Thread: Firearms in Vehicles

Originally Posted by Cordite

My take in this case is that it was a certainty Lincoln would get the AOS called on himself, since he carried the slung semi in and out of, first a petrol station shop, and then secondly in and out of the public toilet, in Palmerston I think. Left plenty time for a police response and they caught up with him somewhere South of Christchurch. And he proved in court that the law is an ass and in the process demonstrated that cops lie and fabricate evidence. Police would of course only do that to people they've already determined are bad, so we are all safe-as-in-China from such happening to ourselves.

As it is, law society is a law to themselves, it is a private club, and they did not want to admit him in part based on this stunt, so what is legal is not necessarily OK for your career. One law degree wasted, and one man with study debts he can't pay. Don't hear much about RL these days, maybe he is keeping his head down sweeping the floors in some lawyer's office hoping to get in with the Law Society's good graces again. Freedom of speech, even if perfectly legitimate, does not apply to everyone.

One of the big things was they obtained a search warrant on the grounds of Lincoln appearing in a poor mental state (without qualifications to do so), yet they deemed him fit enough to answer questions.

Originally Posted by gadgetman

One of the big things was they obtained a search warrant on the grounds of Lincoln appearing in a poor mental state (without qualifications to do so), yet they deemed him fit enough to answer questions.

The judge slammed the cops in that case. I'm pretty sure two got done for perjury

https://www.saviorequipment.com/prod...15946694688858

Originally Posted by Danger Mouse

https://www.saviorequipment.com/prod...15946694688858

Thanks for the link to the above image. Wonder if they also sell that rifle with serbian or cyrilic tipp ex scribbles on it. Yes, I know, bad taste.

Anyway, best is a base guitar case, it will accommodate all rifles, even a full length Type 38, though not with its bayonet attached.

Originally Posted by gadgetman

Since the law is so specific any reasonable person must conclude that taking the firearm with you is the only legal option. Avoiding breaking such a specific law must be considered reasonable reason.

I think the only way to get better laws is for Police to be tied up wasting a lot of time and effort with people obeying stupid laws. Police seem to be driving a lot of law changes nowadays so give them incentive to improve things.

I dont read the law as being 'so specific'. I read 'proper and sufficient purpose' to mean that there is room for the Police to make a call on the situation and decide that there is 'insufficient' purpose. Where is @Sidney to please clear this up ??

Technically Lincoln was correct at the time....

There is a technical breach to not have the rifle in your possession outside of your own security provisions at your home address.

Clearly its a catch 22, the trick will always be how you manage the ambiguity. If the police feel that your have been responsible in securing your firearm, out of sight, inoperable locked inside an otherwise secure vehicle while you got to the toilet, or to obtain a meal, all whilst minimising the time away and perhaps seeking to remain in eyesight of the vehicle - then you are probably fine until you run into the arsehole who wants to get technical with you.

I guess Lincoln was being that guy... at the other end of the spectrum. I am not sure that he wasn't making a legitimate point, by pointing out the idiocy technically forced on us and the poor defensive bombastic inarticulate little policeman that day couldn't deal with it... But the willingness of the police to misrepresent, lie and fabricate evidence as a result of not liking effectively being held to account for trying to act outside of the law, is a warning to us all.

A dangerous game to play as all found out I guess...

Its very unfortunate that we have such power hungry regulators who believe that they should always hold the power but be the distributors of discretion. They want us exposed continually and therefore controllable. I am firmly of the position that society should only hold enough power to prevent disaster, not to subject individuals to punitive control.

Everywhere around me, I run into people who seem happy with the state having that power - its rather sickening, particularly when you consider that the state is supposed to be subject to the people in a democracy, not the other way around.

You, as a responsible firearms user, should plan your trip so as to minimise the likelihood of having to leave the (disabled) firearm in your vehicle. Come on guys, as John Key would say, "it's not rocket surgery"...

Actually if my firearm is in a locked vehicle and I have not been negligent in the manner it is stored or visible, then the crime is committed by the offender who breaks in and steals it. Not me.

But the way the law is at the moment, you are the criminal, you are the most likely to get prosecuted because apprehending the actual criminals is a whole lot harder. Understanding that is not rocket surgery either... and neither is it equitable.

