Subscribe to NZGUNS

Register and subscribe to view unlimited premium content.

Select Committee Submission

By Rachael Dean, MNZM
  •   28th Nov, 2019 Nov 28, 2019, 12:00 AM
  •   0 Comments
  •   Save for offline viewing

Date: 28 November 2019

 

To: The Finance and Expenditure Committee

 

From: R K Dean, MNZM

 

Submission on: Arms Legislation Bill – Supplementary Order Paper 408

 

I wish to appear before the committee to speak on this submission.

 

SUBMISSION

The Making of SOP408 – involves some time travel back over 800 years.

 

The following was spotted in an October dated submission on the Arms Legislation Bill from a writer who stated they had a LLB (but no firearm’s licence). “…Furthermore the unacceptably wide ranging powers granted via Order in Council, such as “any other firearm…” and “any ammunition declared…” also gives the power, without following the process the New Zealand people expect for changes of this magnitude through legislation, to ban firearms (and ammunition) that far exceeds the stated ban on semi-automatic firearms and some shotguns that the public have been led to believe is the intent of the Bill.”

 

The writer must have been psychic...

 

HERE IT IS, ABUSE OF POWERS 101

  • Give Police powers to make up the rules as they go along (the role of Parliament) and wait for abuse of power to occur. After all why should Parliament be concerned with minor matters like prison terms of five years or seizure of the privately owned assets of law abiding citizens - it is totally okay that these can occur at the whim of Police - it is not as if New Zealand is a democracy and thank goodness New Zealand is not committed to foolishness like the Universal Declaration of Human Rights.
  • Opportunity knocks - certain police see a media story that can be manipulated to achieve a long standing personal agenda - regardless of the relationship of the media story to facts - the Minister will not question research of factual accuracy when he signs it off.
  • Quickly draw up some wording to achieve said agenda.
  • Look for revenue earning opportunities - the more P applications a person has to make the more fees Police collect - maybe the money could be used to control all those extra goats and wallabies that used to be controlled by pest controllers, hunters and landowners - at least the ones chomping their way through public land.
  • Look for cost saving opportunities - this one is easy - do not pay compensation for those legally acquired assets never used for a criminal purpose that if kept by their owners will result in wholesale criminalisation with extreme consequences. Although wasn’t that one of things the Magna Carta was meant to put a stop to - something about putting a stop to the Crown stripped law abiding persons of their rights or possessions. And there we have it - a step back over 800 years (1).
  • Phone a couple of people who probably know something about a part of the issue - and call it consultation. Don’t consult formally and don’t allow those you do contact time to consider all the issues.
  • Definitely do NOT consult widely with experts.
  • Don’t worry that the wording is poorly drafted and vague and enables the banning of far more than what the public and the Ministers have been led to believe is affected - the Minister won’t question it or notice when he signs it off.
  • Don’t worry that the proposed changes will not reduce public harm, after all the intent is personal agendas - the Minister won’t question it or notice when he signs it off.
  • Doesn’t worry that the proposals distort the political objective - the Minister won’t question it or notice when he signs it off.
  • Definitely do not wait for important carefully researched information such as what should be the output of the Royal Commission - after all, to do so is to risk the Royal Commissions findings not fitting the personal agenda of those writing the legislation.
  • Only allow a limited submission period and try and keep key information from those who wish to submit for as long as possible (unless of course they share the personal agenda).
  • Do not allow time for those who cannot or do not use the internet to have time to learn of the proposals and submit – to allow all new Zealanders who wish to submit could open one up to accusations of genuinely wanted to consult widely and adequately.
  • Limit verbal submissions as much as possible - (unless of course they share the personal agenda).
  • Continue with the campaign of stigmatising (2) those affected - and kept the truth from the public about what is really be banned.

 

RESULT:

  1. The destruction of what is probably thousands of valuable assets - police can put a number on it as these are all registered as are on B or C (or C Theatrical) endorsements. Some of which cannot even be fired or have had no ammunition manufactured for them for decades.
  2. Theft by the State of people’s assets thus reducing their net worth.
  3. Misrepresentation of the above to the public as being an improvement in public safety.
  4. The wholesale criminalisation of people at the whim of police.
  5. All this from no evidence base.


(1) Not the only step back over 800 years either...


(2) When someone is stigmatised... most people relate to that person on the basis of a single characteristic instead of their identity more broadly. Stigma is also a process of communicating to others that a particular group is associated with shame, disgrace, degeneracy, infamy and failure. They are abnormal – not us.

 

Stigmatising individuals and groups allows ‘normal’ people to single the victims out for punishment of moral containment.


RECOMMENDATIONS:

  1. Wait for the report of the Royal Commission.
  2. Wait for the report of the Office of the Auditor General on the Buy-back Scheme. This will give an indication of the operational performance of Police in these matters.
  3. Make no changes unless evidence based.
  4. Provide fair compensation to those whose legally acquired and owned assets have suddenly become prohibited.

 

BUT WAIT, THERE'S MORE...

While completing this submission another Order in Council with more banning has showed up - effective now - 29 November - “Any drum magazine that can be attached to a pistol is declared to be a prohibited magazine for the purposes of the Arms Act 1983”.

 

Here are a couple of them - more historical artifacts gone - and no consultation, notification or compensation - or improvement to public safety!

 

Abuse of powers 101 - this time on steroids!

Comments



Please Sign in or Register to comment

More in Campfire

conservation kaimanawas

Kaimanawa Whio Project Update

By Tori Levy

This latest trapping effort comes as part of the Central North Island Sika Foundation Kaimanawa Whio Recovery Project to protect the vulnerable whio (blue duck)...

community firearms

NZGUNS (NZG&H) Press Release: Firearms Law Reform

By NZGUNS

"...it is our responsibility as a publisher to keep both our community and the industry informed as to why we are unable to review or advertise...

More from NZGUNS

accuracy hunting reloading

The Advantages of Mild Calibres

By Jeff Brown

With my shooting I much prefer cartridge and firearm combinations that are easy on the ears, shoulder and pocket...

firearms technology

New Firearms Guide 11th Edition!

By NZGUNS

The new edition of the Firearms Guide enables deep, complex searches of antique and modern guns...

community firearms law

SSANZ Update: Gun crime on the increase...

By Phil Cregeen, SSANZ

Police have executed more than 100 search warrants, seized nearly 50 firearms...

A new version of this app/site is available. Click here to update.