Safe place to store ammo?

Civil society or police state?

Random spot checks with no probable cause amount to unreasonable breach of privacy and are way too open to abuse, sorry, please stop assuming everyone is a criminal. We don't have random spot checks now and there's not a massive plague of people leaving their guns lying around for burglars. Why not go check everyone in the countries house to ensure they're not in possession of a joint? Oh because of "due process". Firearms license holders have been vetted to be fit and proper to hold a license, we don't need you to check up on us to make sure we're obeying the rules.

Surely you can see the incompatibility between your view that the most law-abiding segment of the population needs constant monitoring to make sure they're not committing crimes, and the idea that the police need more powers? On the one hand you're assuming that everyone is a completely untrustworthy criminal and on the other that the police are incorruptible. It doesn't make sense, and displays a blatant disregard for civil rights which is ironically the reason I'm opposed to greater police powers

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by gimp

Civil society or police state?

Random spot checks with no probable cause amount to unreasonable breach of privacy and are way too open to abuse, sorry, please stop assuming everyone is a criminal. We don't have random spot checks now and there's not a massive plague of people leaving their guns lying around for burglars. Why not go check everyone in the countries house to ensure they're not in possession of a joint? Oh because of "due process". Firearms license holders have been vetted to be fit and proper to hold a license, we don't need you to check up on us to make sure we're obeying the rules.

Surely you can see the incompatibility between your view that the most law-abiding segment of the population needs constant monitoring to make sure they're not committing crimes, and the idea that the police need more powers? On the one hand you're assuming that everyone is a completely untrustworthy criminal and on the other that the police are incorruptible. It doesn't make sense, and displays a blatant disregard for civil rights which is ironically the reason I'm opposed to greater police powers

---

This is NZ, NZ isn't a Police state, far from it. If you think otherwise then I suggest again that you spend a night on the beat.

Not all random spot checks amount to a breach of privacy, your broad sweeping statement is wrong.

Vetting isn't 100% reliable, this is shown when licences are revoked.

I don't assume that everyone is a criminal, spot checks are a necessary preventative measure in certain situations. Checking a person doesn't mean that they're being assumed to be a criminal.

Where did I say that everyone was a criminal? Or are you making an assumption? Where did I say that there was no corruption in the Police? Another stupid assumption? Where did I say the Police need more powers? Stop assuming that I've either said or think something to try and further your argument which is what you have done for your entire last paragraph, making it irrelevant.

Did you get hurt feelings because somebody told you what to do or pulled you over?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Savage1

This is NZ, NZ isn't a Police state, far from it. If you think otherwise then I suggest again that you spend a night on the beat.

---

You're right, it's not, because police don't have that sort of power.

Quote:

---

Not all random spot checks amount to a breach of privacy, your broad sweeping statement is wrong.

---

The power to conduct random spot checks enables unreasonable breach of privacy.

Quote:

---

Vetting isn't 100% reliable, this is shown when licences are revoked.

---

And licenses are revoked for good cause, presumably, not "because you feel like it". So you can't search my house "because you feel like it"

Quote:

---

I don't assume that everyone is a criminal, spot checks are a necessary preventative measure in certain situations. Checking a person doesn't mean that they're being assumed to be a criminal.

---

In those cases you'll have probable cause then.

Quote:

---

Where did I say that everyone was a criminal? Or are you making an assumption? Where did I say that there was no corruption in the Police? Another stupid assumption? Where did I say the Police need more powers? Stop assuming that I've either said or think something to try and further your argument which is what you have done for your entire last paragraph, making it irrelevant.

---

You opposed my statement that "the police should not have power to make random spot checks without probable cause". Opposing that implies that you believe that the police should have that power, which literally means you do support increased police powers.

You haven't said that there is no corruption in the police but your statements strongly imply that you distrust all who aren't police, while strongly implying that you believe that the police should have increased (easily abused) powers

Quote:

---

Did you get hurt feelings because somebody told you what to do or pulled you over?

---

No,I just firmly believe in civil rights, nice little ad hominem though

Random checks don't open up opportunity for breaches of privacy, read up on the legislation before making such statements. They are quite closely controlled.

I never said that Police could search your house because they feel like it.

I opposed your statement because you said Police shouldn't have the power to do spot checks, I know what would happen with the number of drink drivers, unsafe vehicles etc. That no way implies that I endorse increased Police powers.

My statements don't imply anything, you are making assumptions, I think Police powers are just about bang on.

