Save our butts

Court Decision

2010-03-01T16:46:00.001+13:00

THe High Court has struck down the Police policy decision on MSSA pistol grips. .. ie: We Won. For further info visit the NSA website.

Cheers
R

Police campaign to restrict non-conventional stock designs

2009-08-31T16:42:00.002+12:00

Due to the amount of emails I am receiving seeking advice on what to do about the threats that Police are making against A Cat semi automatic gun owners an advisory has been posted on the National Shooters Association Website. See the following link:

http://www.nsanz.org.nz/

Update on judicial review

2009-08-20T13:41:00.004+12:00

Today a case management hearing was held in the High Court at Wellington. A number of issues were discussed involving procedure.

The timetabling has been pencilled in as follows:

11 September	The Commissioner of Police has until 11 September to file evidential affidavits.
02 October	The Applicant has until 02 October to file evidential affidavits.
09 October	Crown law has until 09 October to file legal submissions.
16 October	The Applicant has until 16 October to file legal submissions.

This timetable is aimed at a substantive hearing date which has been reserved for the 22^nd October with time also available on October 23^rd. While this date is preferred it is flexible and if any issues arise, particularly in the regard to evidential matters, the date can be postponed.

At my request arrangements have been made that an H&K SL8 firearm will be exhibited in Court.

Further issues have arisen when a member of NSA asked Tony McLeod for advice on how to comply an SL8, Tony said he couldn't comment or give any advice… a rather odd response given that the Police advertising campaign is continuing unabated. See the letter at National Shooters Association Website .

A statement of defence was filed by Crown law but this is considered to be defective because it doesn't disclose any grounds for defence but merely admits the Commissioner and I disagree over what is a military pattern free standing pistol grip: i.e. I say that a military pattern free standing pistol grip is a military pattern free standing pistol grip and he says it's something else.

As most of you would have seen, Joe Green went on TV and publicly stated that the firearms that police are targeting do in fact comply with the definition of a sporting configuration. Joe hasn't been heard from since then and I suspect he may have been transferred to outer Siberia on traffic duties.

The Herald has written another misleading and inaccurate story. NSA has responded to the Herald. See the reports on the National Shooters Association Website .

To grip or not to grip… that is the question

2009-08-08T09:14:00.004+12:00

There has been a lot of discussion since Mackenzie J handed down his judgment on interim orders. There seems to be one dominant question: "is my [fill in your favourite rifle here] still legal for my 'A' licence endorsement.

There is no simple – yes / no answer to that until the High Court has disposed of the judicial review proceeding. It is "not known." Any advice police give you is merely an opinion and of no legal standing. The final decision is yours and yours alone. Here is something that may influence your decision.

You are not liable to conviction by a Court for an offence when you have made a mistake of fact. This is distinct from a mistake of law. For example: A man was charged with a traffic offence committed in a rural paddock. The paddock was used for the relevant day as a car park for a field day event. The man knew the paddock was a car-park for the event; he mistakenly believed that the paddock was not subject to the traffic laws that generally applied to roads. In fact the law applies to any area like that, temporary or not, where the public has access. He made a mistake in law. However if the man had not know that the area was annexed as a car park for the day of the event, that would have been a mistake of fact and he would not have been convicted. When you accidentally break the law based on a reasonable mistake of fact then you cannot be convicted.

If you know that your [fill in your favourite rifle here] has a military pattern free standing pistol grip but you believe that the relevant law does not apply from Friday at 6pm until Sunday at 6pm that would be a mistake of law and your busted. However if you genuinely believe that your thumbhole stock is not a military pattern free standing pistol grip then that is a mistake of fact and even if Police tried to prosecute you, a court would acquit. Oh I hear you say, "but the Police would say that they warned me." That maybe so but Mackenzie J says that the police opinion has no legal standing, and the Police have told you for sixteen years that your rifle is 'A' category. If you can look at your [fill in your favourite rifle here], hand on heart, and say, as a reasonable man, it doesn't have a military pattern free standing pistol grip, then you're safe.

NATIONAL SHOOTERS ASSOCIATION MEMBERSHIP ENROLMENT NOW OPEN - CLICK HERE

Membership to the NSA is open now

2009-08-05T22:05:00.003+12:00

We have started issuing membership numbers for the NSA. Welcome to those who have already joined. If you wish to join us, please email me the following details"

Name
Address
Contact Phone Number
Occupation / Profession

Please indicate if you are willing / able to be a representative for your region, which also places you on the National Board.

All Information is treated in confidence and maintained on secure IT systems. No personal information is passed on without written consent.

Please put "NSA Member sign up" in the subject line.

Cheers
R

Judgment of High Court on interim orders

2009-08-05T19:05:00.002+12:00

Today a fax has arrived from the High Court with Justice Mackenzie's decision on interim orders. The print quality is poor so I will post the full version when I get a hardcopy in the mail.

There are 8 pages which go into some detail of the discussion but the most relevant in my view is this:

"Ultimately the question whether the previous interpretation, or the new interpretation, is to be preferred will be matter for the Court. Neither the previous interpretation nor the new interpretation has any particular legal status. In those circumstances, it would not be appropriate for the Court to make an interim order which would have the effect of preferring, on an interim basis and without hearing full argument, the previous interpretation over the new interpretation."

Other relevant snippets of interest:

"In considering what is necessary to preserve the position of the applicant, it is important to note that Police do not have, under the Act, the ability to make a binding classification of the weapons in question"

"That question must be determined, where necessary, by any Court which is determining some relevant issue. The Court will not be bound by the Police interpretation, but must itself apply the relevant definition to the firearm in question."

