The precedence of driver responsibility aligns with all other legislation in the land transport act, but with typically vague wording in the Arms Act, it leaves room for interpretation, and this is how I would interpret the situation if I was Mr Plod, or Judge Judy;
If both occupants are FAL holders, it is surely the responsibility of the driver to ensure the firearms in his/her vehicle are being transported in accordance with the law. I don't see a scenario in which the driver could plead ignorance to incorrect transportation and lay culpability on the passenger.
If the driver is not a FAL holder, I'm sure a good prosecution lawyer could argue that correct transportation protocols are still under the drivers responsibility as they knowingly accepted to transport them, even if the firearms are in the possession/supervision of the passenger with the FAL. Equally, a good lawyer for the defense of said driver could argue that the non licensed driver has no knowledge of the requirements and is likely to get away with any repercussions.
Bookmarks