Thread: The real reason for B/E-cat storage requirements and inspections

From Kiwi Gun Blog, although old, some things do not change. You obviously suspect it, but what can you do against plausible deniability? Yet here is a look into police thinking, from a 1973 NZ Police report. The context is stricter storage requirements for pistol collectors:

7.17 We appreciate that it will be difficult to police the regulations. However, the mere fact that stringent conditions of ownership exist should discourage people from becoming collectors.

7.18 No doubt 'collectors' will resist attempts to impose the restrictions outlined by us.

I note ironic selective use of quotation marks. Manipulation by slander. Same old.

And this sort of thing is why so many people have zero trust of our police.

(insert insult here)

If your have security inspected when you apply for your FAL and then again when applying for your B,C etc and do not change addresses then what has changed. You know the rules and as a law abiding firearms owner and you abide by the rules and want to keep your stuff safe.

so the reason is ...........................?

Originally Posted by mikee

If your have security inspected when you apply for your FAL and then again when applying for your B,C etc and do not change addresses then what has changed. You know the rules and as a law abiding firearms owner and you abide by the rules and want to keep your stuff safe.

so the reason is ...........................?

Because so many gun owners do not abide by the rules. Like ones who leave guns unsecured and seem surprised when they are misused by kids or stolen by thieves.

Or sell their guns to gang members like that fat fuck Mabey from the Coromandel. Or Dale Jenner from Hamilton.

Or join a gang themselves like that guy Beaver from Auckland who had a B and E endorsement and joined the Hells Angels.

Or leave the keys in the lock of the safe "So I don't lose them" like a stupid prick that used to belong to a club I belong to.

And, if you know the rules and as a law abiding firearms owner and you abide by the rules, you'll know the cops can and do inspect guns held on endorsements.

If the cops don't check, how will they ever know you abide by the rules? The examples above, just off the top of my head, show that too many firearms licence holders simply can't be trusted to follow the rules.

I'm happy for them to come and check my guns and security anytime.

Originally Posted by systolic

Because so many gun owners do not abide by the rules. Like ones who leave guns unsecured and seem surprised when they are misused by kids or stolen by thieves.

Or sell their guns to gang members like that fat fuck Mabey from the Coromandel. Or Dale Jenner from Hamilton.

Or join a gang themselves like that guy Beaver from Auckland who had a B and E endorsement and joined the Hells Angels.

Or leave the keys in the lock of the safe "So I don't lose them" like a stupid prick that used to belong to a club I belong to.

And, if you know the rules and as a law abiding firearms owner and you abide by the rules, you'll know the cops can and do inspect guns held on endorsements.

If the cops don't check, how will they ever know you abide by the rules? The examples above, just off the top of my head, show that too many firearms licence holders simply can't be trusted to follow the rules.

I'm happy for them to come and check my guns and security anytime.

you forgot to mention leaving guns unattended in vehicles.

Originally Posted by systolic

If the cops don't check, how will they ever know you abide by the rules?

...and let them search your house and browse your hard drives. If they don't check, how will they ever know you aren't a drug dealer or kiddy porn distributor?

They could just install a camera in my gun room and monitor, as long as they don’t look when I have a stray in there? Big brother for the wrong guys, now install monitor cameras in gang head quarters with listening devices, that would be a start, they have the city centres and malls covered? fuck freedom!!

Originally Posted by Banana

...and let them search your house and browse your hard drives. If they don't check, how will they ever know you aren't a drug dealer or kiddy porn distributor?

There's a very big difference in that you agreed to cops checking your endorsed firearms and security when you got the licence endorsements.

It has been in the Arms Regulations for a long time that it's a condition of your endorsement that they can check and you let them. You didn't have to get the endorsement.

If you don't want cops checking your stuff, you could always surrender your endorsements.

No point getting upset on about things you agreed to.

Originally Posted by systolic

There's a very big difference in that you agreed to cops checking your endorsed firearms and security when you got the licence endorsements.

It has been in the Arms Regulations for a long time that it's a condition of your endorsement that they can check and you let them. You didn't have to get the endorsement.

