The firearm thread

**Mr Merde** · 16th July 2009, 14:46

Response from the President of Pistol NZ

A little bit lost as to exactly what he is saying here. Maybe one of you could decipher it.

Chris

----------------
This Police policy does affect many pistol shooters (some positively!), but generally I view it as an extremely negative policy.ffice

ffice" />>>
I am aware of this action, and other groups positions/actions also.
David Tomlinson>>
Pistol NZ>>

**Mr Merde** · 16th July 2009, 16:37

Response from Neil Hayes of Hayes and Associates
--------------------------------
Certainly willI've been giving some COLFO hierarchy a hard time - if COLFO don't get serious on this one it will be the end of COLFO.>>
Have attached the front page of our latest newsletter.>>
Cheers>>
Neil>>
HAYES & ASSOCIATES LTD
P.O.BOX 188
CARTERTON 5743
Phone: 06.3796692
Fax: 06.3795316

**jono035** · 16th July 2009, 19:33

Just sent my own e-mail to COLFO asking for them to further clarify their position on the issue and the steps they are taking in opposition of it. Should be interesting.

As for the response about it affecting pistol owners positively, I'm utterly baffled.

There is currently a bill being looked at that makes some changes to the Arms Act with respect to clarifying some of the language concerning the ownership and usage of pistols. Specifically it seems to clarify that it is legal for a non-licensed person to fire a pistol at an approved pistol range providing they are under the direct supervision of (general interpretation being able to be restrained by) a B endorsed Firearms License Holder.

It also has some changes with respect to high powered air rifles. Categorizes any air rifle capable of a muzzle energy over 40-something joules (a .177 hunting slug at 1000fps is 30 joules) as a firearm.

Other than that no idea at all. Anyone else?

Edit: It occurs to me that maybe he was talking about the waiving of the application fee for the E category endorsement.

It also sounds like everyone else is slowly getting in behind Richard. I printed off a bunch of flyers to leave on the desk at the CSI range with his website details and a short blurb about the issue on it.

**jono035** · 16th July 2009, 21:35

Just got an e-mail back from Gary Howatt, the chairman of COLFO (very prompt!)

------------------

"COLFO has been in dialogue with the Police, and we do not support the changes, and how they were made. The police are aware of this position. We however have managed to negotiate to have the $200 fee for E cat waived for the introduction.

We have legal opinion and could have gone to court and spent $60k with no guarantee of winning. If we had won then the police have the current support for a law change if necessary which would negate our court action. They can obtain an order in council that means parliament ( cabinet) just agree to change the clause, no consultation.

We are aware there is likely to be a new Bill this year Arms Amendment Bill No 4 and COLFO will rally shooters to submit to this Bill put our efforts and funds into lobbying the politicians over this which is likely to be more significant to all our member organizations.

I hope this helps you understand our position

Gary Howat
Chairman
www.colfo.org.nz"

------------------

That paints an interesting alternative on the subject. I'm not 100% sure I agree that the legal action is pointless as it signals that there are people out there that are passionate about this change, but from a legal stand-point it sounds like they're determined to pass it, one way or another. The other way of looking at it could simply be that COLFO, while not supporting the changes may not necessarily oppose them though...

KREWZR · 16th July 2009, 22:07

"COLFO has been in dialogue with the Police, and we do not support the changes, and how they were made. The police are aware of this position. We however have managed to negotiate to have the $200 fee for E cat waived for the introduction.

We have legal opinion and could have gone to court and spent $60k with no guarantee of winning. If we had won then the police have the current support for a law change if necessary which would negate our court action. They can obtain an order in council that means parliament ( cabinet) just agree to change the clause, no consultation.

We are aware there is likely to be a new Bill this year Arms Amendment Bill No 4 and COLFO will rally shooters to submit to this Bill put our efforts and funds into lobbying the politicians over this which is likely to be more significant to all our member organizations.

I hope this helps you understand our position

Gary Howat
Chairman
www.colfo.org.nz"

Gary I think you should be careful about what you say to people.

"We have legal opinion and could have gone to court and spent $60k with "

Last time it was 25 - 50K .. how has this changed Gary? $10,000 is large amount of money to exaggerate.

