Politics Gun laws and news around the world
- Thread starter HisRoyalHighness
- Start date
- Joined
- May 2, 2019
- Messages
- 506
- Points
- 134
1.4 million more Americans than last year have concealed carry permits, report says
www.foxnews.com
1.4 million more Americans than last year have concealed carry permits, report says
The Crime Prevention Research Center says there are now nearly 19 million Americans with permits to carry a concealed handgun.
FOLLOWING ADVICE ON SUBMISSIONS IS FROM ACT's SEYMOUR
Arms Legislation Submissions Called For
The Finance and Expenditure Committee at Parliament is calling for submissions on the Arms Legislation Bill (the ‘second tranche’ of gun laws). It’s important that we who oppose this legislation are heard by the Committee. You’ve got until Midnight on October 23, I hope this guide will help you write an effective submission.
Credentials
Over five years I’ve spent around 300 hours sitting on select committees and heard hundreds of submissions over that time. I have a fair idea about what works and below are my suggestions for making effective submissions on the Arms Legislation Bill.
The Critical Dates
The Arms Legislation Bill passed First Reading in the House on Tuesday, September 24th. It was referred to the Finance and Expenditure Committee, who must seek public input then report back to the House by February 10th next year. Within that time frame they must call for and hear public submissions on the Bill. The Committee called for public submissions on Wednesday September 25th. Most importantly, submissions must be received by MidnightWednesday 23rd October, 2019. After that date, the Committee will call on submitters to appear in person.
The Practical Details
The best and easiest way to submit is online. The webpage is here. You can put in your text or attach a document. The Committee has refused to receive submissions by email. This is not a conspiracy but designed to make the processing of submissions more efficient. We actually want to make sure public input is efficient so this is not a bad thing. You are also entitled to submit paper copies. You must send 2 copies of your submission to: Finance and Expenditure Committee, Select Committee Services, Parliament Buildings, Wellington 6160. The official guide to making submissions is here.
To Appear or not to Appear?
If you make a written submission, you can ask to present it in person. If you would like to appear in front of the Committee to submit in person, you should indicate this at the top of your paper submission, or using the button on the website. In my experience Committee Members will not understand submissions unless they are explained in person (and even then it’s far from guaranteed!). At this point the Committee has not committed to travel outside of Wellington but ACT will be advocating for it to do so.
Number One Principle
Select Committee Submissions are not a numbers game. The purpose of submissions is to inform the Committee with information they cannot ignore. The objective of submitters is to have the bill dismissed but, more realistically, changed. Our goal should be to force the Committee to say ‘this can’t work, we must make changes.’
Why Quality Trumps Quantity
10,000 people can send in a pro-forma submissions but it will have little effect. 10,000 sounds impressive but professional politicians know it is about 0.4 per cent of voters. So if you just want to make a submission to add your number you have every right to, good on you. But what will be effective is material the Committee can’t ignore.
You Must DIY!
Quality trumps quantity is why you must write your own submission. Take other people’s ideas, sure (we have suggestions below) but write it yourself. Simply getting lots of people to go to the website and put in EXACTLY the same thing will not sway the committee. Even better, provide original objections that will give Government MP’s that ‘oh, crap’ feeling about their legislation!
What Can’t the Committee Ignore?
The majority of the Committee are members of Labour or New Zealand First (at present the Greens are not represented on the Finance and Expenditure Committee). Because their parties are publicly committed to the law, there is nothing you can say that will make them say ‘oh, now you put it like that, maybe we should abandon this stupid law.’ What they can’t ignore is you pointing out the law won’t do what they think it will do, or will offend other values they have. The goal is to force changes.
An Example of Cutting Across the Government’s Other Values
This Government is heavily and rightly committed to improving mental health advocates. They just committed $1.9 billion (about $400 for every person in New Zealand each year) to the cause. Added to that, community leaders such as Sir John Kirwin have spent the last 15 years telling people it’s ok to ask for help. What is the Arms Legislation doing? S91 violates the doctor-patient relationship. It says that “the health practitioner must consider notifying the Police as soon as practicable” if they feel someone is unsafe to have a firearm.
An Example of Self Contradiction in the Law
Much has been made of the new bill saying it should be a privilege not a right to own a firearm. Interestingly, most dictionaries define a privilege as a special form of right, particularly in the legal context. The Government appears to want to say that firearm ownership is a special form of right, not a right!
Humanising LFOs
The Government would like to believe, and would like the public to believe, that LFOs are just terrorists in waiting who must be disarmed before it’s too late. In reality LFOs are from all walks of life. They run businesses, raise families, participate in conservation, train and upskill each other, and contribute to the community. People, including the media who will be there, need to see that LFOs are people. Don’t be afraid to say who you are and tell your story.
ACT’s View
Act is opposed to the legislation for multiple reasons. 1) it is not the Government’s job to define our ‘privileges.’ 2) it is wrong to undermine the doctor-patient relationship 3) The bill makes it harder to follow the law but doesn’t punish actual criminals 4) The register won’t work and creates its own security risks 5) greater regulations on clubs will actually reduce the amount of community support and surveillance for firearm use 6) The timing is wrong. It is being rushed (even if not as rushed as the April law) so that it can be passed in time for the March 15 Anniversary. The image of the law matters more to this Government than making an effective law. Altogether we’ll be less safe.