Justice Mackenzie has essentially found that because the Police "new interpretation" is merely an opinion of Police it is in effect inconsequential. He alluded to this point again in his discussion concerning the Courts ability to make any decision at all given that the Police could not exercise a statutory power to classify firearms. He said (there are some limited) "circumstances in which the Court may correct errors of law in non-binding advice from a public authority". Justice Mackenzie declined to make interim orders.

As I'm flat out with this Court stuff, I invite everyone to write to the Commissioner of Police and ask this:

Is the commissioner willing to extend to you, the immunity from prosecution that has been extended to me... until the High Court has dealt with this judicial review?
How are Police going to reimburse the public if they spend $60,000 on advertising an opinion which is ultimately found wanting?
What contingency plan have Police developed to ensure:
1. that there is a better uptake on registrations than the less than 50% achieved in 1992,
2. that any remaining unregistered 'new' MSSAs do not end up in the hands of criminals, social misfits and psychopaths.

… We didn't get an interim order but look on the bright side… if the Police start advertising this 'opinion' nationally their only going to be irritating more and more shooters which will ultimately be good for our cause. And we have a statement in no uncertain terms that Police have no authority to reclassify firearms J

And to the lovely Erin who commented on my profile photo…. "I'm flattered; but no thanks."

Cheers

Regional working parties

2009-08-04T23:03:00.004+12:00

Mark K has usefully suggested that regional working parties would be a good start to putting our structures in place. This seems like an excellent idea.

My suggestion is this: Each region should have a representative whose role would be to coordinate between members in their region and the national body. Each regional Rep would be a board member and will be part of the national leadership team. Lets start getting some names and locations :ie City, town, district. Once we have sufficient national coverage I will attempt to sort out regional boundaries and each region can have a nomination and election process for a representative. Email me your name & addy & occupation, contact details - (which of course will be confidential) and indicate if you are up for being a rep. If everyone is happy I will manage this as the "Caretaker President" until we get a full democratic structure in place.

LETS BE CLEAR: As I promised from the outset - All donations made to the judicial review legal fund are retained for that purpose alone and any surviving funds will be returned to the donors. The new organisation is a separate identity and will be funded separately.

So lets start drawing up our membership list, join before the end of August and get immortal infamey with your name scribed on the constitution which will be revered and honoured by our children, grandchildren and all the future generations that will remain in awe of our dedication and efforts to preserve their heritage of shooting sports ;)... we hope so anyway :-)

Email with: "NSA Member signup" in the subject line.

Cheers
R

Draft Constitution

2009-08-02T14:58:00.004+12:00

Discussion draft constitution for "National Shooters Association"

CONSTITUTION DRAFT

A couple of typos to fix but you get the idea.

And the Truth newspaper article

TRUTH

Cheers
R

This is the way it should

2009-07-31T20:25:00.003+12:00

Example of a good organisation protecting the rights of its members.... Go the NRA ! what say you all ?

NRA Civil Rights Defence fund

Email

2009-07-31T09:49:00.002+12:00

There are many emails being received, which I greatly appreciate, and I try to reply to each one. However someone has managed to interfere with my email server. I have sorted this but it could take a day to get my outward mail flowing correctly again. If you have not received a reply from me, it is because of that.

regards
R

More from me….

2009-07-30T14:05:00.005+12:00

I had an email this morning from a shooter who had run into considerable problems with the Police MSSA policy. I replied and copy that reply here, for the information of our participants / supporters.

This all sounds likes like pretty frustrating bollocks. At this stage I would make the following observations / suggestions…

The Police have their own 'bent' on how arms control should be 'administered' in New Zealand. This, in my view, is often in conflict with the purposes of the Act. This MSSA policy which you have shed further light on is a classic example. Parliament specifically recognised in 1989- 1992 that were legitimate reasons for some uses of MSSAs. The intention was 'tight control' not 'eventual eradication; which is the Police intention. Likewise the purpose of the Act is being subjected to gross misfeasance by Police with their 'interpretation' of what is a 'military pattern free-standing pistol grip.'

The Police have arrived at a point in their 'sinking lid' regime of (supposed to be) firearms 'control' that someone… that would be me… has had enough and is going to tackle them head on in Court. This particular issue is of course different to yours. However we have also seen future policy plans that include limiting all magazines for all firearms to 10 rounds, we have already seen classifying of bolt-action rifles as semi-automatics, and so on and so on. Neither your issue nor the pistol shooters issues (the 10 round limit on mags) is technically of any interest what-so-ever to me. I couldn't care less if you can't have an MSSA. As long as I can knock over venison for my freezer and use my SL8 to exchange pest control of goats for hunting access I'm happy … does that sound familiar? However…. read on.

I have been droning on and on, here and there, that we (shooters / firearms license holders) in all genres of our sport need to stick together. To this regard my legal action will be the genesis of a new organisation. It will be named the 'National Shooters Association' (assuming that name is available) and it will be open to all license holders, clubs, dealers and importers. Through subscription fees, dealer sponsorship and other fund raising means, the associations primary function will be to challenge in Court unfounded and unlawful decisions of Police and the Executive in regard to the administration of arms control legislation (The Arms Act and the Arms Regulations.)

So regardless that I personally don't give a toss if you have permission to get an MSSA or not I will be off to the High Court on your behalf, pleadings in hand, for judicial review of any non-purposive administrative decision (such as that made in your case.) We will be doing the political lobby thing to ensure that pistol shooters are not restricted to 10 round magazines, and taking Court action on behalf of any other members to challenge any of these unlawful and non-purposive decisions by our public servants. In summary I can tell you that I will stand beside you as a fellow law-abiding responsible firearms licence holder.