"If we had won then the police have the current support for a law change if necessary which would negate our court action. They can obtain an order in council that means parliament ( cabinet) just agree to change the clause, no consultation"

BOLLOCKS ! You obviously know nothing about the Parliamentary process. Have you even bothered to read the Arms Act? Orders in council are regulations made by the Governor General and are only possible by the scope afforded the GG in the Arms Act. Changes in Legislation CANNOT be done by orders in council under the consitutional laws in our country. Gary you are either (a) bloody ignorant or (b) trying to bullshit people to cover your own capitulating arse. I have one word for you Gary -

RESIGN

KREWZR · 16th July 2009, 22:25

Arms Act section 74

Regulations(1) The Governor-General may, from time to time, by Order in Council, make regulations for all or any of the following purposes:

(a) regulating the issue, renewal, and replacement of permits and licences and the granting of endorsements:

(b) prescribing the manner and content of applications for permits, licences, and endorsements and of other applications under this Act, and requiring such applications to be supported by statutory declarations and by such other documents or information as may be prescribed:

(ba) providing for photographs of licence holders to be affixed to or imaged into dealers licences or firearms licences or both and prescribing requirements in relation to those photographs:

(c) providing for applicants for firearms licences to pass theoretical and practical tests as to their ability to handle firearms safely or to undergo courses of training designed to teach them to handle firearms safely:

(d) exempting applicants or classes of applicants for firearms licences from passing tests prescribed under paragraph (c):

(e) prescribing conditions to which permits, licences, and endorsements shall be subject:

(f) prescribing or providing for the fixing of fees payable in respect of any licence, application, or other matter under this Act, the manner of assessing any such fee, and the other matters in respect of which fees are to be payable:

(g) prescribing forms of applications, permits, licences, endorsements, registers, notices, and other documents required for the purposes of this Act, or authorising the Commissioner to prescribe or approve such forms, and requiring the use of such forms:

(h) prescribing the particulars to be recorded by licensed dealers:

(i) making provision for the security of any premises at which a licensed dealer carries on business and prescribing precautions to be taken to prevent the theft or misuse of firearms, airguns, pistols, restricted weapons, ammunition, and explosives in the possession of licensed dealers:

(j) making provision for the security of premises at which any firearm or class of firearm is kept, and prescribing precautions to be taken to prevent the theft or misuse of firearms, airguns, pistols, restricted weapons, ammunition, and explosives in the possession of any person or class of persons:

(k) specifying for the purposes of section 29 classes of persons who may be permitted to obtain endorsements permitting them to have possession of pistols or restricted weapons:

(l) making provision for the marking of firearms with identifying marks before the issue of a licence or permit:

(la) declaring any firearm to be an antique firearm for the purposes of this Act:

(m) defining firearms either generally or for the purposes of any particular provisions of this Act:

(n) applying any of the provisions of this Act to rifles, guns, or pistols of any calibre that are not firearms properly so called:

(o) excluding any firearms or ammunition or parts of firearms or restricted weapons from any of the provisions of this Act:

(p) enabling the Commissioner to direct that only certain members of the Police may issue permits or licences or grant endorsements under this Act:

(q) conferring or providing for exemptions from any provision of any regulation made under this Act:

(r) prescribing offences in respect of the contravention of or non-compliance with any regulations made under this Act, and the amounts of fines that may be imposed in respect of any such offences, which fines shall be an amount not exceeding $400:

(s) providing for such matters as are contemplated by or necessary for giving full effect to this Act and for its due administration.

(2) Notwithstanding the provisions of any regulations made under this Act, the Commissioner may dispense with the payment of any fee payable under any such regulations.

**Mr Merde** · 16th July 2009, 22:57

Originally Posted by jono035

Just got an e-mail back from Gary Howatt, the chairman of COLFO (very prompt!)

------------------

"COLFO has been in dialogue with the Police, and we do not support the changes, and how they were made. The police are aware of this position. We however have managed to negotiate to have the $200 fee for E cat waived for the introduction.

We have legal opinion and could have gone to court and spent $60k with no guarantee of winning. If we had won then the police have the current support for a law change if necessary which would negate our court action. They can obtain an order in council that means parliament ( cabinet) just agree to change the clause, no consultation.