The Best Advice
In our view the best advice is actually from COLFO. Michael, Nicole and the team have done a great job analyzing the situation so far. Their advice from ‘the firearm lawyer’ Nicholas Taylor can be found here: ACT’s advice is to look to COLFO for technical advice, we have found them to be very knowledgeable.
Even Better Advice
Perhaps even better is your own knowledge. I am constantly amazed by LFO’s pointing out things that no politician or bureaucrat would be likely to think of. This is an opportunity to bring your own knowledge on the bill.
Join Our Campaign
You are receiving this email as part of ACT’s Fair Firearm Laws campaign. Please share it and encourage your friends to sign up to the campaign. https://fairfirearmlaws.act.org.nz
Q&A
What follows is a summary of some questions and answers we’ve had lately.
Why is it going to the Finance and Expenditure Committee (FEC)?
A bill can go to any Committee that the House votes for. We believe the Government chose Finance and Expenditure because it has a majority on this Committee. The April Bill also went to FEC for the same reason. Normally these bills should go to the Justice Committee but the Government does have a right to send it to FEC.
Why the compressed timeframe?
Normally a bill goes to Select Committee for six months. This bill will be reported back on February 10. That is just under five months, which doesn’t sound too bad, but when you consider that Parliament is won’t sit from December 18th to February 11, it is really only three months. We think this is outrageous, clearly the image of the process matters more than public safety.
Why are email submissions banned?
The Committee has banned email submissions for administrative reasons. It is easier to organize submissions sent through a portal such as the one on the Parliament website. People will see this as some grand conspiracy against democracy but it is really providing more efficient consultation. It is important we do not get sidetracked here.
Can Submissions Make a Difference?
Yes and no. As we saw in April, a determined Government (and National Party opposition) will steamroll democratic processes. We believe that in this case there is the potential for changes to some of the worst parts of the bill if intelligent submitters show up in numbers.
Arms Legislation Submissions Called For
The Finance and Expenditure Committee at Parliament is calling for submissions on the Arms Legislation Bill (the ‘second tranche’ of gun laws). It’s important that we who oppose this legislation are heard by the Committee. You’ve got until Midnight on October 23, I hope this guide will help you write an effective submission.
Credentials
Over five years I’ve spent around 300 hours sitting on select committees and heard hundreds of submissions over that time. I have a fair idea about what works and below are my suggestions for making effective submissions on the Arms Legislation Bill.
The Critical Dates
The Arms Legislation Bill passed First Reading in the House on Tuesday, September 24th. It was referred to the Finance and Expenditure Committee, who must seek public input then report back to the House by February 10th next year. Within that time frame they must call for and hear public submissions on the Bill. The Committee called for public submissions on Wednesday September 25th. Most importantly, submissions must be received by MidnightWednesday 23rd October, 2019. After that date, the Committee will call on submitters to appear in person.
The Practical Details
The best and easiest way to submit is online. The webpage is here. You can put in your text or attach a document. The Committee has refused to receive submissions by email. This is not a conspiracy but designed to make the processing of submissions more efficient. We actually want to make sure public input is efficient so this is not a bad thing. You are also entitled to submit paper copies. You must send 2 copies of your submission to: Finance and Expenditure Committee, Select Committee Services, Parliament Buildings, Wellington 6160. The official guide to making submissions is here.
To Appear or not to Appear?
If you make a written submission, you can ask to present it in person. If you would like to appear in front of the Committee to submit in person, you should indicate this at the top of your paper submission, or using the button on the website. In my experience Committee Members will not understand submissions unless they are explained in person (and even then it’s far from guaranteed!). At this point the Committee has not committed to travel outside of Wellington but ACT will be advocating for it to do so.
Number One Principle
Select Committee Submissions are not a numbers game. The purpose of submissions is to inform the Committee with information they cannot ignore. The objective of submitters is to have the bill dismissed but, more realistically, changed. Our goal should be to force the Committee to say ‘this can’t work, we must make changes.’
Why Quality Trumps Quantity
10,000 people can send in a pro-forma submissions but it will have little effect. 10,000 sounds impressive but professional politicians know it is about 0.4 per cent of voters. So if you just want to make a submission to add your number you have every right to, good on you. But what will be effective is material the Committee can’t ignore.
You Must DIY!
Quality trumps quantity is why you must write your own submission. Take other people’s ideas, sure (we have suggestions below) but write it yourself. Simply getting lots of people to go to the website and put in EXACTLY the same thing will not sway the committee. Even better, provide original objections that will give Government MP’s that ‘oh, crap’ feeling about their legislation!
What Can’t the Committee Ignore?
The majority of the Committee are members of Labour or New Zealand First (at present the Greens are not represented on the Finance and Expenditure Committee). Because their parties are publicly committed to the law, there is nothing you can say that will make them say ‘oh, now you put it like that, maybe we should abandon this stupid law.’ What they can’t ignore is you pointing out the law won’t do what they think it will do, or will offend other values they have. The goal is to force changes.
An Example of Cutting Across the Government’s Other Values
This Government is heavily and rightly committed to improving mental health advocates. They just committed $1.9 billion (about $400 for every person in New Zealand each year) to the cause. Added to that, community leaders such as Sir John Kirwin have spent the last 15 years telling people it’s ok to ask for help. What is the Arms Legislation doing? S91 violates the doctor-patient relationship. It says that “the health practitioner must consider notifying the Police as soon as practicable” if they feel someone is unsafe to have a firearm.
