Opposition to firearm law changes

Almost all of Parliament agreed with the necessity to urgently tighten up on New Zealand firearm laws following the  Christchurch mosque massacres. That is progressing – see New firearm legislation introduced to Parliament.

However there is growing opposition, especially with the speed of the changes.

RNZ: Gun law change fast-track has ‘outpaced’ gun lobby – academic

The speed with which the government has fast-tracked changes to firearms laws has left the gun lobby in a spin, according to an Australian academic.

By the end of next week, politicians expect the Arms Amendment Bill to come into force.

It will ban semi-automatic weapons and military style semi-automatics, with the exception of shotguns and low-calibre rifles.

Parts, magazines and ammunition which can make a gun illegal will also be banned, and there will be tougher penalties for people breaking firearm laws.

Should it come in by Friday next week, it will have taken just four weeks since the Christchurch mosque attacks which killed 50 people.

Four weeks is not long for those in the gun business to come up with a meaningful reaction to the proposals, and Gun City – which sold the accused gunman four of his firearms – is seeking to slow down the process and ensure an in depth discussion takes place on what law changes should be made.

In a letter sent to people who have previously purchased items from the retailer, Gun City said it wants gun owners to be treated fairly, and asked them to contact lawmakers and media.

Gun City is promoting this:

The proposed Firearms law changes affect all New Zealanders.  We want Firearms Licence holders to be fairly and reasonably treated.

1. We need an independent inquiry into how the shooter obtaining a Firearms Licence
2. We want an accurate description of the firearms which the Government proposes to change the law on
3. We need an immediate indication of how the value will be calculated and when payment will be received
4. Will compensation include accessories and ammunition for the gun?
5. Will compensation be limited to just the items surrendered, or will other compensation be made for things such as the following;

(a) Already booked travel for events with the surrendered items
(b) Loss of investment in production equipment and shooting facilities
(c) Loss of employment
(d) Loss of income.

6. To please allow a reasonable timeframe to effect any changes.

Here is the release from the Beehive in relation to the proposed speedy changes.


What You Can Do:
Step One
Sign the Petition asking for Parliament to give this consultation the time it deserves.


Step Two
Write to the people who are controlling our destiny; MPs, Police, newspapers, television, and radio (we suggest you avoid direct interviews with Radio, TV, and reporters as you may not be presented as you wish).

(a) Email or mail a short note to these people expressing how you feel about the matter
(b) Email or mail a short note expressing how you feel about the matter to Parliament. Using the following emailed address: gunlawchanges@parliament.govt.nz
(c) Prepare a more detailed letter (submission) about the law changes. This note from COLFO has good direction:


Step Three
Follow Firearms owners groups like the ones listed below:







We want to encourage shooting sports unity as we are stronger as one group.  If shooters help one another it is more likely that your preferred type of shooting sport will remain secure.  The reasons and activities for which we own guns vary.  Let’s stand united as Firearms Licence holders rather than dividing into different groups, in the hope that other shooting disciplines will not be affected.

In summary, we want reasonable reactions that which will be effective.


The director of GunPolicy.org, Philip Alpers, said the government had followed Australia’s playbook for how to change gun laws.

“With gun control it’s gratifying to see this government do an end run around the gun lobby,” Mr Alpers said.

“That’s exactly what happened in Australia. John Howard took only 12 days after Port Arthur and that’s what won the battle, he outpaced and outsmarted and just outflanked the gun lobby in a very short period of time.

“New Zealand’s done it in an even shorter period of time.”

Speed, according to Philip Alpers, is crucial when countering a gun lobby which can mobilise quickly, and has helped halt gun law reform for more than two decades.

Professor Kevin Clements, of the University of Otago, praised the quick actions of the government and said it was about time the laws changed.

“This is exactly in line with the suggestions and recommendations of Judge Tom Thorp from 21 years ago, and it should have happened a long time ago rather than having to wait for a tragedy to occur.

“This is a wonderful step forward.”

I think that the political will to change firearm laws quickly looks likely to prevail here.

Illegally buying a firearm

Story (TV3) ran a story last night showing how Heather Du Plessis-Allan bought a firearm, pointing out how ridiculously easy it was to buy a rifle online.