So for now… I highly recommend that you petition all firearms license holders you know to sign on for this fight and carry their subscription over to membership of the National Shooters Association when that is formed. Download the handout from the website and stand-outside your local branch of the 'silent national chain arms dealer 'for ½ an hour.

What does the future hold…

2009-07-29T21:38:00.001+12:00

I have recently received an email with the following comment…..

Reading the forums hunters/shooters seem to think once they have obtained their e class endorsement the police are readily going to allow them to pursue the same activities they have previously participated in with their new folding stock, pistol grip, flash hidden, 100 round drum magazine fed upgraded saiga etc.

Anyone who believes the Police will allow them to obtain hi-cap magazines and other bling for their e-cat… I can convey this information on good authority, and I copy here exactly what was sent to me in another email - verbatim:

3.) The police have requested government to pull back the current arms act amendment bill (3) to make their suggested revisions, …

4.) These revisions will also see the reclassification of all air powered weapons of any sort, including paintball, to require a firearms license for lawful possession.

5.) Also on the agenda is the increase of A-Cat weapons to a maximum of 10 rounds magazine capacity and a decrease of E-Cat to 10 Rounds capacity. E-Cat will therefore only be based on appearance rather than firepower. This will also be applied to B-Cat, as pistols will be allowed a maximum of 10 Round magazine capacity also. The recommendation of police is that there will be no compensation for this, as magazines can be "Cut down". There will likely be a process they will have to follow for this, such as going to select committee and public submission.

As I recently said to some hopeful optimist in one of the forums… "wise up" We (firearms license holders in all genres of the sport of hunting and shooting) need to show a united and consistent front. The only thing that will stop the anti-gun brigade is if a politician is fearful of losing his seat or hopeful of gaining / regaining a seat (in Parliament) If gun-owners show now, in this case, in this battle, on this ground, that they are cohesive, organised and well resourced we will clearly demonstrate that we cannot be ignored and disregarded. If we sit on our collective butts and do nothing our butts will go and the next thing will be [fill in you favourite gun here]. So again "wise-up"

Interim Orders

2009-07-29T13:31:00.001+12:00

Justice Mackenzie held a one hour hearing in the High Court this afternoon.

The crown acknowledged there was a serious question of law to be answered. They argued that my only standing was that I owned one of the firearms impacted by the decision. Their argument was that they had given an assurance that they would not prosecute me pending the disposition of the review and accordingly that the reasonable necessity for interim relief was not proved.

I argued that my standing was (1) being a licence holder (2) that I owned one of the firearms impacted (3) I was a member of the public. I then argued that I was unable to exercise the normal rights given by my licence as the police had reclassified many of the firearms I was entitled to prior to the reclassification in accordance with previously issued police approvals. I argued that in terms of my own rifle I was unable to exercise normal rights; for example lending it to another "a-cat" licence holder. I then argued that as a member of the public I was entitled to relief from a police policy decision which would repeat the 1992 fiasco and put 10,000 odd more MSSAs into the hands of criminals and psychopaths. I pointed to the $60,000 dollars in advertising at the tax-payers expense that the police were proposing. I said that the current 'policy' had run for 16 years and the purpose of the 1992 amendments was to prevent any further 'Aramoanas' and that it had. I submitted that there was no disadvantage to the police or general public in stopping the policy and that there was significant consequence for other public and commercial interests if it were to go ahead. I presented a police photo of the weapons from the Napier siege to Justice Mackenzie and told the judge that what the crown was asking, on behalf of the commissioner was for him to be instrumental in potentially arming the criminal underbelly with yet another 10,000 MSSA's similar to what happened in 1992. I told him that this matter begs for interim orders.

Justice Mackenzie said that in his view the Police reinterpretation of the Arms Act is irrelevant and meaningless, that the Police had no statutory power to make a binding interpretation and that any such interpretation was inconsequential.

Justice Mackenzie reserved his decision on interim orders. I did my best …. Keep you posted when I get the decision

Have a look in "The Truth" newspaper out today!

Hearing today

2009-07-29T09:27:00.001+12:00

The High Court hearing for interim orders is at noon today … how ironic … "high noon!" Everything is as prepared and ready as can be. Unfortunately we have no barrister but I will do my absolute best for us all. Although we have had a lot of behind the scenes assistance from a certain Barrister in the mainland (you know who you are.)The judge today is Justice Mackenzie. We have a backup plan in case the interim order is not granted. Gun City and New Zealand Ammunition have given me written permission to join them to the proceeding as additional plaintiffs. They are able to show substantial loss / potential loss from the unlawful misinterpretation policy of Police. We can revisit the question of interim orders with them onboard - if we have to.

Now if you will excuse me I have to go throw the polar fleece in the wash and dust off the suit and tie! Will update this evening.

Cheers

Look its a single shot, military style, lever action, semi-automatic, double barrel, subatomic, nuclear, musket machine gun PERIOD !

2009-07-28T13:21:00.006+12:00

I have confirmed the details of the bolt-action rifle classified by Police as being a semi-automatic. The Steyr AUG has recently been produced in a straight pull bolt action model; similar to the H&K R8. The New Zealand Police recently inspected one of these bolt action rifles pending import into New Zealand. They classified it as semi-automatic.

Legal definition of a semi-automatic (Arms Act section 2)

"a firearm which, after being loaded, fires, ejects, and chambers a cartridge with each pull of the trigger"

Lawyers for the importers wrote to Police:

"We are puzzled about that view, given that the firearm in question has, by the manufacturer, been made a straight pull bolt action rifle. It does not, therefore, after being loaded, fire, eject and chamber a cartridge with each pull of the trigger."

