Thread: Firearm Storage Requirements

Originally Posted by 308

.......The rule I follow for B-cat is go straight to the range and straight back unless I'm going to a gunsmith.....

That's the requirement for B-cat and it must be in a stout lockable container while being transported.

Originally Posted by 308

You know Savage is a cop, right?

Honestly, that makes no difference, if ANYONE no matter what their profession may be comes here and says something that puts others down and adds no contribution or solid reasoning for it, I will ask them the exact same question, he doesn't get special treatment.

Thanks for the info guys. I guess just try and secure as much as possible and never let it out of my sight. Cheers, Looks like I may have opened a can of worms

Originally Posted by Jexla

Honestly, that makes no difference, if ANYONE no matter what their profession may be comes here and says something that puts others down and adds no contribution or solid reasoning for it, I will ask them the exact same question, he doesn't get special treatment.

No, what you wrote was a put down.
Savage might have pointed out a fact about people being over analytical, but it was not directed at anyone in particular. His suggestion to use 'common sense' was spot on. Funny, as I see that seems to have been the basis of the OPs solution.

Chill.

Originally Posted by Jexla

Honestly, that makes no difference, if ANYONE no matter what their profession may be comes here and says something that puts others down and adds no contribution or solid reasoning for it, I will ask them the exact same question, he doesn't get special treatment.

I don't think Savage was putting anyone down. He has a right to express his opinion too and I agree with him that common sense should be paramount with regard to the firearms safety code. We all know the basic seven rules of firearm safety or should do.

Originally Posted by rs200nz

...Looks like I may have opened a can of worms

Nah, just another typical forum thread, goes in a weird direction after 3 posts - it's in the rules !

Originally Posted by Savage1

People look too far into things and complain that it's open to interpretation, no it's actually pretty simple.

His comment was directly pointed at me, I'm the one that said the legislation is open to interpretation.

Moutere, please quote the put down that you claim.

10-Ring, the question here isn't that commonsense should be paramount or not, that's obvious it should, but that's not always how the police see it and people need to remember that to avoid getting themselves in trouble when unnecessary.

Originally Posted by Jexla

You come here say people do this that, have nothing to actually contribute, why are you here?

But it's starting to get off topic now.

Originally Posted by Jexla

His comment was directly pointed at me, I'm the one that said the legislation is open to interpretation.

Bear in mind though, that is your interpretation of Savage's comment and may not be correct.

Originally Posted by Jexla

Yeah, love to see what the police would say if they caught you with an AR in your backpack.
I remember this question coming up at my mountain safety course and what the guys there suggested is that bolt hidden and gun locked in the car is sufficient.
Problem with our gun laws is that it's EXTREMELY open to interpretation and we need to push for all these things to be laid out plain as daylight, almost every situation explained, there's nothing worse for locking up law abiding citizens than confusing legislation.
Another problem being is they made this legislation very open ended on purpose so they can use it how they see fit.

We'll since you're making such a big deal out of my comment and over analysing it, and somehow thinking that it constituted a put down,

The Arms Act is actually one of the easiest to understand and follow, you throw out a broad sweeping statement that it is "extremely open to interpretation", which is simply just your opinion, which in my experience is completely untrue especially when compared to other most other commonly used legislation. People such as yourself decide to exaggerate one section or subsection, often without looking at relevant case law or even the interpretation section of the act, and state the whole act is poorly written, which I disagree with.

You know what I would say if I came across a person with a ar broken down at in his backpack because he had no way to reasonably secure it in his vehicle and had to quickly nip into a shop? We'll it wouldn't be anything bad because he had taken reasonable and responsible steps to ensure the security of his firearm in the circumstances, the last thing I'd be doing is arresting him and putting him before the courts, I imagine the judge would throw it out and rightfully so as I'm pretty sure it wouldn't be an offence as he had a reasonable and responsible reason for being in possession of the firearm in the circumstances. It would get messy and awkward if it was on show though. Have a read of the solicitor general's prosecution guidelines.

I'm not sure where you get the "legislation very open ended so they can use it how they see fit". It's actually quite simple.

You're missing the forest for the trees.

The last thing police want to be doing is locking up good people for silly stuff, the limited resources are better off directed elsewhere.

This is all just my personal opinion, as your post is yours. Neither really holds any more value than the other persons, unless you're a judge, then you win hands down.

Is that a contribution?

I appreciate the reply, and I applaud you for thinking as you do.
Problem being, you're a firearms user outside of the police force and that means you understand the problems that we can come across.
The same cannot be said for every other police officer, some who don't even know the laws themselves. There have been countless examples on this forum and others of police failing to understand and using the wording of the legislation to how they see fit.
One example as of recently, which I will link for reference is where the police took a mans firearm and firearms licence from him for shooting claybird with his shotgun in a rural area on private property.
There were no charges (yet?) and he has had his belongings taken from him.

Link: http://www.nzhuntingandshooting.co.n...i-stand-18527/

Originally Posted by Tristan

....the Sargent was asking the questions like who was shooting who's gun as who has the fal, she asked how the gun got here and I stated it got here in my ute and she asked if I had a secure lock up in my vehicle for it, to which I said you can carry a gun in a vehicle not loaded breach open for shotgun, she looked at me dead in the eyes and paused for a minute to which I know I was right

Then the Sarg asks him if he had a secure lockup in his ute for it to get it there, now all of us know that's not necessary to transport an A class firearm, but the Sarg didn't seem to.

This is one recent example of many, I'm not going to say you're wrong about anything Savage, but I will say I disagree about the arms act being written very clearly.
I hope if I ever have an encounter with the police related to me using my firearms lawfully it's with you or someone as knowledgeable as you about firearms.

http://www.nzhuntingandshooting.co.n...i-stand-18527/
Personally, my 'opinion' is that there is 3 sides to that particular story. I don't think it's necessarily a clear cut example of poor policing.
The other Nelson incident from the media is the only other one that comes to mind and I can't remember the outcome there. I don't really think that constitutes 'many examples'. However, there may be some support for the argument regarding regional differences in securing a safe.

Here's another curly scenario: what if FAL holder lives the house-bus / campervan lifestyle? Their home where they store their firearm(s) is also a vehicle. What, if any, security arrangements would be acceptable for him/her to be able to legally leave his vehicle/home unattended with firearm(s) secured inside?

Originally Posted by stretch

Here's another curly scenario: what if FAL holder lives the house-bus / campervan lifestyle? Their home where they store their firearm(s) is also a vehicle. What, if any, security arrangements would be acceptable for him/her to be able to legally leave his vehicle/home unattended with firearm(s) secured inside?

Good question.

You covered it in your last few words, "secured inside". The FAL holder would have to have adequate security in his motorhome/caravan. That would be either a gun cabinet or a gun rack that meets the required security criteria. Doubt whether a strong room would be a viable option.

Ask Mr Richard Lincoln when he was living in a house bus in ChCh. I can't remember the exact details on the court case but by memory it hinged around his E Cat application and security - and how which comes 1st.