I believe in civil rights, funnily enough it's a Police officers job to protect them. You'll find a criminal will be far more willing to breach your civil rights and without Police powers then what's to stop them.

I dont have an issue with random checks. I would rather them than the two times a week minimum road blocks for "random" warrant checks
I got stopped three times out kf fiur drives in two days... that sort of excessive focus in a small area does more to bother me than random firearm checks. It got to the point inwas actually starting to.calculate loss of income due to time spent in lines at check points.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Savage1

I never said that Police could search your house because they feel like it.

---

Well since that's literally what a random check involves...?

Quote:

---

I opposed your statement because you said Police shouldn't have the power to do spot checks, I know what would happen with the number of drink drivers, unsafe vehicles etc. That no way implies that I endorse increased Police powers.

---

that's cool but 1: it's not the context random checks were being discussed in and 2: breath testing drivers is different to searching vehicles/homes

Quote:

---

My statements don't imply anything, you are making assumptions, I think Police powers are just about bang on.

I believe in civil rights, funnily enough it's a Police officers job to protect them. You'll find a criminal will be far more willing to breach your civil rights and without Police powers then what's to stop them.

---

They're reasonable assumptions to make from what you've said

Good red herring. Police powers to search my home without good cause definitely prevent criminals from breaching my civil rights. After all, who would have any cause to worry but the guilty...... right?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by distant stalker

Good demo. Had always been curious about if a rifle round would build enough pressure when not held in a chamber.
R.e the powder. I believe its more the insurers that dont like powder in the house. I just burmt half a pound on the back lawn
Just sizzles. Less dangerous than more common accelerants like white spirits, meths etc

---

I wonder if having ammunition locked in a safe or container makes it more dangerous than lying around loose (ie not dangerous at all). Wonder if a fireproof safe would prevent heat from cooking off rounds/powder.

I grew up in Northern Ireland. I knew nothing other than random checks, and hey I treated it as "if you've got something to hide then you're going to hate these".

Anyway this topic is sooooooooooooo off now. Someone get it back on please.

A random check means just that, a random check, not a search of the house. Two very different things. Just as Police don't have powers to search the boot/glovebox/seat pockets in a vehicle to check the WOF is up to standard or a child is correctly restrained.

I assumed your comment to mean no spot checks full stop including traffic. My bad for assuming.

They're not good assumptions you've made as they have been shown to be incorrect.

So do you feel that your privacy of having to let a person into your home to confirm your firearm storage is up to standard is more important than the potential good of what random checks would achieve in keeping firearms out of the hands of children and criminals?

Personally I can't understand how somebody could be offended by a random check for firearm security, if a cop turned up on my door randomly to check my security I would be more than happy to oblige and would find it reassuring that people are being checked, however I've never been checked.

Back on topic. I store my bolts in a different safe to my rifles even though my safe has a seperate lockable compartment. I do store the ammo in the lockable compartment though. I know I don't have to remove the bolts by law but I see it as a responsible thing to do and I would hate to know that some burglars got away with some operational firearms if they took my whole safe, if they could lift it. Bolts are a lot harder to source than ammo which can be easily shoplifted.

I would be pretty bloody upset if my house was randomly spot checked while I was at work, on holiday,out hunting, shagging the wife, having a party.
In fact Im pretty pissed if anyone turns up unannounced with out a hey mate what you up to? Courtesy tx first.

Sent from my GT-S5360T using Tapatalk 2

Not every one has a fancy phone VC yeah a raid is a cunt trust me. Been there!!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dundee

Not every one has a fancy phone VC yeah a raid is a cunt trust me. Been there!!

---

They still make phones that don't tx?

Sent from my GT-S5360T using Tapatalk 2

oh that thing on the wall with a cord;) My mistake then aye

:D

A safe place to store ammo

Attachment 11414

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by seano

A safe place to store ammo

Attachment 11414

---

Nahh Seano this is safer cause its hidden:pacman:

Attachment 11430:D

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dundee

Nahh Seano this is safer cause its hidden:pacman:

Attachment 11430:D

---

I like the way you think Dundee

I bought a second hand 3 drawer filing cabinet (the standard office type). The top drawer has all my manuals, warranty, receipts, and stuff. The middle drawer has all my bits and pieces like knives, torches, bipods, basically all the crap I've accumulated. The bottom drawer has all my ammo in it. Bolted to the wall. One key locks everything. Insurance companies like it. The old ones are better built. Best of all - the Mrs can't see what's in it.