Inspector Joe Green replied:

"The Police Armourer has demonstrated that all of the working of the semi automatic are retained with the exception of the gas assembly attached to the barrel. By simply replacing the barrel with one with this attached, and which is the original design of the firearm (a very simple process) the firearm is returned to semi automatic. That is, to its original form. This is a non technical explanation Police are happy to expand on."

If you have a firearm that can be converted from a bolt action to a semi-automatic then that firearm is a semi-automatic regardless of whether it's been converted or not?

Maybe we should have a game of "think up a misinterpretation"... hmmm let me see.. well it doesnt fire a cartridge (it fires a projectile)... nor does it load a cartridge after the last round is fired.. well that settles it... theres no such thing in NZ law as a semi-automatic !

Further advice

2009-07-25T09:50:00.001+12:00

This court action has a very high probability of success however there can be no absolute guarantee of a win. In the event that the Police succeed in this case, they will have effectively gained a ruling that each firearm that they approved for the last sixteen years as 'a' category which is now re-classified was incorrectly approved in the first place. This of course establishes substantial negligence on the part of Police and they will be liable for any costs incurred on firearms owners and dealers for conversions, security upgrades, consequential losses and so on. If you do take any steps to comply with the threats and demands from Police at this time, please keep your receipts. In the event that they do manage to establish their negligence by winning these proceedings, I will be arranging a class action to sue for the extra costs of compliance and loss incurred.

Notice of date of interlocutory hearing

2009-07-24T10:54:00.002+12:00

We have a date…

2009-07-23T09:47:00.003+12:00

Yesterday there were some discussions with the Registrar of the High Court at Palmerston North. I was concerned that this matter was not being taken seriously. Needless to say there were a couple of succinct emails that went to the courthouse.

The Registrar has now been in contact again and has now set the matter down for 29^th July 2009 at 12 noon in the High Court here at Palmerston North. That's next Wednesday. I will post the actual fixture notice when it arrives.

I call on you now to help me by emailing me and setting out your own circumstances. This however is not the forum to debate the substantive issue (that chance will come later.) We need to focus on interim orders; the purpose of these is to preserve the position of the applicant.

For now I need to show the Court the following points:

You are a real person… i.e. identity – name and city of domicile
You have standing – ie: you are affected because you own one of the firearms affected by the policy change, or are selling, buying, fixing, borrowing one, planning to marry one, or whatever.
Interim orders will not be contrary to the public interest: - eg: You have held a firearms license for a period of time, you have never caused any trouble with your firearms, and it is not contrary to the public interest to hold the status quos. You will obey the law as it applies at this time until the court has considered this matter. You are a law-abiding responsible FAL holder who takes the responsibility of having firearms seriously and respectfully.
You are disadvantaged by the new policy because – eg: you are fixing a gun that you cannot return to its owner, you are stuck with shop stock you cannot sell, you cannot assist your neighbour culling furry things, you will be unable to hunt to feed your family, etc, etc. You will be criminalised if the policy is implemented and in peril of prosecution. You don't want to buy a new safe, get and 'e' endorsement – or – modify your gun – or hand it over to Police – or sell it… while this matter has not yet been determined by the Court.

All this in your own words please J

Date for interim orders

2009-07-22T15:54:00.001+12:00

The High Court at Palmerston North provided a date today for the hearing of the interlocutory application for interim orders. The notice states 14 August 2009 in Court room 1 at 10am.

I have responded to the Registrar pointing out that that date is unacceptable as it is after the 10^th of August and this matter should be heard prior to that date and with sufficient time to appeal to the Court of appeal if an interim order is declined. I have also pointed out that this matter has far reaching effects for thousands of other private and commercial interests. I have asked for an earlier fixture. The Registrar has not replied yet.

I now ask that all effect users email me so that I can present those emails to the Judge: Who you are, your license has been held for how many years, your concerns about this matter, your desire not to be criminalised by Police, etc, etc. I will present those emails to the Judge…. (So mind your P's & Q's.)

Also everyone who can and will attend the Court fixture please email me separately and let me know. It is important that we have a good show of hands to ensure that we are taken seriously. Members of the Press are likely to be present.

Cheers

Intentions clearer…. here we go ….

2009-07-21T16:36:00.001+12:00

Today I have been told on good authority that the Police department have just classified a bolt action rifle as a semi-automatic. I have not seen the papers yet but when I do I will confirm; and ask if I can post copies up here. I hope that makes the apathetic "this doesn't really affect us" bunch sit up and take notice. Start preparing your Ruger M77 semi-automatic bolt-action military style hunting rifle for an E endorsement… here it comes!

Donations

2009-07-20T15:32:00.002+12:00

All donations to the legal fighting fund will be used to pay for a barrister and court costs such as filing fees and disbursements.

When you subscribe you will receive a regular email update that will include bank statements and financial reporting.

No court case is a guaranteed win but we have a very high probability of being successful in this case. At the end of the case, when we win, we will be entitled to an award of costs. Generally we can expect to receive between 60% to 80% of the actual costs.

Any surviving donation will be paid back to the donors, on a percentage basis…. For example: if you donate $100.00 and we have 90% surviving funds overall, you will be refunded $90.00.

Please ensure that your donation has some kind of number or your name. For example pick your own 4 digit pin. We will cross-reference this against your donation amount to confirm your identity to pay back your donations.

Milestone!

2009-07-16T10:31:00.005+12:00

Today we have reached somewhat of a milestone... we just passed 50 and we now have 51 members of our group supporting the cause. This is an important milestone I think, in terms of raising $50,000 to pay for our barrister.

Why do I think that…?

