Thread: Feeling sick after reading this !

Originally Posted by Rushy

Sorry but I simply don’t buy that. Of the three thousand million (rounded) containers that come in to New Zealand every year, how many are thoroughly checked by NZ customs let alone checked thoroughly checked for the presence of firearms. I would suggest that of those containers that are checked by customs, their primary focus would be on unwelcome organisms and drugs. I have no reason to believe that NZ Customs intercept all of the drugs that come in to the country in containers and I have even less reason to believe that there aren’t any firearms concealed with the drug shipments that get through. Hell, I wonder how many customs officers would even recognise firearms parts for what they were if they were on an X-ray screen in front of them. Customs simply do not have the resources required to comprehensively inspect every container that comes here.

Customs have authored a document that listed the guns and parts seized over the past number of years. It is probably somewhere on the customs website

Originally Posted by gundoc

Can you please provide the example of changed legislation to support your comment. The 'right' is recognised by the word 'must' in the Arms Act regarding the issue of a Firearms Licence, not 'may' or 'should' or 'in the discretion of..'. 'Must' is a specific directive of what is required to occur if the applicant is deemed fit and proper' etc.

It is mentioned in the last bit of law that went through that owning firearms is a privillage not a right. That said anyone they dont want to give a licence to will be deemed not fit and propper, and they have expanded that massively to cover just about any situation they want.

Originally Posted by HG Man

Sure. But you don't see a lot of them in press releases for example. Check out Operation Tauwhiro coverage, very few pistols seized during the course of that. But to firm it up, I've lodged an OIA with police, asking about total number of firearms and type of firearms seized.

So I'll let you know in a year when they get back to me.

Be really interesting to see the results, cheers for that!

I imagine those stats will be heavily skewed with all the sawn off .22s/shottys coming under the umbrella "pistols". The fact they seem to be such a large proportion of seized firearms, along with bolt action rifles and break action shotguns, seems to indicate that mass importations across the border aren't the primary source of illegal firearms currently. Super anecdotal though so YMMV

Originally Posted by HG Man

https://www.customs.govt.nz/about-us...s-intercepted/

So its not a report, but its better. You can clearly see that air cargo intercepts of weapons massively outnumber sea cargo. My job is tangently related to the border and I deal with Customs on some things. I also try and read the annual reports of major Govt departments, so I know what my taxes are going towards.

What you fail to recognize is these are only the figures of what is being intercepted not what is being missed. Air freight is loose shipping and easily inspected, containers are not. The money being spent on this worthless firearms register would far better be spent on beefing up port customs and better screening equipment for packed containers.
FACT: Only 2%-5% of sea freighted containers are being inspected. Of this pitiful amount of containers being inspected they found over 5800 firearms. Now do the math on the amount of firearms that are getting in unchecked!

Once again people are under some illusion that this constant attack on lawful firearms owners is to stop some sort of crime occurring..
Firearms will still be stolen whether they are registered or not, what difference will it make if they are on a register to a criminal? You can bet your ass the small number of LFAO's that sell to crims wont register what they sell or just report them lost/stolen anyway.


https://fb.watch/hOdskv8J4f/

Originally Posted by Wingman

FACT: Only 2%-5% of sea freighted containers are being inspected. Of this pitiful amount of containers being inspected they found over 5800 firearms. Now do the math on the amount of firearms that are getting in unchecked!

FACT. Righto, cause its in all caps, its true? Where did you get that figure from? Look at the link I've provided, that disagrees with your statement. I've backed my assertions up, lets see yours.

Originally Posted by HG Man

FACT. Righto, cause its in all caps, its true? Where did you get that figure from? Look at the link I've provided, that disagrees with your statement. I've backed my assertions up, lets see yours.

Did you watch the video link in my post?

Originally Posted by Wingman

Did you watch the video link in my post?

No, I don't use Facebook at all. But I did click the link and if its from the Justice Select Committee for their annual review hearing, you should be able to find an actual link to the documents.

