Thread: Overall length Saga continues

There was a recent discussion about all OAL length on here.

Police Policy on measuring MSSA Firearms on FOUNZ (I think this came out in March 2017):
http://www.founz.co.nz/wp-content/up..._-approval.pdf

The length of any firearm is measured without any “attachments” (whether or not
“permanently” attached (e.g. welding, pinned)), such as flash-hiders, silencers,
muzzle brakes, or barrel extensions. In the case of rifled firearms (such as rifles and
Pistols), barrel length will be determined by measuring from the muzzle to the bolt face
(excluding anything attached beyond the muzzle), this means that the chamber is included in
the measurement of the barrel, not just the rifled portion. The exception is for revolvers in
which barrel length is determined by the barrel only and excluding the chamber.

It is on the Police website as well
https://www.police.govt.nz/sites/def..._-approval.pdf

Following lobbying / discussions the following was released via email to various groups by the Police:

On the 13th of September the policy position below was distributed internally and externally. Since then I have been asked to provide clarification as to the points to be measured from and to. To determine overall length of the MSSA the measuring should start from the closed or folded stock position to the end of the flash suppressor, providing the flash suppressor is firmly fixed to the firearm in such a way that a tool is required to remove it.
Mike McIlraith - Arms Act Service Delivery Group"

This was released widely and is referenced on the

Kiwigunblog: https://kiwigunblog.wordpress.com/20...inimum-length/

Pistol NZ: https://www.pistolnz.org.nz/blog/759038

Deer stalkers (see page 8) http://www.wairarapanzda.org.nz/wp-c...newsletter.pdf

Essentially:
E cat's are measured by Police from flash suppressor to closed stock.

A cats - from end of stock (obviously can't be collapsible/foldable) to end of threads.

If I have read the Kiwi Gun Blog right and the chap referred to in the Kiwi Gun Blog article had an A cat firearm, which to make up the total length he counted a suppressor as part of the length, he has fallen outside of the Police guidelines for measuring length on an A cat.

Unfortunately the way NZ law works is
Law is made - > relevant enforcement agency seeks legal opinion on interpretation -> Court cases follow where the interpretation is decided - > Caselaw is made (precedents).
I am not saying it is right, just the way it is.

Would be a lot better of if the law was more specific, but then I suppose the Act is 35 years old and the amendments (e cat etc) came in 1992 after the Aramoana Massacre I believe.

I am not trying to say that the way that the Police measure firearms is correct as that is pretty subjective, however it appears that that they were at least somewhat clear with their intentions on this one. (Would have been a lot better if they had updated their Policy on their website rather than a (widely dispersed email).

"While the New Zealand Police is a government department with a minister responsible for it, the Commissioner and sworn members swear allegiance directly to the Sovereign and, by convention, have constabulary independence from the government of the day."

Originally Posted by veitnamcam

So the NZ police have a coup ? and are not answerable to the Govt?

In other words; They are a Paramilitary organisation and have been for quite sometime.

I really am sick of them shifting the goal posts on us all the time. It leaves little to be desired and is not much of an incentive for us to follow the rules is it... And why should we??

You can't tell me that after TWO YEARS of them pushing their "ultra-vires" policy they aren't trying to drive a wedge between us & them. The police are clearly aware of how law-abiding firearm owners feel about all of this. I mean how many times do we have to say; "We are NOT the problem" "We are Law-Abiding, criminals are not" "Certain aesthetics for firearm's don't save lives" "Registries don't prevent real crime"

I could go on and on.

All the cards are on the table now, and they definitely know where our position lies on the matter - It's up to us to push back and make others aware that this will not be tolerated.

Originally Posted by Square22

A cats - from end of stock (obviously can't be collapsible/foldable) to end of threads.

Yes, A cats (apart from semi's) can have those features. But must be no less then 762mm in their reduced state.

Originally Posted by Sasquatch

Yes, A cats (apart from semi's) can have those features. But must be no less then 762mm in their reduced state.

Oh sorry yep you're right they can, apart from semi's.

so currently one of my rifles has its wood off as i am re-oiling it. its still fireable in this condition so guess if the cops turn up i'm toast

Originally Posted by gonetropo

so currently one of my rifles has its wood off as i am re-oiling it. its still fireable in this condition so guess if the cops turn up i'm toast

I can't see there would be a way that would stand up in Court, that would mean every time a gunsmith did something like that when working on a rifle that they would be creating a Pistol.

If you took it out and starting using/firing it as just a barreled action though or stored it permanently like that and Police could prove somehow you intended to keep it like that permanently then I think you could find yourself in the poo.

Originally Posted by Square22

I can't see there would be a way that would stand up in Court, that would mean every time a gunsmith did something like that when working on a rifle that they would be creating a Pistol.

