this is from the POL67/K(S) Police security report form.
no mention of bolt at all, only that ammunition must be stored separately.
Attachment 8320
Printable View
this is from the POL67/K(S) Police security report form.
no mention of bolt at all, only that ammunition must be stored separately.
Attachment 8320
There really is no need for the full stop separation between the letters to write an acronym... :oh noes: /going off at a tangent
do you happen to have any online links or more photos of the storage inspection booklet?Quote:
Originally Posted by Haydendev
i can take photos of the rest of it and post it up if u like
Quote:
Originally Posted by striker
Well I confess all this discussion prompted me to 'tidy up' my previous everything-in-the-same-locked-cupboard system; I can now truthfully say my bolts and ammo are stored (and locked) separately to my rifles/shotties. I'm feeling almost virtuous.
here is all 15 pages
https://www.dropbox.com/sh/nkv8ujsc2g3gka0/3f8Ixy4k5h
I must have missed the loaded part. Clearly walking anywhere with a loaded firearm you do not immediatly intend to destroy something with is extremely unsafe and foolish and deserves a wrist slap. If its in a public place thats probable very reasonable cause to suspend/remove the FAL. Carrying an unloaded and disabled gun in a safe manner should not cause undue alarm / stress to anyone else whos of sound and reasonable mind in IMHO. On the other hand its like fear of the boggey man, you just cant convinced the wilfully ignorant of anything to the contary they have made their mind up over. So how do we protect ourselves from the weirdos? we have to hide ourselves in quiet corners? I guess we do...is that for the best? not sure.Quote:
Originally Posted by LyonRuge
So if I have my gun hidden in a large black hard case while moving in public, thats OK? inside a soft carrycase that roughly the shape of a gun, thats OK? Hidden in my car boot thats OK? yet on my shoulder with the bolt and mag clearly removed thats not OK? bit of a splitting hair case IMHO. When we see the army with their LAVs with 37mm? canons on top, thats OK? so the uniform signals we are safe?
Now I dont want to frigthen or upset anyone, but what some ppl consider reasonable and waht others consider reasonable seems rather subjective.
Which reminds me I need to talk to tranzmetro and ferry on what they require..........
People accept what they know and fear what they don't, it's as simple as that.Quote:
Originally Posted by steven
I'm just about to shift houses I hope that I don't have to go through all this rubbish.
Brilliant cheers for thatQuote:
Originally Posted by Haydendev
Well if he calls on me I'll send him to you!lolQuote:
Originally Posted by SiB
I received a response to my email from the :
"Advisor: Firearms Licensing" attached to the Office of the Commissioner at National Police HQ
Sounds like the right guy to talk to.
He advised that Reg. 19 has not changed and that if my security complies to Reg. 19 then it should be accepted.
He's seems a reasonable and approachable guy, and responds well to a straight, succinct question.
regards
Tim
Good to hear Tim.Quote:
Originally Posted by kiwi39
I don't understand why some ppl posting are so combative toward either/both police AO's and society who are fearful of guns.
Eg. A 50yo city dweller who's never been exposed to firearms, but watches the tv news, wouldn't be able to tell if any gun was loaded or not. But she'd most likely be shocked, alarmed & fearful if she saw a bloke walking down the road with a rifle in his hands or even on his shoulder. She may even contact the police immediately. Why would we persecute her for reacting that way? I suggest only guys 'wanting' to shock and cause fear would carry an uncovered firearm in a public place.
Regarding police and weapon storage: I think the guts of the original post by Tim and the outcome he eventually was able to share is positive (albeit predictable). However, some ppl seem determined to argue for their right to store firearms in an easily accessible and shootable state! Why?! What's not to understand about your/our obligation to society to at least provide as much deterrent and hindrance to any firearm thief or child (!) who happens upon our hunting gear? Owning and using firearms is a privilege I'm proud of in NZ and I wish our gun laws and licensing controls were a lot more strict than they currently are.
Don't even get me started on Tactical weapons and semi-auto centre fire rifles!
My guns are stored in a locked cabinet with bolts and ammo stored in a different part of the house (not under lock and key) but hidden. If anyone stole my cabinet, good luck getting replacement bolts without big questions being raised.
What about semi auto rimfire rifles?
Get a holder that fits to the side of your bed, in the states the public are buying 2 , one for each side of the bed, so mum and dad both have a shotgun available for home defence, wonder if they store ammo separately? crazy anywayQuote:
Originally Posted by kiwi39
I have a small safe inside my gun safe for bolt and bullets, is this okay?
It was when i got my safe
Sent from my GT-S5360T using Tapatalk 2
Yes there is. Carry on reading.Quote:
Originally Posted by Savage1
However, you can carry an unloaded gun.
It's simple for me really gimp... No-one needs them. I do understand the desire to shoot them for fun (& have done so myself while touring Vietnam and Cambodia... AK47s are awesome fun!). But no 'individual' should have any right to keep them at home in NZ. I think a few select contract helicopter culling operators should be able to argue their case for ownership, but I still maintain... No one NEEDS them, and only military forces should (IMO) have access to them.