An Example of Self Contradiction in the Law
Much has been made of the new bill saying it should be a privilege not a right to own a firearm. Interestingly, most dictionaries define a privilege as a special form of right, particularly in the legal context. The Government appears to want to say that firearm ownership is a special form of right, not a right!
Humanising LFOs
The Government would like to believe, and would like the public to believe, that LFOs are just terrorists in waiting who must be disarmed before it’s too late. In reality LFOs are from all walks of life. They run businesses, raise families, participate in conservation, train and upskill each other, and contribute to the community. People, including the media who will be there, need to see that LFOs are people. Don’t be afraid to say who you are and tell your story.
ACT’s View
Act is opposed to the legislation for multiple reasons. 1) it is not the Government’s job to define our ‘privileges.’ 2) it is wrong to undermine the doctor-patient relationship 3) The bill makes it harder to follow the law but doesn’t punish actual criminals 4) The register won’t work and creates its own security risks 5) greater regulations on clubs will actually reduce the amount of community support and surveillance for firearm use 6) The timing is wrong. It is being rushed (even if not as rushed as the April law) so that it can be passed in time for the March 15 Anniversary. The image of the law matters more to this Government than making an effective law. Altogether we’ll be less safe.
The Best Advice
In our view the best advice is actually from COLFO. Michael, Nicole and the team have done a great job analyzing the situation so far. Their advice from ‘the firearm lawyer’ Nicholas Taylor can be found here: ACT’s advice is to look to COLFO for technical advice, we have found them to be very knowledgeable.
Even Better Advice
Perhaps even better is your own knowledge. I am constantly amazed by LFO’s pointing out things that no politician or bureaucrat would be likely to think of. This is an opportunity to bring your own knowledge on the bill.
Join Our Campaign
You are receiving this email as part of ACT’s Fair Firearm Laws campaign. Please share it and encourage your friends to sign up to the campaign. https://fairfirearmlaws.act.org.nz
Q&A
What follows is a summary of some questions and answers we’ve had lately.
Why is it going to the Finance and Expenditure Committee (FEC)?
A bill can go to any Committee that the House votes for. We believe the Government chose Finance and Expenditure because it has a majority on this Committee. The April Bill also went to FEC for the same reason. Normally these bills should go to the Justice Committee but the Government does have a right to send it to FEC.
Why the compressed timeframe?
Normally a bill goes to Select Committee for six months. This bill will be reported back on February 10. That is just under five months, which doesn’t sound too bad, but when you consider that Parliament is won’t sit from December 18th to February 11, it is really only three months. We think this is outrageous, clearly the image of the process matters more than public safety.
Why are email submissions banned?
The Committee has banned email submissions for administrative reasons. It is easier to organize submissions sent through a portal such as the one on the Parliament website. People will see this as some grand conspiracy against democracy but it is really providing more efficient consultation. It is important we do not get sidetracked here.
Can Submissions Make a Difference?
Yes and no. As we saw in April, a determined Government (and National Party opposition) will steamroll democratic processes. We believe that in this case there is the potential for changes to some of the worst parts of the bill if intelligent submitters show up in numbers.
- Joined
- Mar 8, 2018
- Messages
- 9,373
- Points
- 348
Whats the Average price of a Pistol , Rifle , Shotgun in per state in America ???
Dear SSANZ members,
Attached is a summary of the almost 70 offences that you must guard against as a result of being the owner of a firearm. Refer to the Act and new Bill for full details
http://www.legislation.govt.nz/act/public/1983/0044/latest/whole.html
http://legislation.govt.nz/bill/government/2019/0177/latest/LMS256577.html
Many now involve the possibility of serious Jail time up to 10 years, or a heavy fine, for a simple error on your part.
One worrying aspect of the new legislation is the plan to create a register of all our details and individual firearms. The concern here is that the information contained in the register may be hacked or leaked, which we know can happen as illustrated by the recent hacking of DHB data bases. And there is no legislation that says we must be informed if our data is compromised.
https://www.odt.co.nz/news/national/health-details-risk-after-hack-attack
It is interesting to note that while there are plenty of offences to trap us firearm owners there are no offences for officials who may unlawfully access the firearm registry or pass on information to unauthorised third parties, again something that been done in the past.
You may like to include this in your next letter to an MP
Dear Member of Parliament
The difference between the statistics and facts being promulgated by the Police and what others are researching appears to be growing. Do you, like me find this apparent inflation and misrepresentation by the Police troubling, distressing and confusing?
Can I respectfully ask:
https://cfnz.blog/2019/10/03/police...l_mjv4QzRY8Z124ZHrL74afFyYNAqMKH5iKI25aezQw7k
Police inflate firearms offences by a factor of 10 in legislation impact report
The Arms Amendment Bill is in the process of being pushed through parliament, and as part of that the Police have issued an “impact statement” claiming that there will be no unintended side effects, which is unfortunately far from the truth. But that’s not all – under a section of the impact report we are informed that firearm-related offences make up almost 11% of violent offences. Wow! that is really high! but is it true? not in the least.
........................