If you don't want cops checking your stuff, you could always surrender your endorsements.

No point getting upset on about things you agreed to.

Just a reminder to everyone that this is true, just remember that if the police want to come inspect your gear and it is not a good time for you then tell them so and book a time that suits both parties.

Originally Posted by systolic

There's a very big difference in that you agreed to cops checking your endorsed firearms and security when you got the licence endorsements.
It has been in the Arms Regulations for a long time that it's a condition of your endorsement that they can check and you let them. You didn't have to get the endorsement.
If you don't want cops checking your stuff, you could always surrender your endorsements.
No point getting upset on about things you agreed to.

In the OP I was not talking about inspections, but about heavy secure storage requirements. I personally have no problems getting checked on that I stick to the law as I am not casual about firearms ownership. Just dust did a few hours work on my guns and duly stuffed them all back inside their kennel, a bit of a jigsaw, but I don't feel comfortable with such stuff lying about, even when there are no kids about.

The point was, many people who are safe, responsible, fit and proper do not apply for B/E cat as they just can't be bothered and/or cannot afford the extra heavy "security" -- and this discouragement was/is the MAIN (and intentional) effect of the stricter storage requirements, at least on the part of police. Which explains why they are so hot on security but can't be bothered to attend to investigate many firearms thefts.

Originally Posted by 40mm

you forgot to mention leaving guns unattended in vehicles.

Or toilets.... or leaving them in toilets.....

Originally Posted by Cordite

In the OP I was not talking about inspections, but about heavy secure storage requirements. I personally have no problems getting checked on that I stick to the law as I am not casual about firearms ownership. Just dust did a few hours work on my guns and duly stuffed them all back inside their kennel, a bit of a jigsaw, but I don't feel comfortable with such stuff lying about, even when there are no kids about.

The point was, many people who are safe, responsible, fit and proper do not apply for B/E cat as they just can't be bothered and/or cannot afford the extra heavy "security" -- and this discouragement was/is the MAIN (and intentional) effect of the stricter storage requirements, at least on the part of police. Which explains why they are so hot on security but can't be bothered to attend to investigate many firearms thefts.

So you think it's all a conspiracy mainly to stop people applying for endorsements, rather than simply having higher security requirements for more dangerous (or attractive to criminals) weapons like pistols and machine guns to prevent them falling into the wrong hands?

Originally Posted by systolic

So you think it's all a conspiracy mainly to stop people applying for endorsements, rather than simply having higher security requirements for more dangerous (or attractive to criminals) weapons like pistols and machine guns to prevent them falling into the wrong hands?

It would also be nice if folk didn't leave pistols lying around the place for unendorsed folk to pick up as well.

Originally Posted by systolic

So you think it's all a conspiracy mainly to stop people applying for endorsements, rather than simply having higher security requirements for more dangerous (or attractive to criminals) weapons like pistols and machine guns to prevent them falling into the wrong hands?

Cripes. @systolic, did you not read @Cordite's original post?

"However, the mere fact that stringent conditions of ownership exist should discourage people from becoming collectors."

If that quote is accurate then how can anyone deny there was/is an agenda to dissuade people from collecting restricted firearms?

Originally Posted by systolic

So you think it's all a conspiracy mainly to stop people applying for endorsements, rather than simply having higher security requirements for more dangerous (or attractive to criminals) weapons like pistols and machine guns to prevent them falling into the wrong hands?

My dear Systolic,

NZ Police sees BCE-cat firearm license holders as a problem to be managed, the fewer the better. No weather change since 1973.

Conspiracy? Such things are hard to prove so we should not bother speculating. NZ Police were not going to come right out and publicly recommend to the government "Make it unreasonably hard to own black guns and pistols so as to reduce ownership numbers." Except of course in confidential reports to ministers. But, the public gets served "elfunsafety" speak. Always harder to argue against such plausible and noble intents.

Security is always and only just for kids and random burglars. Heavier security is a joke when it comes to the sort of criminals who use guns. Such criminals will do things others won't do to get guns.