As for rimfire SAs Beavis... Again, unnecessary for 'hunting' and in practise, they teach bad habits anyway. This isn't about me and the moral high ground, but I started out with a BSA single shot opn sighted .22. Every shot counted and I learned real quick that if I couldn't achieve a one shot kill (head), don't take the shot. So when it came time to get a more sporty rifle with a magazine, I bought a ten shot bolt action and learned to work the bolt quickly when needed for multiple animals. One day I took all five hares in a family bunch before the last made it to the safety of the scrub. So, as said above, if you're any good at shooting, you don't need a semi auto (shotguns for game birds excluded)
Identify your target beyond all doubt! Sorry won't cut it later and no deer is worth the fall out. Safe and happy hunting :)
There are a lot of things people don't "need". Fast food, cars capable of over 300km/h etc etc.
Its a bit of a slippery slope this one and probably the wrong thread for it, yes I understand your reasoning that nobody NEEDS one, but why should that mean that they should not be allowed to own one if they want to?
I personally am not a fan of semi auto or military rifles and do not own one nor do I have any desire to purely as they are not of interest to me, even for gamebird shooting I use a side by side and an under/over, but each to his own, why should my personal preference restrict others owning something that they are interested in?
Its a bit like saying we should govern all motor vehicles to 100km/h because that is as fast as they need to go. So what then if I want to take my superbike to a track and do 300km/h? Because its not everyone's idea of fun should we all be controlled by this?
Really? Where? I have never seen it but then I probably haven't looked in the right places.Quote:
Originally Posted by Wirehunt
I need my one it keeps me sane!....errr......ummm.Quote:
Originally Posted by Hunt4life
Seriously, things like WSRA (service rifle shooting) is a sport...rugby is a sport and it has injurys, sky diving is lethal if it goes wrong.
So if we want to do "needs" then anything that involves risk of injury for no monetary gain should be banned.
Are semi's worse than bolts? I wonder since 1881 (or so) how many ppl bolt guns havd killed v semis?
Also most ppl dont need to hunt, meat is provided on a plastic tray in many shops....of course then you dont need to eat meat.
How far do you want to take it? really you have taken a stance that has no negative impact on you, and bugger everyone else, thanks for that.
The problem really is the nut cases, we have a good system that seems to minimalise the possibility of the nutjobs getting guns. If its possible I'd like to see that system improved as incidents are going to hurt gun users, I just dont see anything effective proposed.
I believe the biggest risk to public safety is secure storage rather than certain types of firearms, I am not worried about a fit and proper individual owning and using any type of firearm, I am more concerned with criminal types stealing those said firearms and then them being used for criminal acts.
For this reason I endeavor to make my firearm storage as secure as reasonably possible.
I love how these people say "nobody needs them". You don't need your guns either buddy.
I understand and even appreciate most of your comments. But, as Spud says, too many nut jobs and the criminal fraternity who strongly desire this type of weapon and if the crims can get them, the police and the rest of us have a bigger problem than if they only had access to a slower-to-repeat firearm.
I really don't have a "bugger everyone else" mentality... More a sometimes we have to make sacrifices for the greater good belief.
I feel you're trying to make an extremist point by suggesting playing rugby or skydiving, and the risks of injury involved, can actually be drawn as a parallel for the risks of a sociopath being in possession of a rapid fire large calibre weapon.
I concede perhaps competitive sport shooting should allow for this type of weapon... But are pistol shooters permitted to keep their pistol at home? Or only on club premises in a sealed concrete and steel room? Get my drift? No-one should have these weapons at home, in a basic gun safe
Identify your target beyond all doubt! Sorry won't cut it later and no deer is worth the fall out. Safe and happy hunting :)
Oh, good argument Beavis (sigh). So another extremist view is that I should hunt deer with a knife, bow or sticks and stones?
"Need" refers to type of weapon required to carry out a clean kill at distance and also infers that competitive sport shooting can be with any other type of firearm. Automatics, IN MY OPINION, just aren't necessary for shooters to enjoy the sport of shooting.
Take a good look at the USA currently: the NRA are fighting hard out for NO gun control amendments. Why? Because they fear that allowing any control measures will open a floodgate for eventual gun elimination. This is highly unlikely to occur or even be suggested. But the problem of free-for-all gun sales (in supermarkets next to your meat!) and the possession of automatic weapons by nut jobs competing with the last nut job for the top spot as public enemy No.1 is way out of control. Hunting and club sport shooting isn't even being threatened.
Do we want this situation here? Personally, I don't. So I'm taking a stand as an ethical gun owner who cares for his community. Feel free to disagree with me, but I wouldn't be convinced of a different way of thinking. Over and out
Identify your target beyond all doubt! Sorry won't cut it later and no deer is worth the fall out. Safe and happy hunting :)
Umm, you are allowed to keep pistols at home if you have the appropriate licence and security.
I have my E cat soon to renew my B I no longer own an E cat firearm.
I don't need one for hunting but owned one for my job.
