

Speaking of pits, the very first time I saw deer damage on this farm was about 15 years ago, I had dug a pit and lined it with plastic to use it to brew fermented biofertilizer. I'd just got the pit dug and lined with plastic, came back in the morning and the lining had deer print holes all through it. Flaming animal had either jumped or fallen into the pit and made a series of nice holes through the lining on the way out. That was the end of that idea.