When I started this campaign against the big blue fist of dictatorship, I was faced with having to find $50,000 from myself — (a reasonably onerous task for 'self' I can tip you.) The first person who joined the cause spilt that into $25,000 each. At 50 members we got to $1000.00 each, which is not going to bankrupt anyone but it is still a considerable amount of money for most people in these hard economic times. But the good news is that it all gets easier from here – our group now represents $980.00 each and counting down from here. I have celebrated today's milestone by making a donation of $1000.00 to our fighting fund from my salary; the dog and I are on rice and possum for the rest of the month but we will survive !

Thankyou to all who stay the cause and believe as I do that — in this free country of New Zealand it is the exclusive right of our democratically elected government to govern us and legislate in our name.

Application for interim orders (injunction)

2009-07-14T13:10:00.004+12:00

Following today's judicial conference with His Honour Justice MacKenzie, I have authored, filed and served on crown law an interlocutory application for interim orders.

The Registrar of the High Court at Palmerston North will now time-table a hearing and the High Court will determine that application. I have asked that it be heard with urgency given that the 10th of August is the date the defendant is implementing their purported reclassification policy. It is possible, if not likely that the hearing will be held in Wellington (In Chambers - HCR 7.34)

Cheers
R

http://www.drivehq.com/file/df.aspx/publish/Krewzr/PublicFolder/Interim_order_app.pdf

http://www.drivehq.com/file/df.aspx/publish/Krewzr/PublicFolder/rcpt2.pdf

Outcome of Judicial Conference

2009-07-14T10:08:00.003+12:00

Justice MacKenzie dealt with various procedural issues this morning.

The shape and form of the proceedings have been accepted and the substantive issue has been adequately set out. There has been no requirement to amend the statement of claim.

The defendant has been given until August 7th to file a notice of defence. Once that is filed there will be a further judicial case management (telephone)conference on August 18th to deal with issues of discovery and evidence.

I raised with the judge that I was not satisfied to wait until August 18th to deal with the issue of interim relief orders. I pointed out that there were 240,000 people effected by the Police policy and that that was due to be imposed on us on the 10th of August. The Judge instructed that an application for interim orders was to be filed and he accepted that that application would be timetabled separately and heard, probably in Wellington, for the sake of expediancy.

I have had discussions with other stake-holders yesterday evening and this morning and we are gaining momentum and increasingly the financial clout to get a .50 CAL full-auto barrister on our team. Keep up the good work pounding the streets for donations.

Cheers
R

Judicial conference memorandum

2009-07-09T14:15:00.003+12:00

Judicial conference memorandum submitted to Court today. This addresses procedural issues and seeks an estoppel on Police altering the terms of a firearms license.

Click on the title [Judicial conference memorandum] above to view the PDF copy. Also available on the sidebar under proceedings documents links.

Affidavit supporting application for interim orders available on the sidebar under proceedings documents links

Cheers
R

Crown law office in contact

2009-07-07T15:07:00.001+12:00

Crown law have emailed me and provided their contact person who will be championing their defence.

Next week on Tuesday we have the judicial conference. Prior to that conference we have to prepare a memorandum covering various procedural issues; one of which if the issue of interlocutory applications — if any. An interlocutory application is an application for a Court order peripheral to the substantive issue.

I have asked Crown Law to secure and undertaking from Police that they will set-aside their policy until the Court has finally dealt with the matter.

This is my email to crown law:

"Thankyou for your email Austin

I am preparing a memorandum for the High Court conference. At this stage I seek from you a formal undertaking from crown law that the Police will not further advertise, implement or enforce their reinterpretation of the Arms Act definition of MSSA, and that the Police policy is forthwith set-aside and is of no effect until this matter is finally determined by the High Court. In this way we will avoid the need to apply for an interim injunction.

I would draw to your attention that Police are currently criminalising thousands of responsible law-abiding citizens and interfering with the commercial interests of hundreds of legitimate arms dealers and manufacturers. The mood of those presently affected is such that I cannot guarantee that collectively we will not sue for exemplary damages if the Police are uncooperative.

Would you be good enough to let me know as soon as possible. If I do not hear from you prior to filing memoranda, I will assume that such an undertaking is not forthcoming and an interim injunction, with its associated costs, will have to be considered.

Richard Lincoln"

What will happen in this judicial review?

2009-07-06T14:26:00.001+12:00

The judge conducting the review in the High Court will hear evidence of fact and submissions on law. The High Court can then make an order. The order can be an injunction to stop something, or an order of specific performance to make something happen, or even an order confirming the disputed issue. The Court can make a declaratory judgment (which cannot then be contested by Police – subject to their right of appeal).

In this case I am asking the High Court to make a declaratory judgment that my H&K SL8-4 is a non-military style semi-automatic rifle – it is a semi-automatic rifle that is kept in a sporting configuration for the purposes of section 2 of the Arms Act 1983.

The case is framed in this way to avoid certain traps – for example: It is doubtful that I could ask the court to overturn an "administrative decision" of the Police to reclassify semi-auto firearms. The Police have no statutory authority to reclassify firearms therefore their reinterpretation of the Arms Act is not as such, an administrative decision.

In the course of this case the Court will be obliged to consider the interpretation of section 2 of the arms act – dealing with the definition of an MSSA.

This effects all FAL holders in New Zealand and its outcome will not only define MSSA but it will also either encourage or discourage Police to manipulate the interpretation of the law to suit their own agenda in the future…. Could be with firearms, could be with that inconsequential smack… could be with anything. So really this has a wider consequence for all New Zealanders.

Please support this case in any way you can.

Cheers

Successful litigation for firearms owners

2009-07-05T21:53:00.001+12:00

Click here

Humour....

2009-07-05T14:52:00.001+12:00

Although this is a serious issue... I had to laugh at this gem someone emailed me.