If you took it out and starting using/firing it as just a barreled action though or stored it permanently like that and Police could prove somehow you intended to keep it like that permanently then I think you could find yourself in the poo.

But it points out the silliness of the situation and how open to abuse it currently is.

@systolic, been thinking a bit about your comments regarding "constabulary independence"

Like much of the police hierarchy thinking, it is a concept inherited from the United Kingdom.

What it boils down to is actually operational independence, so that police are free to decide whether they wish to investigate or charge without undue influence from politicians.

What it does not mean, is policy independence. Which is what I suspect you (and some of the top brass) are aiming for.

It is the job of the police to enforce the law, not to dream up laws that fit their world view...

Originally Posted by ebf

@systolic, been thinking a bit about your comments regarding "constabulary independence"

Like much of the police hierarchy thinking, it is a concept inherited from the United Kingdom.

What it boils down to is actually operational independence, so that police are free to decide whether they wish to investigate or charge without undue influence from politicians.

What it does not mean, is policy independence. Which is what I suspect you (and some of the top brass) are aiming for.

It is the job of the police to enforce the law, not to dream up laws that fit their world view...

You and systolic are actually pretty much onto it regarding this. I'll post the reply I received shortly. I did note that I received a response VERY quickly. So even though no action, it got some attention.

I’d never really thought about it, but what purpose do minimum length rules serve? If a license holder has a short or long rifle, he is still obliged to act within the law. If a criminal without an FAL has a short or long rifle, he is acting outside if the law. He can easily convert a long rifle into a short concealable rifle. If he is found with either he is stuffed.

Am I missing something?

Originally Posted by tanqueray

I’d never really thought about it, but what purpose do minimum length rules serve? If a license holder has a short or long rifle, he is still obliged to act within the law. If a criminal without an FAL has a short or long rifle, he is acting outside if the law. He can easily convert a long rifle into a short concealable rifle. If he is found with either he is stuffed.

Am I missing something?

Yes...................you mistakenly applied the "common sense" mode of thought

Originally Posted by tanqueray

I’d never really thought about it, but what purpose do minimum length rules serve? If a license holder has a short or long rifle, he is still obliged to act within the law. If a criminal without an FAL has a short or long rifle, he is acting outside if the law. He can easily convert a long rifle into a short concealable rifle. If he is found with either he is stuffed.

Am I missing something?

I think it's more to provide a distinction between a rifle and a pistol. Otherwise you'd have people with cut down rifles which are totally not pistols but using them as such.

Sent from my TA-1024 using Tapatalk

Quick update. I will respond to Nash. I will also be contacting he prime minister's office and laying an ipca complaint. I encourage all of you to do similar if you wish to retain your sport.

From: Travis Mills <Travis.Mills@parliament.govt.nz>
Sent: Thursday, 16 August 2018 9:25 a.m.
To:xxxxx
Subject: NZ police enforcement of 'policy' over legislation

Dear Mr xxxxxx

Thank you for your email of 15 August 2018, to the Minister of Police, Hon Stuart Nash, concerning Police enforcement of the Arm Act.

Please note that there is a long standing convention that prevents Ministers from becoming involved in specific police investigations or operations. This ensures that operational matters within police remain free of any political influence or interference.

Your correspondence to the Minister has therefore been transferred to the office of the Commissioner of Police, for consideration by Police.

Yours faithfully

Travis


Travis Mills
Private Secretary (Police)
Office of Hon Stuart Nash, Minister of Police
Level 19 Bowen House | Parliament Buildings, Wellington 6010
M +64 021 220 6607
P +64 04 817 6979
E travis.mills@parliament.govt.nz

Right team,
here is the response.
1t point, they got my name wrong.
2nd they didnt really answer any of the questions.
3rd point. This has been shown to a few people, non shooters. They are quite concerned at the greater issue here - the abuse of police powers and the lack of accountability being dislayed. I think this is the actual important point that needs to be emphasasied.

I will be contact a few organizations emphasizing this point in order to continue placing pressure.

Keep on keepin on team.

Originally Posted by Russian 22.

I think it's more to provide a distinction between a rifle and a pistol. Otherwise you'd have people with cut down rifles which are totally not pistols but using them as such.

Sent from my TA-1024 using Tapatalk

Ah.. yes... but if you apply the logic of my original post, why do we even need pistol specific laws? Crims can and do make pistol sized firearms from rifles and shotguns. Whether they have a rifle, shortened rifle or pistol, they’re breaking the law, and naturally they’d be inclined to shorten whatever they can get their hands on anyway. Licensed firearm owners should be conducting themselves within the law, regardless of whether they’re using a 20mm cannon or a derringer.