This is a serious concern – but serious concerns have also been raised about the use of a fake name and a fake firearms license number, and also allegedly used the name, ID number and signature of a fictitious police officer.

(Reports refer to a gun license – they are called firearms licences. And the ‘gun’ that was purchased was a rifle).

What you should do is print off an order form, fill it in and then go to a police station with a firearms licence to get Police to verify it and sign the form.

The Story report simply says they didn’t visit a police station.

Highlighting a problem with the ease of purchasing firearms has some merit. But forging police officer details and ‘obtaining by deception’ are potentially serious offences and the police “would not rule out charging the woman who bought the gun”.

Story reports (video at the link): Loophole in gun laws needs to close.

Story was able to obtain a rifle, but it should not have been able to happen and it was too easy to get.

There is a serious weakness in the gun laws that should be closed.

Perhaps – but how tough should procedures be to prevent false claims and forgery?

It would be interesting to know what led to Story doing this? Did someone suggest it to them? Were the ways of faking application details also suggested?

A mail order form was printed off the gun dealer’s website. A fake name and gun license number was used, and the form was not taken to a police station.

Duncan Garner says “we bought it under the name who simply doesn’t exist and who doesn’t have a firearms licence” – obviously if they don’t exist.

The form was sent to Gun City and on the same day, Story received a call.

Two phone calls happened, but information was not checked either time.

A few days later, a parcel arrived.

I could imagine someone in a rural area wanting to obtain a firearm (legally) but why in a city like Auckland? It would be far quicker and easier to do it in person at a shop – and easier to check fraud. Firearms llcences have the holder’s photo on them.

Story wants to stress that someone with a current firearms license was nearby who took possession of the rifle. It was locked away in a steel cabinet as the law requires.

Complying with bits of the law is not a defence against others. Du Plessis-Allen says they also didn’t have any ammunition for the rifle (it was .22 calibre) – a firearms licence would be necessary to purchase ammunition.

And I presume ammunition can’t be delivered along with a rifle,

Gun City is taking a private prosecution against Story and does not believe criminals exploit this weakness, so think nothing needs to change. However, they have admitted they will make changes.

I can imagine them being very unhappy about being duped into selling a firearm to Story.


$300 sounds cheap for a .22 rifle but what do you expect when the manufacturer can’t spell Sporting on the instructions.

Stuff reports that Police are investigating – Gun shop owner vows to prosecute TV3 reporter:

A gun shop owner is vowing to privately prosecute TV3 reporter Heather du Plessis-Allan, claiming she bought a gun without a licence for her current affairs show.

Auckland City Police has announced it has opened a criminal investigation into the purchase of the gun over the internet.

The police investigation stemmed from a report “from a woman alleging that false details had been used to fraudulently obtain a firearm via an online dealer”, the police statement said.

“For anyone to possess a firearm without having the necessary license is a criminal offence and, if proven in court, could result in a sentence of up to three months’ imprisonment or a fine of up to $1000.

“Charges for obtaining by deception, if proven, carries penalties ranging from three months imprisonment up to seven years imprisonment depending on the value of the item obtained.”

And Gun City isn’t happy:

A gun shop owner is vowing to privately prosecute TV3 reporter Heather du Plessis-Allan, claiming she bought a gun without a licence for her current affairs show.

Owner David Tipple said the store had broken no laws – but claimed du Plessis-Allan and TV3 could be in trouble.

If police didn’t prosecute the journalists, he would take a private case against them, he said.

He claimed that: “We’ve done nothing wrong. We have completely and absolutely complied with the law.”

The form for the gun purchase had, he claimed, been forged, using a fake name against a fake gun licence number that just happened to be a valid number for a licensed New Zealand gun user.

Tipple said maybe du Plessis-Allan just got lucky with the licence number.

His bigger concern was that the gun form also featured the name, ID number and signature of a fictitious police officer.

That is a concern.

To what extent of illegality should journalists be able to go to prove deficiencies in legal procedures?

I could imagine Police not being very happy if Story did a story on how easy it was to buy drugs by buying drugs.