Incoming….

2009-07-05T13:33:00.001+12:00

Hi Richard

I found a link to your site from the www.fishnhunt.co.nz forums.

I'm keen to get added to your mailing list. While I don't currently own any firearms that would be affected by this re-interpretation, I would like to have the opportunity left open for me in the future if I was to want one. Hopefully I can also scrounge up some money to aid you in your bid to overthrow this ludicrous decision by the police. Please be sure to let everyone know the court dates/times as I'm sure there are a few in Palmy (including myself) that would be keen to make an appearance in your support.

Regards,

****
Hi ****

Great to see the word is getting out! - and thank you very much for your donation.

Additional to serving the purpose of keeping your options open, it is important to impress upon the Police via the Courts, that they cannot simply apply a misinterpretation of a law they preside over to suit their own agenda. If they get away with this, it won't be long before your bolt action is misinterpreted as being a semi-automatic and your Labrador retriever will become an 'especially dangerous weapon.' I thought they got that message loud and clear in PTC v Commissioner of Police.

http://www.drivehq.com/file/df.aspx/publish/Krewzr/PublicFolder/1480_001.pdf

…but apparently their memories are fading!

You're on the list my friend!
Cheers
R

Are they going to make up their minds or what ?

2009-07-04T16:42:00.005+12:00

The Police have updated their website and put all new webpages up listing approved (A CAT) firearms... The SL8 is still A CAT according to this information.

Check it out

In one day alone ..... you legends !

2009-07-04T15:33:00.008+12:00

In just a single day you have demonstrated your strenght of character and determination. You can hunt on my block any day !

Please remember I need to be able to make sure your donations can be returned if theres any left over or (and more likely) we are awarded full costs by the High Court. Please then include some deposit reference (an account number would be best) where I can reinburse you once we've won our case.

If you havn't donated yet please give anything you can. 200,000 license holders. 10% @ $1.00 each = $20,000.

Keep in mind the Police are going to spend YOUR TAX PAYER MONEY to try and stop you resisting their misinterpretation.

We need to brief legal counsel prior to the 14th of July.

Cheers and thanks thanks thanks thanks for the support, donations, resources and offers of help !
R

Your donations and any other communication with me or this website are strictly anonymous unless you request otherwise.

Click the picture below to view our bank account statement (detailing where to make donations.)

Both sides of the argument ….

2009-07-04T12:22:00.002+12:00

Hi Richard

The way I see the changes are the police are trying to get a grip on how many unregistered semiautos are out.as a law abiding gun owner whats wrong with having to have the appropriate endorsements to own one of these .its to easy at the moment to buy a saiga with druganov stock or an h&k sl8-4 as examples legally as a cat making this an unregistered rifle.then you can buy without any license at all a 30 shot clip yes you are breaking the law when you put the two together but that's how easy it is for the non law abiding owner to get an assault type rifle.with the changes the police want to make it then means that they will no where these weapons are as law abiding gun owners is this really a bad thing.

Regards

******

Hi ********

Let me try an answer questions…

as a law abiding gun owner whats wrong with having to have the appropriate endorsements to own one of these .

I assume you mean an E endorsement? Well the Police don't just hand these out. They are hard to get and require the cost of extra security. There are severe restrictions over where and how you may use an E cat firearm. Generally you will not be able to obtain such an endorsement for sporting purposes (read the police policy guidelines on my website) Even if the Police did get their way, that still doesn't stop anyone from buying, say, a conventionally furnished mini-14 and retrofitting a pistol grip – Neither the non-mssa semi's or the retrofit gear (which is still legal on a non-semi) will disappear off the market. The criminals will make use of what-ever is on the market – even if that means breaking the law by assembling it into an illegal configuration. So the argument, that it solves that problem, is invalid.

The law, which is a reflection of the voice of the citizens of this country (a democracy), determines what firearms we are legally permitted to own and use and how those are classified. Under the current law we are allowed semi automatic rifles. We are allowed to have semi-auto's that have a pistol grip in a sporting configuration. That is the law. What we are not allowed is to have a free standing (that is structurally without additional support) pistol grip that comes from a military pattern firearm (that is a firearm that was built to military specifications for the use of the military). If there is a need for a change in that law, that change can only be made by Parliament (remember who they are…." the voice of the citizens of this country (a democracy)" It is not up to the Police to deliberately misinterpret the law to suit whatever their agenda is from time to time.

The way I see the changes are the police are trying to get a grip on how many unregistered semiautos are out.

If you read the Police policy statement on the sidebar you will see that the Police deny that they are trying to create a registration system by default. The misinterpretation of the law will not discover how many un-registered semi-autos there are out there. There will be many semi-autos that do not fall into the new Police misinterpretation of an MSSA. Eg: bog-standard mini-14. So that argument is again invalid

buy a saiga with druganov stock or an h&k sl8-4 as examples legally as a cat making this an unregistered rifle. then you can buy without any license at all a 30 shot clip yes you are breaking the law when you put the two together but that's how easy it is for the non law abiding owner to get an assault type rifle.

A drugunov stock in itself does not constitute a firearm - you would have to fit it to something. You could fit it to a mini-14 and buy a 30 round magazine. The new Police misinterpretation of an MSSA will not change that. There will still be retrofit tactical kit which will is still legal on a non-semi auto, there will still be hi-cap magazines which are still legal on non-semi-auto and there will still be semi-autos such as mini-14s that are non-mssa. Those elements will still all be able to be bought together to form an unregistered MSSA. The H&L SL-8 does not have a high capacity magazine option. So that argument is again invalid.

with the changes the police want to make it then means that they will no (sic) where these weapons are as law abiding gun owners is this really a bad thing?