If you are fit and proper and it is legal, you should be able to have what you want. Semi or not.
Far be it for me to say someone does not need something if it is legal and they want to own and use it legally.
Opinions change. I started with bolts 35 years ago, obtained an AR maybe 30-32 years ago, got rid of the AR and stayed with bolts. Recently (maybe last five years) rediscovered semis (Drag's + AR's) as they are fun to shoot (range weapons).Quote:
Originally Posted by Hunt4life
Thank God this country is still a democracy where I am permitted to enjoy life in the ways I choose (morally and legally of course). I oppose anyone with opinions such as yours which restricts my enjoyment of life.
The politicians have passed reasonable laws and the police have done a pretty good job in keeping loopies away from firearms. It's all good in NZ in my opinion.
I know I've stuck my head out and this view wouldn't be popular with many. I've got similar opinions about speed limits for vehicles on public roads. ie. computerised speed governers/limiters... Highly unpopular as most people want a liberal society where we can choose to break laws and take the consequences if we get caught. I speed like anyone else at times, just as I'd like to shoot an AR for fun. Liberties don't make it 'right', as the risks speak for themselves. My point really is, if as a society we really want to reduce the risk of harm, we should make the rules more fool proof and consequences much more severe.
It's okay guys... We live in NZ. A soft touch on everything, so we'll all be sweet ;)
Identify your target beyond all doubt! Sorry won't cut it later and no deer is worth the fall out. Safe and happy hunting :)
Using your logic, you shouldn't have that single bolt action too. Why not just stick to black powder and ball ? After all, it was good enough in the day, and using cased ammo simply teaches bad habits of being able to shoot quickly. Not like in the old days when every shot counted because of the time it took to reload.Quote:
Originally Posted by Hunt4life
Firearms evolve, one would hope hypocrisy would've evolved into nothingess too. Alas it hasn't.
My old Magica do that, 1st trigger,both barrels,two bangs:yarr:
Your post indicates to me that everything you know about "rapid fire automatic weapons" or what ever, you learned from watching TV. You don't need to hunt either.Quote:
Originally Posted by Hunt4life
I wholeheartedly dissagree.Quote:
Originally Posted by Hunt4life
Shooting is the oldest organised sport in this country. It was also the first sport here to have trophies competed for, such as the Cavalry Champions Belt, 1st competed for in 1871, now known as the Charles Upham Memorial triophy and recently won by a forum member.
My point is, our shooting sports has Military origins, before anything else such as hunting. We actually have the historic provenance to support shooting military style matches, with current general issue equipment, more than anything else. So certain MSSA's, IMO, have a legitimate place in NZ shooting sports.
This whole argument about semi's, in particular ar styled, being used for crimes, is any of this based on actual fact? I would love to see the stats of shot guns vs semi auto rifles used in robberies etc.
All guns go bang, and all are inherently dangerous. Not trying to play down any accidents that happen to shooting victims but ACC pays out a shitload more to people like me that injure themselves in other sports like basketball and rugby.
NZ is pretty safe in a whole.
Absolutely not, and most especially in New ZealandQuote:
Originally Posted by Nibblet
The only ar I've seen in anything vaguely related was a drug bust. Only thing was, the ar in question was a softair plastic pellet gun. There might be some limited incidences of ar's falling into the wrong hands, but none that I know of.
According to the cops I know, the firearms most commonly used by criminals are cut down shotguns, .22's and old .303s with all three usually cut down to pistol length. Mostly this is because they're the most commonly available firearms, and the law of averages says the more prevalent something is the more likely it is to fall into the wrong hands.
There are already lots of urban legends about OMCs having full auto kit anyway, so semi-autos aren't really up there with those, and at the end of the day, a half-way competent machinist with a P habit could pay off their debts with hand-made pistols in fairly short order. After all pistols are much more practical for criminals, and cad plans for pistols are all over the web....
Exactly. Saw off shotties the choice of most crims over here.Quote:
Originally Posted by gimp
Everyone just being sucked into media hype. Nothing like a bit of scare mongering to get the public flapping.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Fna9WEO6BjEQuote:
Originally Posted by scaggly
The E-Cat measures were brought on by the David Grey shooting that happened right here in NZ. It doesn't specifically target ARs. It is a preventative measure to try and stop MSSAs from falling into the wrong hands, and it may possibly have worked for the last 20yrs looking at the statistics.
Do define which weapons needed more control they used features on certain types of firearms that aren't vital for any sporting use of firearms except the odd exception (Service Rifle Shooting), which also attract the types of people that go on shooting sprees. For the people that really wanted them they had the reasonably easy process of getting the necessary endorsement.
Sounds quite reasonable when put out there in the basic version. But people continue to use the argument that the rifles are no more dangerous or used in crime and refuse to look at the reasoning behind it because it doesn't fit their argument.
I personally don't think the A-Cat system is strict enough to allow people to get MSSAs, I mean a 16 yr old can easily get one.
The way I see it is that if you want the toys then get the endorsement, simple. Mine's underway.
The reasoning behind it is flawed
