Thread: Safe transportation - legal requirements?

Originally Posted by Preacher

Lets just skip the irrelevant wording and try this...

Which is loaded with a bullet in its magazine. It does not state the rifle is loaded, only the magazine.

It also does not state location of magazine.

The issue is whether the magazine is considered part of the rifle at all if it is not fitted. Especially if there are several magazines present, which is that rifles magazine? I don't think removable magazines were even thought about when they wrote that law, which is why it seems ambiguous to us.

That is exactly the point I was try to make @GravelBen. Personally it is a non issue for me because I will only load magazine on an empty chamber when I get to hunting area.

Think about it this way too - if you have a loaded magazine in a car with no rifle, could anybody call it a loaded rifle? I would say its an obvious no.

Originally Posted by Preacher

Lets just skip the irrelevant wording and try this...

Which is loaded with a bullet in its magazine. It does not state the rifle is loaded, only the magazine.

It also does not state location of magazine.

Um. No. The wording you have removed is the most relevant.

Section 7.21 is titled Loaded Firearms not loaded magazines.

A driver must not operate a motor vehicle on or in which is carried any firearm, airgun, or restricted weapon (as defined in section 2 of the Arms Act 1983) that is loaded with a bullet, cartridge, missile, or projectile, whether in its breech, barrel, chamber, or magazine.

Many of the shooters at our club drive to the club with magazines already loaded for the Saturday shoots. I usually do too.

The others are those weirdos that think keeping magazines loaded with somehow weaken the springs.

Shit folks I think I just got owned by systolic.

I had it in my head that section was titled "carriage of firearms" or similar.

On this we agree systolic...
"The others are those weirdos that think keeping magazines loaded with somehow weaken the springs.

Originally Posted by Preacher

Shit folks I think I just got owned by systolic.

Some days the world is a dark and scary place. There are far worse things that could happen though to be fair.

How to sum it up. If I was in trouble I'd rather have systolic advising me, he'd not be too fussed about how his advice makes me feel.

Agree on the springs.

Why get so wound up about the regulations? Surely it's a just a little step to remove ammo prior to travel. 30 seconds. Is that so inconvenient? It makes the chance of shit happening less during travel breaks and it only takes short time to load magazine when arrive at range or hunting location. Surely no one is that time constrained.

Originally Posted by systolic

Um. No. The wording you have removed is the most relevant.

Section 7.21 is titled Loaded Firearms not loaded magazines.

A driver must not operate a motor vehicle on or in which is carried any firearm, airgun, or restricted weapon (as defined in section 2 of the Arms Act 1983) that is loaded with a bullet, cartridge, missile, or projectile, whether in its breech, barrel, chamber, or magazine.

This has been tested in court here and the ruling was that if the magazine is not attached to the firearm the firearm is not loaded.

They should of gone over that when you got your firearms license

Originally Posted by gadgetman

This has been tested in court here and the ruling was that if the magazine is not attached to the firearm the firearm is not loaded.

Got a link to the case?

Originally Posted by systolic

Got a link to the case?

Someone put one up here a few months ago. Basically the judge said the whole bit you posted needs to be considered. The key being "is the firearm loaded?", and if the magazine is not attached then the firearm cannot be considered loaded.

Originally Posted by northdude

They should of gone over that when you got your firearms license

I completed my FAL this year. The MSC person was very clear it's magazine empty. He was really clear about being sensible with all things safety related and if that means doing more than the law, do it.
He however also was really clear about using common sense, being logical and sensible so leave rifle in car if paying for petrol, grabbing a pie during long distance trip to hunting area, etc. He said difficulty was if wanted to say go into resturant for lunch or diner as car not in sight. He was strong advocate for hard gun case, not soft bags saying general public recognise a soft gun case for what it is but often don't recognise a hard case as could be tools, fishing rod, musical instrument, etc. He mentioned the case of Timaru lawyer, saying he has reputation of being a bit of a dick and he tested the law by taking uncovered rifle into a public toilet. I agrred with MSC guy that whether lawful or not, it was a dick move.
https://www.stuff.co.nz/the-press/ne...public-toilets