Any lawful and well conceived measure to improve firearms safety and security and reduce arms related crime is a very good thing and I will be the first to campaign for that. But lawful means within the law, — as in the New Zealand law made by parliament – not the Police law made by a deliberate misinterpretation. If the Police are allowed to get away with their misinterpretation of the law this time, what comes next? Does it not bother you that you might get arrested putting out your wheelie bin on a charge of dumping rubbish in a public place?

So just what is a military pattern…?

2009-07-03T16:39:00.003+12:00

Well thanks to the Canadian department of defence and some help with research, we can now comprehensively answer that question… and you will be surprised. It seems that the Police executive may have been better off to keep quiet while they had us all believing the previous interpretation of what we were allowed.

Beginning in the early 1700s, ordnance officials, from their headquarters at the Tower of London, divided the manufacture of firearms into locks, stocks, barrels, ramrods, and furniture—all of which they sought to purchase directly from subcontractors. Since different components for the same weapon were made in different locations, Tower officials oversaw the establishment of "Sealed Patterns" (sample firearms) to serve as exact models for gun makers. An Ordnance Office decree of 1722 led to a "standard army musket." And so the standard military pattern was born.

Anything can be a military pattern item, firearms, cups, trucks, and condoms, whatever. When a military force wants to purchase firearms they lay down a specification which must both serve their purpose and comply with international laws of warfare. This is where the term "milspec" comes from. Once the military item, built to milspec, is bought into operation by said military force it becomes a standard military pattern item. There is the CSMP (Canadian standard military pattern) and a BSMP (from our aforementioned northern cousins.) The US, (being the US) just calls theirs the standard military pattern.

In regard to a military pattern item then it has two important (minimum) prerequisites. Firstly it must be milspec and secondly it must have been in , or intended for, military service. Does this immediately make you realise that the aftermarket sporting free standing pistol grip on your AR15 does not qualify as MSSA? Yep it would appear that you didn't really have to screw that alloy bar on after all. However if you want to have a military pattern A1 grip or a military pattern A2 grip on your AR15 … sorry you'll have to get an endorsement.

So is the Heckler and Koch SL8-4 a rifle that was built to military specification?
- No
Is the Heckler and Koch SL8-4 rifle that has been bought into operation by any military force?
– No
Does the Heckler and Koch SL8-4 rifle have a military pattern grip?
– Clearly not.

To conclude…Is it so hard to imagine that maybe when the legislation was drafted the authors were actually trying to be as fair and unrestrictive as possible rather then being imposing and prohibitive?

Cheers

Incoming emails

2009-07-03T10:39:00.003+12:00

The following emails have come in this morning, these and my responses maybe of interest.

Hi Richard,

Its good to see you undertaking this feat for the benefit of all legitimate
shooters in the country.

years ago, the Brazillian government wanted to completely ban guns and gun
sales.

the pro gun lobby there got in contact with the NRA ( USA ) and they got a
massive boost in terms of funding and support and finally the Brazil
government had to trash that idea.

Also note that NZ imports most of our firearms and ammo from the U.S, and
we are also a similar Western country.

If they helped Brazil, surely they can help you.

Just an idea

Also I'll be donating to your legal fund.

Thanks ****

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

Hi ****

I am in contact with and talking to both the US and UK NRA. The NZ NRA doesn’t mention the Police advisory so I'm not sure what they're up to. Thanks very much for the donation.

Perhaps the Police should reflect on the words of the Japanese fleet commander at Pearl Harbour "I am afraid we have awoken a sleeping giant"

Cheers
R

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

Hi Richard, as a suggestion perhaps a bank account number where people can direct credit donations too would be a good idea ? Id certainly be happy to start the ball rolling.

Im a pistol shooter but I can see this change if not fought will result in future attempts by police to put more restrictions on us, not to mention I was eyeing up a Remington 597 or Ruger 10/22 USST for my first rimfire rifle.

Good luck and all the best.

PS: Im also a web developer so if you need any help with web stuff (website work, marketing, graphics etc) feel free to contact me via *******. Im good friends with **** and designed ***** website as well.

-----------------------------------------------------------------
Hi *****

Thanks for your email. I have sent you a copy (below) of the email that went out to list members yesterday. I have added you to the list.

I think that my legal action may be the genesis of something bigger in the long term. Looking especially at the weak-willed response from COLFO, I suspect there may be a need, and indeed there seems to be clear support, for an organisation that is more in the style of a ‘union’ for FAL holders. A collective voice that is prepared to litigate and take lawful tangible actions to protect the interests of its members; aka: recreational FA users. If we FAL holders could organise ourselves with as much passion and commitment as Maori did in response to the Foreshore and Seabed issue we can surely get some real traction and sensible legislation? In that sense a page on blogspot is not going to fly as the web presence of such an organisation and that’s where you skills would be highly valuable. So stay in touch !

Cheers
R
------------------------------------------------------------------------

On a lighter note....

2009-07-03T09:03:00.004+12:00

Someone sent me a picture of a custom M16 pistol grip that fits in with Tony McLeod's criteria. It doesnt retain the "practical functionality" or "much of the appearance" of a military pattern, free-standing pistol grip... so it looks like the Police should be OK with this one.

BE HEARD... VOTE NOW ->

Not sure whose wrong?... easy! use some logic

2009-07-02T21:36:00.009+12:00

Wilco has left a comment on my blog "LEGAL STATUS OF PISTOL GRIPS AND THUMBHOLE STOCKS” I would like to respond to this here as the points (he?) raised are relevant.