We are aware there is likely to be a new Bill this year Arms Amendment Bill No 4 and COLFO will rally shooters to submit to this Bill put our efforts and funds into lobbying the politicians over this which is likely to be more significant to all our member organizations.

I hope this helps you understand our position

Gary Howat
Chairman
www.colfo.org.nz"

------------------

That paints an interesting alternative on the subject. I'm not 100% sure I agree that the legal action is pointless as it signals that there are people out there that are passionate about this change, but from a legal stand-point it sounds like they're determined to pass it, one way or another. The other way of looking at it could simply be that COLFO, while not supporting the changes may not necessarily oppose them though...

Jono035,

Do you mind if I forward this answer from COLFO on to Neil Hayes.
He seems to know how these groups work and also seems to know who to forward information on to in order to get the message accross.

As said befor Neil fought hard to get pistol shooting accepted in this country and I know he is passionate about the shooting sports.

It would be also interesting to forward it on to those groups whos members use these firearms.

Nice to see a group that says its working for our benifit, suck up to the police and not do sometime as it is in the too hard or too expensive basket.

Chris

**jono035** · 17th July 2009, 05:52

Originally Posted by Mr Merde

Jono035,

Do you mind if I forward this answer from COLFO on to Neil Hayes.
He seems to know how these groups work and also seems to know who to forward information on to in order to get the message accross.

As said befor Neil fought hard to get pistol shooting accepted in this country and I know he is passionate about the shooting sports.

It would be also interesting to forward it on to those groups whos members use these firearms.

Nice to see a group that says its working for our benifit, suck up to the police and not do sometime as it is in the too hard or too expensive basket.

Chris

Go for it, I sent an e-mail back to Gary saying that I would be spreading this info around and haven't received a reply asking me not to. None of it was given in confidence and it is with respect to a very generic question.

Edit: That newsletter linked is an interesting read Chris. Sounds like they've got their heads wrapped around the problem quite well! There are no problems with A category semi-autos in the hands of licensed firearms owners. Also the note about how there were no problems with 9 years of Labour government and then National comes along and hey presto, bizarre cosmetic nit-picking gun law change.

**Mr Merde** · 17th July 2009, 12:21

Sent the reply to Neil.

This is what hew came back to me with.

"
Thanks Chris"
COLFO has a meeting tomorrow and hopefully they will get the message from the majority of the board members. Otherwise they may as well close down,>>
coz the MSSA fiasco is precisely the reason they exist.>>
Tomlinson's reply doesn't surprise me at all! This is exactly what the Poms thought!>>
Cheers>>
Neil"

Looks like we have just given him some more ammunition.

**Mr Merde** · 17th July 2009, 14:42

Had a reply from the NZDF

From: SCRIVENER MIKE, MR [mailto:MICHAEL.SCRIVENER@nzdf.mil.nz]
Subject: Unclassified: Military equipment specifications
Chris,
please refer to the Arms Act 1983, which is administered by the NZ Police.

Regards
Mike Scrivener
Senior Ministerial Coordinator
HQNZDF
Tel 04 496 0037

**Mr Merde** · 17th July 2009, 14:44

My Reply

Mike,
Thanks for such a prompt answer to my request.
I have access to the Arms Act. This is not what I am after.
I was actually hoping to get the Military Specifications.
Everything in the military is to a pattern or specification including small arms.
When the military put a purchase or order in for something there is a very strict
set of specifications that it must comply to.
Having been in both the NZ Army and the British Army, being the son of an RSM and
the grandson of a WW1 veteran I have had this drummed into me since was a child.
If the military orders toilet paper it must conform to a specification. I am
trying to ascertain what these specifications are EXACTLY. Not what the firearms
act and the police interpret them to be.
Chris

**sAsLEX** · 18th July 2009, 09:55

Well Gun City forgot to put my scope base in the box with the rifle....... and I am still waiting for them to send it! Not happy!

**sAsLEX** · 18th July 2009, 09:56

Originally Posted by Mr Merde

My Reply

If the military orders toilet paper it must conform to a specification. I am
trying to ascertain what these specifications are EXACTLY. Not what the firearms
act and the police interpret them to be.
Chris

I will see if I can find the BR (Book of reference) at work which specifies our NZDF small arms.