Let me bust out my calculator real quick, and, ah, yes – the real number is more like 1.3% of serious assaults in 2018, roughly one-tenth of what the Police are telling our MPs. And the percentages plummet if you take all assaults or a wider range of offences into account.\
And then once you take the rate of firearms offences committed by firearms licence holders, which is around 1%, you end up with about 0.01% of serious violent crimes involving firearms being committed by licence holders. The Arms Legislation Bill almost exclusively focuses on regulation of licences, dealers, clubs, and ranges, and ignores the other (literally) 99.99% of violent crime involving firearms.
If there was any shred of credibility remaining in the NZ Police they just flushed it away.
Perhaps blunt instruments and edged weapons need to be banned as well or at least serialised and registered. But will this make NZ safer?
I urge you to consider more than just the information provided by the Police and the Police Association, and question their motives when you consider the current Firearms Bill. From reported statements it looks like arming of the Police and disarmament of the law abiding public is a long term goal. Will a NZ where only the Military, Police and gangs are armed actually make NZ safer?
Did the Police administration of the Arms Act and the firearms license application process actually contribute to the events of March 15?
Before any further Legislative changes don't you think you should have this information so that you can make an informed decision.
Regards
ACT Party Visiting Whangarei to talk about Freedom of Speech and Firearms, All Welcome
https://www.act.org.nz/freedom_to_s...t_whangarei&utm_medium=email&utm_source=actnz
Stay Strong and Stay focussed I know many of you are making great efforts to preserve our ability to continue to hunt, shoot and collect firearms.
All the best,
Attached is a summary of the almost 70 offences that you must guard against as a result of being the owner of a firearm. Refer to the Act and new Bill for full details
http://www.legislation.govt.nz/act/public/1983/0044/latest/whole.html
http://legislation.govt.nz/bill/government/2019/0177/latest/LMS256577.html
Many now involve the possibility of serious Jail time up to 10 years, or a heavy fine, for a simple error on your part.
One worrying aspect of the new legislation is the plan to create a register of all our details and individual firearms. The concern here is that the information contained in the register may be hacked or leaked, which we know can happen as illustrated by the recent hacking of DHB data bases. And there is no legislation that says we must be informed if our data is compromised.
https://www.odt.co.nz/news/national/health-details-risk-after-hack-attack
It is interesting to note that while there are plenty of offences to trap us firearm owners there are no offences for officials who may unlawfully access the firearm registry or pass on information to unauthorised third parties, again something that been done in the past.
You may like to include this in your next letter to an MP
Dear Member of Parliament
The difference between the statistics and facts being promulgated by the Police and what others are researching appears to be growing. Do you, like me find this apparent inflation and misrepresentation by the Police troubling, distressing and confusing?
Can I respectfully ask:
- What due diligence is carried out by Members of Parliament regarding the information the Police provide in support of changes to the Firearms legislation post 15 March?
- What power does Parliament have and what actions can it take if it finds that the facts and information provided by the Police don't stack up?
https://cfnz.blog/2019/10/03/police...l_mjv4QzRY8Z124ZHrL74afFyYNAqMKH5iKI25aezQw7k
Police inflate firearms offences by a factor of 10 in legislation impact report
The Arms Amendment Bill is in the process of being pushed through parliament, and as part of that the Police have issued an “impact statement” claiming that there will be no unintended side effects, which is unfortunately far from the truth. But that’s not all – under a section of the impact report we are informed that firearm-related offences make up almost 11% of violent offences. Wow! that is really high! but is it true? not in the least.
........................
Let me bust out my calculator real quick, and, ah, yes – the real number is more like 1.3% of serious assaults in 2018, roughly one-tenth of what the Police are telling our MPs. And the percentages plummet if you take all assaults or a wider range of offences into account.\
And then once you take the rate of firearms offences committed by firearms licence holders, which is around 1%, you end up with about 0.01% of serious violent crimes involving firearms being committed by licence holders. The Arms Legislation Bill almost exclusively focuses on regulation of licences, dealers, clubs, and ranges, and ignores the other (literally) 99.99% of violent crime involving firearms.
If there was any shred of credibility remaining in the NZ Police they just flushed it away.
Perhaps blunt instruments and edged weapons need to be banned as well or at least serialised and registered. But will this make NZ safer?
I urge you to consider more than just the information provided by the Police and the Police Association, and question their motives when you consider the current Firearms Bill. From reported statements it looks like arming of the Police and disarmament of the law abiding public is a long term goal. Will a NZ where only the Military, Police and gangs are armed actually make NZ safer?
Did the Police administration of the Arms Act and the firearms license application process actually contribute to the events of March 15?
Before any further Legislative changes don't you think you should have this information so that you can make an informed decision.
Regards
ACT Party Visiting Whangarei to talk about Freedom of Speech and Firearms, All Welcome
https://www.act.org.nz/freedom_to_s...t_whangarei&utm_medium=email&utm_source=actnz
Stay Strong and Stay focussed I know many of you are making great efforts to preserve our ability to continue to hunt, shoot and collect firearms.