The transference of responsiblity to those who have not acted or been negligent, or have not intended harm, to either prevent criminality, or to call to account for some unfortunate event is a fricken national sport for the emotionally affected and simple.

Someone must be held accountable is the catch cry of the stupid. We are riddled with this stuff, its pathetic, its neither preventative or remedial its simply retribution... and is about the exercise of force on otherwise compliant citizens.

Don't sanction stupidity.... the cost is more that we can understand...

Originally Posted by Sidney

Everywhere around me, I run into people who seem happy with the state having that power - its rather sickening, particularly when you consider that the state is supposed to be subject to the people in a democracy, not the other way around.

^This.

Originally Posted by Cordite

Anyway, best is a base guitar case, it will accommodate all rifles, even a full length Type 38, though not with its bayonet attached.

Attachment 159222

AN interesting picture of Ariska 38s in British hands which initially had me pondering how it came to be, but eventually, the "little gray cells" finaly obliged. Does your source say which training troop / unit it is who appear in the your picture and when /where it was taken?

Originally Posted by Ranger 888

You, as a responsible firearms user, should plan your trip so as to minimise the likelihood of having to leave the (disabled) firearm in your vehicle. Come on guys, as John Key would say, "it's not rocket surgery"...

You're kidding aren't you?

Or do you never drive far from home?

My longest single day drive to a competition is 6 1/2 hours.
I don't plan to stay in the vehicle for 6 1/2 hours.
I need a break, food and liquids over that time.

Originally Posted by Cyclops

You're kidding aren't you?

Or do you never drive far from home?

My longest single day drive to a competition is 6 1/2 hours.
I don't plan to stay in the vehicle for 6 1/2 hours.
I need a break, food and liquids over that time.

I doubt he is kidding, because he is right. I think you are misinterpreting what he has written. He says "minimize the liklihood", not eliminate. As in go to the toilet, get food or petrol whatever, but don't load up your car with all your hunting or competition gear then drive 5 minutes to your local supermarket and spend half an hour inside getting your groceries (or go to the movies!). Do that beforehand. Different story if you live in the wop-wops though and its not practical to do separate trips.

Originally Posted by Kiwi Sapper

AN interesting picture of Ariska 38s in British hands which initially had me pondering how it came to be, but eventually, the "little gray cells" finaly obliged. Does your source say which training troop / unit it is who appear in the your picture and when /where it was taken?

Picture is from this forum page: https://www.greatwarforum.org/topic/...risaka-rifles/ Appears to show some territorial army soldiers during WW1.

The venerable 6.5x51SR (usually called 6.5x50 for some reason) was adopted by the British early 1900s and some 150,000 of the t-38 rifle saw rear-guard action with the British army in WW1, purchased from the Japanese via middle-men as a stop gap while more SMLEs were manufactured. Official designations were Rifle Magazine .256 inch, Pattern 1900 (Murati, Type 30) taking round nose ammo, and Pattern 1907, the T38 (an improved rifle worked over by Colonel Nambu) which was sighted in for spitzer ammo.

The adoption of these two rifles and the EXACT copying of the Pattern 1900's bayonet as the P1907 bayonet explains how the heck the British army came to adopt a samurai sword! Everything Japanese was actually cool those years after the Japanese licked the Russians. How fickle.

Another link to a PDF with details: http://www.armsregister.com/articles...sh_service.pdf

Here is an article, The .256" British, a lost opportunity. Bemoaning the British army failing to adopt a perfect calibre. Aside from being a long action cartridge, the 6.5 Jap is arguably an ideal military cartridge with muzzle energy 1.5 times the 5.56x45 NATO and would do just fine with a boat tail.

I'm waffling. (-:

Well I for one don't see an issue with leaving a firearm in your car as long as the vehicle is registered , because apparently registration is a magical anti theft barrier (sarc)

Originally Posted by Cyclops

You're kidding aren't you?

Or do you never drive far from home?

My longest single day drive to a competition is 6 1/2 hours.
I don't plan to stay in the vehicle for 6 1/2 hours.
I need a break, food and liquids over that time.

I agree with Ranger 888. Make sammy's, fill a flask, stop at a roadside layby on the way. To me that is 'responsible' and planning put together.