Thread: Registry to stay??

This "news" item is hidden behind the NZ Herald pay-wall https://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/politi...IGXIBIQUR3LJY/

Firearms Minister Nicole McKee wants the gun registry gone – review says she should keep it

Note how the headline refers to Nicole as the "Firearms Minister". I was unaware of such an entity in the NZ Parliament.
Would be interesting to see what the actual report is.

Remember folks, for the registry to be gone, "our" Minister needs every bit of support that we can muster.

49er

Minister McKee responds...

Someone has decided that they would give confidential information about the review of the firearms registry to the media.
Whether that is designed to create a certain narrative, or influence what Cabinet decides, it is wrong and needs to be investigated.
Let me be clear with those people: it is my Cabinet colleagues who have the responsibility of deciding whether the registry stays or goes, not them.
Cabinet has not even had the opportunity to consider this information and someone has decided to make it public. Totally unacceptable.

its getting more and more clear "we" are getting screwed over... again...

Originally Posted by STC

its getting more and more clear "we" are getting screwed over... again...

Yep, but going by the stats. regarding submissions made “we” haven’t helped ourselves. Way too much apathy out there.

Originally Posted by woods223

Yep, but going by the stats. regarding submissions made “we” haven’t helped ourselves. Way too much apathy out there.

yes but also... its a convenient excuse.

I wonder what the outcome would be if there was a simple referendum. Registration yes/no.

Originally Posted by Tahr

I wonder what the outcome would be if there was a simple referendum. Registration yes/no.

depends:

would the populace be informed correctly about costs, risks, and benefits (or lack thereof)?

probably not...

Originally Posted by Tahr

I wonder what the outcome would be if there was a simple referendum. Registration yes/no.

If the facts were laid out then I think the average voter would vote no.

Unlike seatbelts or speed limits,there is no tangible public safety benefit to a registry. It's just that the Police " think it's a good idea".

I dont believe the issue is the Register per se - the real issue is the inability of the Police to operate said Register even adequately , whilst safeguarding our private information.

And that doesnt even touch on letting them write the legislation to suit themselves.....

If that is correct from Nicole's comment about it being a leak then that's come from someone fairly highly up in the machine - and that in itself is a reason why the registry is a bad idea.

You people have to understand one thing . You have to be naieve to the point of abject supidity if you think that the Registry is going away . Even though I have not sucumbed to registering I know that it is only a matter of time until I will be foced to do it.
The fact is for NZ First and National to vote for a scraping of the Registery system is to admit that their support for it previously was WRONG . Do you think any politician is going to admit that when all the emotional crap put forward by the Hand Wringers and Harpes screaming from the lofty heights goes on .
In effect where screwed on the alter of expediency and power hungry muppets called Politicians who don't give a toss about reality , just how much power they can wield.

Confidential information being leaked by someone who had no authority to do so... my, how much that sounds like the reason we didn't want the registry in the first place.

Originally Posted by STC

depends:

would the populace be informed correctly about costs, risks, and benefits (or lack thereof)?

probably not...

They were not on the last referendum, 49 - 51% and the gubbermint said, 'Nah, we don't need a recount the answer is pretty clear with a landslide against..... blah blah blah....... '.

How about this for an idea . Given that the registry might be forced on the gun community.
Rule is that -
Only the Firearms officer for each area has the authority to interrogate the registry in detail of serial numbers of guns, calibre, mafr name, and so on.

If other normal duty cops want to see things all that can find out is that Joe blow has the following types of fire arms
Registered shooter xyz Licence number xya
Handgun - one off
Rimfire - three off
Shotgun - one off

So if there is major data leak or even a minor one in a given area the fingerpointing can go to just one person.
It also would mean that front line police could visit an address and know what they should find but only the general types.

That makes it much less of a potential shopping list for crims.

if an ordinary police officer is found to have entered the registry at precision level (obviously there is table of police IDnumbers and data acess levels stored in the system ) that should be the basis for an internal investigation and potential dismissal.

The other thing that needs to be looked at very carefully is the ability to take USB drives into the FSA in Wellington and download information . Either all the machines have to have all spare USB ports physically locked out and basically carrying a non police registered USB drive (which is never to leave the building) needs to be a sackable offense. Exxon Mobil have that sort of discipline and I have had to work under it in Melbourne. you can be sacked for leaving your PC not locked out and going to lunch .

Firearm data for thousands of gun owners - all of whom could be subject to burglary is as important as Exxon -M's commercial and technical information.

What about inserting clause in the legislation that if a policeman or woman is traceable to a leak which results in a burglary(s) then if there is incompetence or intent that person has to pay for all loses suffered by the firearms owners and any enforcement in the civil courts would be at the cost of the government . That would keep people pretty focused.

TEF

"What about inserting clause in the legislation that if a policeman or woman is traceable to a leak which results in a burglary(s) then if there is incompetence or intent that person has to pay for all loses suffered by the firearms owners and any enforcement in the civil courts would be at the cost of the government . That would keep people pretty focused."

Enforced by Police investigating Police, and they laughed and laughed. It wouldn't be the IPCA but their own internal outfit. And they laughed and laughed some more.