All the best,
- Joined
- May 2, 2019
- Messages
- 506
- Points
- 134
Democrats’ Gun Sales Surge Continues – September NICS Checks Up 10%
www.thetruthaboutguns.com
Democrats' Gun Sales Surge Continues - September NICS Checks Up 10% - The Truth About Guns
If gun makers and the big bad gun lobby had gotten together and designed a strategy to goose gun sales (which were already good by historically standards) they couldn’t have done much better than what Democrats have done on their own. Between Beto’s media-enabled confiscation jihad and other...
www.thetruthaboutguns.com
- Joined
- May 2, 2019
- Messages
- 506
- Points
- 134
Bump stock ban's flop a bad omen for Democrats' gun buyback plan
m.washingtontimes.com
And morons like Beto and Harris think Americans will hand over their MSSAs by the millions.
Oh but that’s not the big news, the big news and likely the biggest of the year is this:
Supreme Court Refuses to Drop 2A Case, Despite NYC Pleas
Bump stock ban failure an omen for gun buyback plan
The federal government collected fewer than 1,000 bump stocks during the run-up to a new ban in March, despite estimates that hundreds of thousands of the devices that mimic machine gun fire are in circulation, according to federal data provided to The Washington Times by the Justice Department.
m.washingtontimes.com
And morons like Beto and Harris think Americans will hand over their MSSAs by the millions.
Oh but that’s not the big news, the big news and likely the biggest of the year is this:
Supreme Court Refuses to Drop 2A Case, Despite NYC Pleas
Dear SSANZ members,
With time running short we make no apology for providing the attached guidance provided by fellow COLFO member NZDA on making a submission. Why reinvent the wheel?
We also attach a copy of the SSANZ submission, by all means take ideas from this, but please do not copy and paste from it as you efforts will be lumped in with ours and count as one submission. It is important that your submission is written in your own words. You can however say that you support our submission if you think that is appropriate.
To give you encouragement here is an article worth reading.
http://suegrey.co.nz/index.php/2019...ons-and-medicinal-cannabis-all-have-in-common
Good luck with your submission.
All the best,
With time running short we make no apology for providing the attached guidance provided by fellow COLFO member NZDA on making a submission. Why reinvent the wheel?
We also attach a copy of the SSANZ submission, by all means take ideas from this, but please do not copy and paste from it as you efforts will be lumped in with ours and count as one submission. It is important that your submission is written in your own words. You can however say that you support our submission if you think that is appropriate.
To give you encouragement here is an article worth reading.
http://suegrey.co.nz/index.php/2019...ons-and-medicinal-cannabis-all-have-in-common
Good luck with your submission.
All the best,
- Joined
- May 2, 2019
- Messages
- 506
- Points
- 134
Dick’s CEO Says Anti-Gun Policy Shrank Company by a ‘Quarter Billion Dollars’
freebeacon.com
Basically, virtue signaling.
What’s ghoulish is how a new anti-gun story involving Dicks or Stack is coming out every other week. Like they are trying desperately to keep the PR limelight.
Dick's CEO Says Anti-Gun Policy Shrank Company by a 'Quarter Billion Dollars'
The CEO of Dick's Sporting Goods told CBS News this weekend that his decisions to stop selling certain guns and hire lobbyists to push for new gun bans have cost his company roughly $250 million.
Basically, virtue signaling.
What’s ghoulish is how a new anti-gun story involving Dicks or Stack is coming out every other week. Like they are trying desperately to keep the PR limelight.
Dear Supporter,
Nicole and I have spent the last few hours with the lawyers going over the final version of our submission on the Arms Legislation Amendment Bill — the Government's second tranche of firearms law changes.
You can read the full submission here (I've also copied a summary of the submission to the end of this email).
The Bill introduces an onerous firearms register, halves the period of a licence, will hike fees, and introduces new rules and restrictions on arms and ammo. It also hands enormous and discretionary regulatory power to the Police and in our view will undermine the mutual trust and confidence between the Police and responsible firearms owners, which New Zealand has historically enjoyed.
As you will see, the lawyers have spent many long days over the last two weeks to ensure that our arguments are presented persuasively and the full effects of the proposed law changes are laid bare. After reading the full submission it leaves you with an impression that the Bill is a result of Government determined to ostracise, rather than work constructively with, responsible firearms owners.
Some extracts:
This Bill is far more reprehensible after close study than was feared from the Government announcements. But among the disappointments is that it has not taken the opportunity to fix obvious problems from the rushed Arm (Prohibited Firearms, Magazines, and Parts) Amendment Act 2019 [the Amendment Act]. That Act was made in a climate of political excitement. It did not follow good legislative processes. It did not benefit from proper consultation. This Bill gives the Committee the opportunity to fix these issues now.
This Bill contains significant increases to penalties for existing and new offences. ... We are not aware of any evidence that should have persuaded the government that these increases will do anything to deter unsafe firearm use. It is likely to have the opposite effect – it will make criminals out of those people who in all other aspects have been law abiding citizens, generally ready and willing to support the Police and to play their part in reporting and deterring crime in their communities.
On the compensation and buyback:
We think the current approach is catapulting prohibited weapons into the unlawful sector. ... No evidence has been put forward by the government to explain why the rates of compensation seem deliberately set to punish firearm owners. ... The Government cannot complain if owners generally see as a denunciation, an approach that they are inherently wrongdoers. Such hostility does not build “trust and confidence.”
We need your help to make sure the message is heard in Wellington
Our lawyers tell us that the best way to ensure the submission is well-considered, is to ensure a very large number of people are willing to endorse or support the submission, and (ideally) make their own submission putting similar points into their own words.