Originally Posted by OGM

One of the things I have found in firearms circles is the amount of speculation which goes on. Maybe its sometimes right, maybe its not. But the issue is when people go and get their end of the world information from mates rather then making a quick call to the Police / Fire Arms Authority and asking for themselves.

But even worse is when they complain about what they heard through the grapevine but have no interest in making a submission or responding to the survey. Oh no, someone else (ie: clubs, orgs, etc) can do that for them...

Right.

Because the police know what they're talking about.

Originally Posted by gundoc

I am a lot of things; stubborn, principled, honest, resilient, self-sufficient, possibly intransigent, but not deluded, obsequious, or timid.

Quite the contrary... a highly skilled expert.

Anyway to answer your question. Case law interprets and applies the law to any given case before the court. The principle I made reference to has been upheld and confirmed now in a huge number of cases but

Barrett v Police [2020] NZDC 9189

Mooseman v Police [2021] NZDC 23700 illustrate how the Court views the current standing of the law.

As far as registration - can anyone see the flaw in person buying firearm registers it, sometime down track the identifying marks are removed in 30 seconds or less with a stolen cordless grinder and then 'disappeared'.

Now, tell me how that is traced back to someone or the ownership discrepancy picked up apart from once every 10 years? And probably not even then unless the license holder comes under scrutiny for another reason.

Bizarre theory and almost religious fervor that registration will 'fix everything' whereas in actual fact it will most likely serve to simply become a noose around the regulators neck when it fails. That's why it's been bloody near abandoned in every jurisdiction that's tried it and only the stupidly stubborn have kept it despite never getting the results that were promised. Just more denial and wasting of taxpayer cash unfortunately.

My own personal belief is that there would be better things to spend that money on that would result in greater protection of life - roading, youth and child welfare and mental health being three obvious starters.

Originally Posted by OGM

So the Police and Government set up a whole new department staffed by folks who's main purpose is to put themselves out of a job?

This is the net effect of some of the claims here.

Doesn't make sense to me.

Invariably when the Government gets interested in something and sets up a department of something, we end up with more of whatever that something is.

Indeed, like forced vaccinations.

Originally Posted by small_caliber

You will find criminals can import firearms in greater quantities, cheaper and in configurations that aren't readily available to the public in New Zealand

And why don't we see these configurations in the seizures where the Police proudly display all the guns and meth they are seizing?

Look at the Customs data that I've given the link to elsewhere, it shows that air cargo intercepts make up the vast majority of the weapons seized at the border. I'm not saying that firearms aren't being imported, just that its not happening through sea cargo.

I think your view of how gangs/criminals get guns is very narrow minded and just mimics the police view. Or its based around the actual facts and figures that are published. Unless you have something to say those figures are wrong?

There's a study of British WW2 bombers that looked at where the returning bombers had suffered hits from flak and fighter guns with a view to increasing the Armour and survivability of the aircraft. All was going well, right up until they plotted the damage visually on the outline of a bomber. Then one bright spark observed that the hits were not in the areas of the engines, fuel hydraulic and cooling systems, pilots or flight controls...

What they were going to do was add Armour where it wasn't needed, as all of the aircraft that returned hit had already survived the damage. It's the missing statistics that didn't return that provided the important info...

Originally Posted by OGM

And the media who are clearly hooked on all that taxpayer, opps I mean government, loot.

Hand in glove.

Originally Posted by OGM

So the Police and Government set up a whole new department staffed by folks who's main purpose is to put themselves out of a job?

This is the net effect of some of the claims here.

Doesn't make sense to me.

Invariably when the Government gets interested in something and sets up a department of something, we end up with more of whatever that something is.

Anyone can see that the enormous charges are a tax. The only part that may cost some money is checking someone out to make sure that they are fit and proper, ie suitable to hold any firearm (and I mean any). That bit I can understand has a real cost. The rest is tax, pure and simple. Why does the government excessively tax certain items? booze, cigarettes, petrol vehicles, carbon etc etc?
Because they maybe want to discourage consumption/use?

I'm afraid if you can't understand that I'm not sure where to go next.