Thread: Insanity rules in the vetting process

Originally Posted by Danger Mouse

True. The issue is the inconsistent nature. People having licenses removed for speeding tickets but 15x criminal conviction gets a license

Yes and I think it's fair that all of us get the same chance at redemption. Being able to show a reasonable period of time where you have improved your ways, should give you a second chance.

Originally Posted by inglishill

I hear this sort of thing a lot, can you point me in the direction to where this is documented?

I have tried to find the source information but have been unable to.

Dont know where the docs are but ive got a rellie that cant get one anymore

I'm all for second chances, once they have paid their dues and demonstrated that they have made a real turnaround. I'd like to think that if I make a slip, there's a road back, even if it is long and tortuous.

This case is, at face value, an excellent example that even prison time for fifteen armed robberies isn't a life sentence. And there is a way back. If there is anything I'd like to see it is strict monitoring by the authority over his acquisitions and safekeeping (at least at first) and a one strike rule if there is any reoffending. I'm not a great believer in third chances.

I've just been through the process after watching my licence expire during the 20 years I lived overseas. When I first applied, I was told by the vetting agent that I should withdraw my application so that it wasn't rejected. This was because despite having previously held a licence in NZ, having supplied Criminal Record Checks for the countries I had lived in since leaving NZ, and having held firearms' licences in some of those countries, I could not provide a NZ Citizen, living in NZ who had been in close contact with me through the previous three years... I declined their suggestion to withdraw my application.

Fortunately, the actual Firearms officer who reviewed my file had a load of commonsense and chose to interview a number of people to satisfy the character side of things. Makes me wonder hom many others have been put off applying... and makes me a little frustrated at the stree I endured when reading this article... (though I believe everyone should have the opportunity for redemption).

I know im pretty hard line on this type of topic, as we all know any one can vouch for anyone and we have seen what can happen there. In cases like this on Id like to see the refferees shoulder some of the consiquences if this guy fuks up. Not saying he will but its going to be quite convienient if he does.

Originally Posted by blip

Dont know where the docs are but ive got a rellie that cant get one anymore

Now there is an episode in/of case law which your rellie can refer to should they wish to apply.

Originally Posted by whanahuia

Yes and I think it's fair that all of us get the same chance at redemption. Being able to show a reasonable period of time where you have improved your ways, should give you a second chance.

I agree.
Not many of us would be able to honestly say that if everything we did in our younger years was exposed, that we never did anything which would draw suspicion on our fit and proper status. We just may not have been caught or convicted.
I think in this case, the guy is "now" one of our better citizens. If we all helped as many vulnerable people as he is now, we would live in a better place.

Yes, Nicolas Taylor would also be your man I hear. Got himself a nice career with what looks like no lessening of work in the future!

This is where very clear, plain english rules guiding what is acceptable and what is not and taking the human interpretation out of the usual run of business (with some process of special consideration for those who wish to proceed without fitting the 'normal mold' and those who come from overseas etc) would ease a lot of this.

Originally Posted by No.3

Yes, Nicolas Taylor would also be your man I hear. Got himself a nice career with what looks like no lessening of work in the future!

This is where very clear, plain english rules guiding what is acceptable and what is not and taking the human interpretation out of the usual run of business (with some process of special consideration for those who wish to proceed without fitting the 'normal mold' and those who come from overseas etc) would ease a lot of this.

As a lawyer I think this is the last field of law you would want to get into. A murky dark sort of field.

Originally Posted by 7mmwsm

Now there is an episode in/of case law which your rellie can refer to should they wish to apply.

As dumb as it sounds he wouldnt persue it he knows he has addiction problems and now he has no licence he is kind of doing the responsible thing and not hopping behind the wheel again

Originally Posted by Bol Tackshin

I'm not a great believer in third chances.

He had 14 chances to stop doing what he did after his first armed robbery......but he didn't.

Originally Posted by XR500

He had 14 chances to stop doing what he did after his first armed robbery......but he didn't.

Which really makes you wonder WTF was going on after the 5th time, surely that would have been enough to put him away.

Perhaps they only caught up with him after the 15th time.........

Or, they actually pinned it on the wrong guy and this is their backdoors way of redress.

Any number of things may have happened that we simply don't have the information to ascertain.

Originally Posted by Coop

To play devil's advocate here. Isn't this what we want from the Justice system? A young fellow made some bad decisions 20 years ago, did his time and has come out of it for the better and from the looks of it hasn't reoffended since. He even runs a youth mentoring group focusing on young men that might be headed down the same path he did. Seems fine to me.

Time will tell, as always.

Originally Posted by XR500

He had 14 chances to stop doing what he did after his first armed robbery......but he didn't.

With you on the one. This guys beyond help. And what the hell is he doing walking the streets now. Surely sensible sentencing would mean he should have been inside for life.

Originally Posted by XR500

He had 14 chances to stop doing what he did after his first armed robbery......but he didn't.

Respectfully disagree. He was on the wrong path, irrespective of how many times he did it. Once he was tried and convicted, he served his sentence and turned his life around. That is his second chance. If he went back to prison because he reoffended after he was released, that's an entirely different matter, and if he now screws up, the first thing that needs to happen is he permanently loses the privilege to own and use firearms.