(1) Add your name to the COLFO submission
Those groups who want to see even more restrictions and prohibitions are organising to get people outside the firearms community to submit in support of the Bill's provisions.
That's why we are asking you to visit our website and add your name to the submission before we submit it to the Select Committee on 23 October.
--> Add name in support of the submission <--
(2) Make your own submission
Personal submissions are the most powerful tool you can use to convince MPs to dump the onerous provisions in this Bill - or at the very least defer the close of submissions until after the Christchurch Royal Commission has reported back.
Our lawyers have created a series of guidance papers on the various aspects of the Bill. If you agree that standing up for the rights of lawful firearms owners is important, please take a few minutes to put the points into your own words and file your own submissions. You can read the guidance on how to make a submission here.
Thank you for your support.
COLFO
Nicole and I have spent the last few hours with the lawyers going over the final version of our submission on the Arms Legislation Amendment Bill — the Government's second tranche of firearms law changes.
You can read the full submission here (I've also copied a summary of the submission to the end of this email).
The Bill introduces an onerous firearms register, halves the period of a licence, will hike fees, and introduces new rules and restrictions on arms and ammo. It also hands enormous and discretionary regulatory power to the Police and in our view will undermine the mutual trust and confidence between the Police and responsible firearms owners, which New Zealand has historically enjoyed.
As you will see, the lawyers have spent many long days over the last two weeks to ensure that our arguments are presented persuasively and the full effects of the proposed law changes are laid bare. After reading the full submission it leaves you with an impression that the Bill is a result of Government determined to ostracise, rather than work constructively with, responsible firearms owners.
Some extracts:
This Bill is far more reprehensible after close study than was feared from the Government announcements. But among the disappointments is that it has not taken the opportunity to fix obvious problems from the rushed Arm (Prohibited Firearms, Magazines, and Parts) Amendment Act 2019 [the Amendment Act]. That Act was made in a climate of political excitement. It did not follow good legislative processes. It did not benefit from proper consultation. This Bill gives the Committee the opportunity to fix these issues now.
This Bill contains significant increases to penalties for existing and new offences. ... We are not aware of any evidence that should have persuaded the government that these increases will do anything to deter unsafe firearm use. It is likely to have the opposite effect – it will make criminals out of those people who in all other aspects have been law abiding citizens, generally ready and willing to support the Police and to play their part in reporting and deterring crime in their communities.
On the compensation and buyback:
We think the current approach is catapulting prohibited weapons into the unlawful sector. ... No evidence has been put forward by the government to explain why the rates of compensation seem deliberately set to punish firearm owners. ... The Government cannot complain if owners generally see as a denunciation, an approach that they are inherently wrongdoers. Such hostility does not build “trust and confidence.”
We need your help to make sure the message is heard in Wellington
Our lawyers tell us that the best way to ensure the submission is well-considered, is to ensure a very large number of people are willing to endorse or support the submission, and (ideally) make their own submission putting similar points into their own words.
(1) Add your name to the COLFO submission
Those groups who want to see even more restrictions and prohibitions are organising to get people outside the firearms community to submit in support of the Bill's provisions.
That's why we are asking you to visit our website and add your name to the submission before we submit it to the Select Committee on 23 October.
--> Add name in support of the submission <--
(2) Make your own submission
Personal submissions are the most powerful tool you can use to convince MPs to dump the onerous provisions in this Bill - or at the very least defer the close of submissions until after the Christchurch Royal Commission has reported back.
Our lawyers have created a series of guidance papers on the various aspects of the Bill. If you agree that standing up for the rights of lawful firearms owners is important, please take a few minutes to put the points into your own words and file your own submissions. You can read the guidance on how to make a submission here.
Thank you for your support.
COLFO
- Joined
- May 2, 2019
- Messages
- 506
- Points
- 134
California adopts broadest US rules for seizing guns
apnews.com
Coming from the state that had a city designate the NRA as a terrorist organization.
Even the ACLU thinks it is complete BS.
California adopts broadest US rules for seizing guns
SACRAMENTO, Calif. (AP) — California Gov. Gavin Newsom on Friday signed a law that will make the state the first to allow employers, co-workers and teachers to seek gun violence restraining orders against other people.
apnews.com
Coming from the state that had a city designate the NRA as a terrorist organization.
Even the ACLU thinks it is complete BS.
- Joined
- Apr 15, 2019
- Messages
- 2,123
- Points
- 278
Doesn't matter. I worked with a nurse who banned her two sons from having toy guns. She looked outside one day and they had picked up sticks to use as their battle rifles. We didn't have hand grenades either as kids, dirt clods worked just fine for our purposes.
There was a huge response over the weekend to Michael’s email asking supporters to endorse the COLFO submission on the Government’s second tranche of firearm law reforms. More than 3,000 have added their name in just 48 hours – but we need to hit 10,000 by the 23rd of October, when submissions close, to ensure the voice of responsible firearms owners are heard.
Click here to read the full submission (a summary is copied below). It only takes a few seconds to add your name here.
Click here to add your name to the submission.
Thank you for your support.
COLFO
Click here to read the full submission (a summary is copied below). It only takes a few seconds to add your name here.
Click here to add your name to the submission.
Thank you for your support.
