Thread: Useing the firearms register

Originally Posted by No good names left

I can see a few people getting in the poo, a private sale and 1 party suggests not to register the trade to avoid a "trigger incident" then the other one gets cold feet & registers it. Party #1 has then then failed to register within 30 days.

Clarification needed here: if both parties to a private sale have not yet put their firearms on the register, does that mean Police are relying on honesty on the part of buyer and seller, to enter all their firearms on the Register as a result of the sale/purchase? No Good Names Left: You are not registering the sale, just putting the new firearm on the register.

Originally Posted by Maca49

Yahoo, my mate took his firearm out of my safe this week, one more I do not have to muck about with

That's the only good thing about this whole debacle. Hate it when mates leave guns with ya for years and zero effort put in to getting themselves organized.

The wording is obligatory not compulsary. I think some clarification is needed there as well. Im not suggesting not doing it but it all hinges on a word

Originally Posted by Ranger 888

Clarification needed here: if both parties to a private sale have not yet put their firearms on the register, does that mean Police are relying on honesty on the part of buyer and seller, to enter all their firearms on the Register as a result of the sale/purchase? No Good Names Left: You are not registering the sale, just putting the new firearm on the register.

Hi @Ranger 888
What I was referring to was if both parties agree to a sale of an unregistered firearm without doing the paperwork that would be illegal but as you say there is no way for the police to know. If 1 of them then decides to do the transfer paperwork for some reason I would assume that they would enter the details of both parties, Hence my thought that sooner or later someone would end up in the poo.

I have no intention of buying or selling anything in the next year or 2 so don't know exactly what details are required but I'd assume they'll be upset if only 1 contacts them.

Are there guidelines for selling and buying now as well. I thought you only had to sight a fal in a private sale.

All I know is both parties need to call the 0800 number. Pay to make the call and check it out before a trade is made just in case you need to record the others persons details

Originally Posted by blip

Are there guidelines for selling and buying now as well. I thought you only had to sight a fal in a private sale.

I believe that in later versions of the registration software you will be able to do this online but this has yet to be released and no timeline yet given for it.

Originally Posted by No good names left

Hi @Ranger 888
What I was referring to was if both parties agree to a sale of an unregistered firearm without doing the paperwork that would be illegal but as you say there is no way for the police to know. If 1 of them then decides to do the transfer paperwork for some reason I would assume that they would enter the details of both parties, Hence my thought that sooner or later someone would end up in the poo.

I have no intention of buying or selling anything in the next year or 2 so don't know exactly what details are required but I'd assume they'll be upset if only 1 contacts them.

Hi No Good Names Left: my (hypothetical) scenario is this: A and B have not yet filled in the register. A sells a rifle to B. When B eventually fills in the register with all his firearms, the newly acquired one simply becomes one of his firearms on the register. You don't have to account for the source of your firearms to get them on the register. I'm just suggesting this is an unintended result of the poorly worded legislation.

I tend to agree with ranger 888s assessment the register is a point in time after an activating event that records the firearms in an individual's possession not where they came from. This covers those stored for friends, guns owned by clubs as well as those owned by the individual.
As far as I can see they haven't specifically prohibited the person to person sale or exchange after sighting fals, as they can't enforce or monitor that. They probably think (if they do at all ) that they will be an insignificant number that many will be caught up in the mail order process, and as more people register that will rapidly curtail the person to person sales or exchanges after all they've given the register 5 years which will probably shorten up when ammunition purchases becomes a trigger event in 25. It's a long game that they're trying to play here

Originally Posted by Marty Henry

I tend to agree with ranger 888s assessment the register is a point in time after an activating event that records the firearms in an individual's possession not where they came from. This covers those stored for friends, guns owned by clubs as well as those owned by the individual.
As far as I can see they haven't specifically prohibited the person to person sale or exchange after sighting fals, as they can't enforce or monitor that. They probably think (if they do at all ) that they will be an insignificant number that many will be caught up in the mail order process, and as more people register that will rapidly curtail the person to person sales or exchanges after all they've given the register 5 years which will probably shorten up when ammunition purchases becomes a trigger event in 25. It's a long game that they're trying to play here

Remember, it wasn't that long ago that a couple of dealers proposed in the submissions that all person to person sales had to go via a dealer. Is this going to come back to haunt us? Look at Oz for example.

With the person to person sales there is the requirement that the two parties then go off and get stuck into the register ha ha.
Interestingly, and I don't think it has changed, but the seller must view the buyers licence, but I don't think it goes the other way ie seller doesn't have to present his licence to the buyer. Correct me if I'm wrong. I always have done though.

And while all this is going on the illegal firearm's trade is ticking along merrily unhindered. I wonder if its increased the value of them?

It's early days but I for one won't be changing my buying habits. If something comes along that takes my fancy I'll buy it and press the button on my "submission" which is largely complete but not lodged. I don't think the register will achieve anything useful, much less make us safer, but I'm dammed if it'll spoil my fun.

The howls about data security don't cut any ice with me, police, shops, TM, other govt agencies all know I have firearms, if someone wants the data they'll figure out a means of obtaining it.

Lots of new license holders will be in the same position, "just got my license and want a rifle".

After their disc grinder treatment, for the criminal maybe but not for the older owner .

Originally Posted by zimmer

Remember, it wasn't that long ago that a couple of dealers proposed in the submissions that all person to person sales had to go via a dealer. Is this going to come back to haunt us? Look at Oz for example.

With the person to person sales there is the requirement that the two parties then go off and get stuck into the register ha ha.
Interestingly, and I don't think it has changed, but the seller must view the buyers licence, but I don't think it goes the other way ie seller doesn't have to present his licence to the buyer. Correct me if I'm wrong. I always have done though.

This is a grey area: it is an offence to sell a firearm if you don't have a FAL. Whether it's an offence to purchase a firearm from someone who doesn't have a FAL is a moot point. I always ask to see the seller's licence.

Yes, as I said I always present my licence to the buyer even if he doesn't ask to see mine
The other thing, which I am bad at, is quickly scanning the licence. Make a point of reading it carefully.