Thread: Thought I might post my response to NZ Fuzz consultation of licence costs.

Originally Posted by no1_49er

I think that the tiresome excuse that "the lock-down" is to blame, is a crock of shyte.
Apart from the face to face interviews, all of their intel' would/could/should have been done remotely. International and local enquiries as necessary, police/criminal records, etc., etc.
The decision of hierarchy to strip the department of staff, and reassign funding to "other purposes" was a recipe for the disaster that is now visited upon the LAFO, many of whom are still waiting.

It's definitely not entirely to blame but was an impediment. What I was getting at re. lockdown non vetting is that the applications couldn't be processed. The bulk of a firearms licence application is the face to face vetting procedures. The earlier pre lockdown applications were obviously slow getting processed in some but not all districts. It was also compounded by the fact that all unrelated referee interviews had to be done face to face post the 2019 firearm legislative changes. Previously, an unrelated referee interview for a renewal licence could be conducted by phone. I believe that has since been changed to a secure video interview for out of district unrelated referee's.

We all know that our current woke government is not firearms friendly. We should also not forget that National and NZ First also went along with the 'making NZ safer' agenda of Labour post the ChCh shootings to mollify their voting base and subsequently throw FAL holders under the bus.

Ho Hum see costers cuddly cuzzies have a new political boss Mr Nash .sound familiar -game on batter up ..strike one!! ??my son told me hed heard yesterday that pm had mentioned this present arms act reorg thing being of interest -can anyone verify ,as i cant seem to find any mention so far.

Hopefully it's of interest enough he shitcans most of it.

theyre not bloody bad are they
they want to drasticly raise prices but they wont to physicly do less by having us do a lot of it online
what a fuckin rip are they really that stupid that they think we dont see thru it.
the crown report said police didnt do thier job with the laws and checks they had.
the rest is just window dressing bullshit.
and thier ''its not you its other licencees we are after '' divide and conquer bullshit is at least unethical if not illegal.
show me how individual dedicated arms officers were overworked if they were only doing this
or is it the were part time there part time here

The thing that gets me about the consultation it's that it is structured so we can't put our point of view in our answers without it being out of scope.
The questions ask "do you agree with..." but then if you disagree the question is "what are some other ideas...", not "why not?" Any answer that says "option x would reduce the membership of my pistol club by x% over time" can be deemed out of scope for the purpose of analysis because it isn't answering the question.
I know this is intentional because I've helped set up questions for this kind of consultation. The idea is to structure questions to cut out "noise" or tangential answers. But for all that I've never seen such a blatant disinterest in the outcomes of a policy change in my career. They don't actually ask how the different policy options will affect us so their regulatory impact analysis won't be able to quantify the impact.
This last point is probably unintentional. Police's policy shop doesn't have a great reputation in Wellington because non-sworn officers are second class members of the organisation so hot shot analysts don't want to work there.

Identify your target beyond all doubt because you never miss (right?) and I'll be missed.

they want to drasticly raise prices but they wont to physicly do less by having us do a lot of it online - Do it all on paper - all of it all of us.

The thing that gets me about the consultation it's that it is structured so we can't put our point of view in our answers without it being out of scope - It will go to a Judicial Review for the simple fact it has nothing to do with safety. This is Mike McIlraith empire building.

Originally Posted by BSA

they want to drasticly raise prices but they wont to physicly do less by having us do a lot of it online - Do it all on paper - all of it all of us.

The thing that gets me about the consultation it's that it is structured so we can't put our point of view in our answers without it being out of scope - It will go to a Judicial Review for the simple fact it has nothing to do with safety. This is Mike McIlraith empire building.

Who can afford a judicial review? Anyone got a spare $250k down the back of the couch?

Identify your target beyond all doubt because you never miss (right?) and I'll be missed.

Originally Posted by Eat Meater

Who can afford a judicial review? Anyone got a spare $250k down the back of the couch?

Identify your target beyond all doubt because you never miss (right?) and I'll be missed.

250,000 Licenced Firearms Owners @ $1.00 each.

Agree with the post just before.
Do not do online processing, stick to paper and keep copies and dint do it too early so it swamps the system

Agree. As a group were hopeless at anything other than bitching and moaning. When it actually comes to doing something constructive to head these red wallies off, we fall down everytime.

From what I can see it takes a huge effort and commitment. A lot of time and money. Legal expertise. Not something that you can just do after work or in your spare time.

Originally Posted by GDMP

Surely you mean 2500 license holders at $100 each.....because most will not lift a finger or spend even $1 to try and turn things around.That has certainly been the case to this point.

mostly cos who knows whose doing what.
id be well in if one cohesive plan was in the pipiline from one respected apolitical source

Originally Posted by gsp follower

mostly cos who knows whose doing what.
id be well in if one cohesive plan was in the pipiline from one respected apolitical source

Me too. I don't mind contributing, IF there was no political agenda and there was a common goal able to be attained without infighting, coups, ego's etc. Thats what derails good peoples efforts.

Sorry, I think we might be too late but. Think the horse has bolted ( no pun intended)

Well - I done my submission.

I did not use their form, I had to much to say - but my submission covered most areas.

It is clear the aim is to tax the firearm user out of existence. The proposed fees made my butt hole quiver and scream. The charging will have unintended consequences.

The reality is there are too many firearms in this county and they will be driving 10,000s underground by the fees. The owner will not renew the license, as it is to expensive and next thing they will not be able to register their gun.

Sooo - they hand their gun to the next person, and IF I recall, IF I (as a LFO) register a gun in the future I will have to say where I obtained it? and land someone in dodo?

OR - the guns will end up in the criminals hands, untraceable, the only good thing is "The gangs will NOT have got the firearm from a Firearms License Holder"

Originally Posted by GDMP

There are to many badly behaved people in NZ,that is the cause of our crime levels.....

Add that to the complete lack of repercussion and it actually encourages that behaviour...

Originally Posted by timattalon

Add that to the complete lack of repercussion and it actually encourages that behaviour...

Especially those crimes involving victims.