COLFO
- Joined
- May 2, 2019
- Messages
- 506
- Points
- 134
California just rubber stamped more idiotic gun laws:
I love how petty they are that they got bitch slapped by the courts that they codified the Del Mar Fairgrounds gun ban into law.
Also, some actual journalism from CNN in regards to gun laws:
He sold illegal AR-15s. Feds agreed to let him go free to avoid hurting gun control efforts
www.cnn.com
I love how petty they are that they got bitch slapped by the courts that they codified the Del Mar Fairgrounds gun ban into law.
Also, some actual journalism from CNN in regards to gun laws:
He sold illegal AR-15s. Feds agreed to let him go free to avoid hurting gun control efforts
He sold illegal AR-15s. Feds agreed to let him go free to avoid hurting gun control efforts | CNN
A case once touted by ATF and federal prosecutors as a crackdown on an illicit AR-15-style weapons factory near Los Angeles is now seen has having the potential to pave the way to unfettered access to one of the most demonized guns in America.
Last edited:
Dear Supporter,
Is steel shot now outlawed? Our lawyers respond to Fish & Game statement.
This afternoon Fish & Game posted a public statement responding to my email to supporters this morning – specifically rejecting our claim that steel shot is now deemed "enhanced penetration ammunition" and therefore possession of such could result in conviction and up to two years in prison.
Fish & Game claim that we (and the ACT Party’s David Seymour) are wrong in our interpretation.
We have asked our Wellington legal experts, Franks Ogilvie, to comment on the matter. They said:
“Fish & Game’s response is surprising. We wish the law was what Fish & Game claim, but it simply isn’t. It appears they have not bothered to read our letter to Police Minister Stuart Nash or sought their own legal advice. We’ve asked the Minister to change the law so that it is along the lines Fish & Game state – indeed what they say is simply repeating what the Police claim and may now wish the Order said.
Of course, for practical purposes people can take comfort they are unlikely to be prosecuted if the Police say they won’t.
But that is not the point. The law is what Parliament passes, and the Governor-General signs. Those disciplines are fundamental to the difference between the Police determining what the law of the land is (a police state), or living under the Rule of Law.
For those interested in detail, the Order has no exclusion for shotgun ammunition. It should. There is nothing confining the prohibition to rifle bullets. There should be. There is no condition that it applies only to bullets intended to penetrate armour. That restriction too should be there. Perhaps Fish & Game are confusing our concerns with the definition of ‘Multi-projectile ammunition' in the same Order (which does specifically exclude shotgun ammunition). That exclusion does not apply to the definition of ‘enhanced penetration ammunition’. That appears to be the key error Police, and the Minister, have made.
We made it plain that the Order would not have been intended to cover shotgun cartridges. We know the Police website now says it does not. But as the law is written, it does.
The point of the alert to supporters, and to the Minister, was to pick just one example of the Police making things up as they go along. On matters where the penalty is up to two years in prison, it is reasonable to expect a much higher standard. The Minister should swallow embarrassment and fix the mistakes, not have groups like Fish & Game try to defend the indefensible with misinformation.
Our respect for Police and our liberties depend on the Police being loyal servants of the law, whatever they think of it – not rulers able to decide what they want it to say.
There has been similar Police invention over the moratorium on criminal liability for possessing the (badly defined) prohibited ammunition. Police said it expired on 30 September, but that if people reported what they have, it will continue until the ammunition is collected by Police. That is not what Regulation 28Z says. As written, from 1 October all people who hold it are liable to two years in prison. The Police can’t waive that. The Order in Council is so badly written that Police have been pretending to have powers the regulation does not give them. We raised that with the Minister only indirectly, because it is not in anyone’s interests to have the criminal liability tested before the Minister has corrected the errors.
Fish & Game should apologise, and in the interests of those they claim to represent, join in COLFO's request that the Minister correct the mistakes. That way, Fish & Game's assurances would have legal backing.”
I think it is really disappointing that Fish & Game have jumped in like this, but they are probably simply relying on the Police’s assurances, something we should all be entitled to do.
But pointing out the errors, and taking-on the Government where it has, frankly, got something badly wrong, is precisely what is needed. It is why we started this campaign and have asked people to crowdfund this effort.
Fish & Game say, that "this is a time when firearms groups should be working together for the public good". We totally agree.
Thank you for your support,
Nicole.
Is steel shot now outlawed? Our lawyers respond to Fish & Game statement.
This afternoon Fish & Game posted a public statement responding to my email to supporters this morning – specifically rejecting our claim that steel shot is now deemed "enhanced penetration ammunition" and therefore possession of such could result in conviction and up to two years in prison.
Fish & Game claim that we (and the ACT Party’s David Seymour) are wrong in our interpretation.
We have asked our Wellington legal experts, Franks Ogilvie, to comment on the matter. They said:
“Fish & Game’s response is surprising. We wish the law was what Fish & Game claim, but it simply isn’t. It appears they have not bothered to read our letter to Police Minister Stuart Nash or sought their own legal advice. We’ve asked the Minister to change the law so that it is along the lines Fish & Game state – indeed what they say is simply repeating what the Police claim and may now wish the Order said.
Of course, for practical purposes people can take comfort they are unlikely to be prosecuted if the Police say they won’t.
But that is not the point. The law is what Parliament passes, and the Governor-General signs. Those disciplines are fundamental to the difference between the Police determining what the law of the land is (a police state), or living under the Rule of Law.
For those interested in detail, the Order has no exclusion for shotgun ammunition. It should. There is nothing confining the prohibition to rifle bullets. There should be. There is no condition that it applies only to bullets intended to penetrate armour. That restriction too should be there. Perhaps Fish & Game are confusing our concerns with the definition of ‘Multi-projectile ammunition' in the same Order (which does specifically exclude shotgun ammunition). That exclusion does not apply to the definition of ‘enhanced penetration ammunition’. That appears to be the key error Police, and the Minister, have made.
We made it plain that the Order would not have been intended to cover shotgun cartridges. We know the Police website now says it does not. But as the law is written, it does.
The point of the alert to supporters, and to the Minister, was to pick just one example of the Police making things up as they go along. On matters where the penalty is up to two years in prison, it is reasonable to expect a much higher standard. The Minister should swallow embarrassment and fix the mistakes, not have groups like Fish & Game try to defend the indefensible with misinformation.
Our respect for Police and our liberties depend on the Police being loyal servants of the law, whatever they think of it – not rulers able to decide what they want it to say.
There has been similar Police invention over the moratorium on criminal liability for possessing the (badly defined) prohibited ammunition. Police said it expired on 30 September, but that if people reported what they have, it will continue until the ammunition is collected by Police. That is not what Regulation 28Z says. As written, from 1 October all people who hold it are liable to two years in prison. The Police can’t waive that. The Order in Council is so badly written that Police have been pretending to have powers the regulation does not give them. We raised that with the Minister only indirectly, because it is not in anyone’s interests to have the criminal liability tested before the Minister has corrected the errors.
Fish & Game should apologise, and in the interests of those they claim to represent, join in COLFO's request that the Minister correct the mistakes. That way, Fish & Game's assurances would have legal backing.”
I think it is really disappointing that Fish & Game have jumped in like this, but they are probably simply relying on the Police’s assurances, something we should all be entitled to do.
But pointing out the errors, and taking-on the Government where it has, frankly, got something badly wrong, is precisely what is needed. It is why we started this campaign and have asked people to crowdfund this effort.
Fish & Game say, that "this is a time when firearms groups should be working together for the public good". We totally agree.
Thank you for your support,
Nicole.
Dear SSANZ members,
We’ve just had a huge win! In the last few hours the Police have issued a statement clarifying that steel shot will not be banned and the Ministerial Order we highlighted publicly will be amended. ( see Police e-mail below) More to come via Fair & Reasonable so sign up and keep up to date www.fairandreasonable.co.nz
Please note that other matters raised in our lawyers letter to the Minister of Police have still to be addressed.
Protest in Christchurch this Saturday
I understand there is a LFOs peaceful protest gathering in CHCH on Saturday to coincide with NZ First Conference details are scant but this is what I have: The actual peaceful protest is in Latimer square at 0845 Sat morn. If you could refrane from wearing anti govt and Anti Jacinda hats and t-shirts that would be preferred. A orange vest would also be preferred.
Act Party are holding a number of events and meetings around the country which you may wish to attend https://www.act.org.nz/events If you do attend please let them know you are a SSANZ member.
See also a press release from New Conservative Party after Police e-mail below.
eft to get your submission in, have you done one yet?
Best regards,
Phil
Secretary SSANZ
COLFO Board Member
We’ve just had a huge win! In the last few hours the Police have issued a statement clarifying that steel shot will not be banned and the Ministerial Order we highlighted publicly will be amended. ( see Police e-mail below) More to come via Fair & Reasonable so sign up and keep up to date www.fairandreasonable.co.nz
Please note that other matters raised in our lawyers letter to the Minister of Police have still to be addressed.
Protest in Christchurch this Saturday
I understand there is a LFOs peaceful protest gathering in CHCH on Saturday to coincide with NZ First Conference details are scant but this is what I have: The actual peaceful protest is in Latimer square at 0845 Sat morn. If you could refrane from wearing anti govt and Anti Jacinda hats and t-shirts that would be preferred. A orange vest would also be preferred.
Act Party are holding a number of events and meetings around the country which you may wish to attend https://www.act.org.nz/events If you do attend please let them know you are a SSANZ member.
See also a press release from New Conservative Party after Police e-mail below.
eft to get your submission in, have you done one yet?
Best regards,
Phil
Secretary SSANZ
COLFO Board Member
- Joined
- Apr 15, 2019
- Messages
- 2,123
- Points
- 278
Another nugget from Beto on a reliance for criminals to do the right thing and turn in their guns. Also, Democrat Candidate Tom Steyer calls the US economy 'rotten'.
OCTOBER 17, 2019
'We should have faith': Beto tells Eric Bolling that criminals will 'do the right thing' and turn in their guns
https://www.theblaze.com/eric-bolli...ITkxXyjs4NWIPRnPlRRX026cwbg4PCIJKuyXyfiM_MDPU
OCTOBER 17, 2019
'We should have faith': Beto tells Eric Bolling that criminals will 'do the right thing' and turn in their guns
https://www.theblaze.com/eric-bolli...ITkxXyjs4NWIPRnPlRRX026cwbg4PCIJKuyXyfiM_MDPU
Similar threads
Politics
Police news / incidents etc