The gist of what Wilco claims is the same as the police, that any stock that has a design which has an “obvious pistol grip that allows a full hand pistol grip” qualifies as an MSSA pistol grip. The Police say that the H&K SL8 “retains the functionality of a pistol grip and much of the appearance and thereby falls within the definition of being MSSA”.

The issue then is that any pistol grip which retains the functionality and appearance of a pistol grip qualifies as MSSA.

Logically all pistol grips retain the functionality and appearance of a pistol grip. Right?

Logically all pistol grips are obvious and allow a full hand pistol grip. Right?

Heck if if didnt look like a pistol grip or function like a pistol grip then obviously its not a pistol grip.

Essentially... if looks like a pistol grip and it feels like a pistol grip then its a pistol grip .... we can all agree on that !

So what that means is that the Police claim all pistol grips retain the functionality and appearance of a pistol grip and are obvious and allow a full hand pistol grip and therefore are MSSA. Right? So all pistol grips are MSSA - call this FACT (A)

Now what the law says is this

All flash suppressors are MSSA. That means if we divide the flash suppressors into two buckets – MSSA flash suppressors and Non MSSA flash suppressors. We have all flash suppressors in the MSSA bucket and none in the non-MSSA bucket. So the whole population of flash suppressors are MSSA. Right?

Collapsible and telescopic stocks are MSSA. So two buckets again – one full of collapsible / telescopic stocks MSSA, the other bucket has all other stocks non-MSSA. You can start to see the logical point…. if there is a subset qualifier of what is MSSA then by implication there must be two groups – one group MSSA and another group non-MSSA. The subset qualifier in this case is "Collapsible and telescopic stocks" Out of all stocks (the whole population) there is a percentage that are MSSA but not 100 percent... meaning the balance left after taking out all the collapsible and telescopic stocks are not MSSA.

Same thing with magazines – First bucket, magazines that hold or appear to hold more than 7 rounds (MSSA), second bucket all the others (non-MSSA)

So now let’s look at pistol grips. There is a qualifier. All pistol grips that are military pattern, free standing pistol grips in our first bucket (MSSA), second bucket all other pistol grips (non MSSA). So this means that there are, according to the Arms Act s2, non-mssa pistol grip options for semi-automatic rifles.

Fact B the legislation says - not all pistol grips are MSSA (military pattern free standing pistol grips.)

So fact B DISPROVES fact A

Having a pistol grip on a semi-automatic rifle does not neccesarily mean the rifle is then an MSSA. Even if it has an obvious pistol grip, that looks like a pistol grip and functions like a pistol grip, that does not mean the pistol grip is a military pattern free standing pistol grip. Obvious functional pistol grips that look like pistol grips are perfectly legal on A Cat semi-autos as long as they are not military pattern free standing.... unless of course you can prove that all pistol grips are free standing military pattern pistol grips... which brings us back to FACT B... (the laws says NOT ALL pistol grips are free standing military pattern)

Judicial Conference Timetabled

2009-07-02T11:54:00.010+12:00

Today the High Court at Palmerston North provided a service copy of the proceeding and that has been served on Central Districts Police HQ in Palmerston North. A judicial conference has been timetabled for 14 July 2009 at 9.30am (by telephone conference).

The documents detailing the judicial conference can be seen on the side bar. "Judicial Conference Notice" >>>>

I notice there have been 3 people who have voted in favour of the Police "re-classification". Good to see that we are getting both sides of the opinion. I am genuinely interested to hear from people who voted "yes". Feel free to click on the comments section of this blog and back up your vote with the reasons why you voted "yes"

Email has been received from a member of the Press so the buzz is out there and your voices are being heard.

If you havn't voted yet... nows the time

LEGAL STATUS OF PISTOL GRIPS AND THUMBHOLE STOCKS

2009-07-01T12:20:00.030+12:00

In my view the meaning of “military pattern free standing pistol grip” (as parliament intended) is a pistol type grip that is free standing by design and manufacture and does not require any additional structural support to maintain its own integrity and is not an integral component of the butt-stock. This means if you fit an aluminium bar between the butt stock and pistol grip base of a military rifle, such as the example M16 below, then you still have a “military pattern free standing pistol grip”. Although it has been modified with a bar, by design and manufacture it is still a “military pattern free standing pistol grip.”

Examples of military pattern free standing pistol grip and non military pattern non free standing pistol grips and thumbhole stocks.

Addition of an aluminium bridging bar does not change the base structure.

Figure 1 – MSSA

Fore-end maybe military pattern free standing pistol grip. (note: rear pistol grip does not qualify as a military pattern free standing pistol grip as it is supported by the trigger guard).

Figure 2 - MSSA? (arguably) MSSA for other reasons (flash suppressor, 30 rnd mag)

Factory designed and manufactured thumbhole stock - integral component of the butt-stock.

Figure 3 - NON MSSA

Pistol grip is designed and manufactured as a structural part of the overall stock. It is not free standing, and relies on the stock for its structural integrity.
Figure 4 - NON MSSA

Pistol grip is designed and manufactured as a structural part of the overall stock. It is not free standing, and relies on the stock for its structural integrity.

Figure 5 - NON MSSA

Pistol grip is designed and manufactured as a structural part of the overall stock. It is not free standing, and relies on the stock for its structural integrity.

Figure 6 - NON MSSA

Why have pistol grips at all? – Well the NZ Police would have us believe that its purpose is so the firearm can be used as an assault weapon (See Superintendent McLeod’s advisory [copy on the sidebar]). Let’s set aside the dramatic thespian police stuff for a moment and examine the real facts. The stock design on modern semi-automatic firearms is focussed on bringing the butt-stock recoil pad into a straight line with the barrel of the firearm. This prevents lift of the barrel end when the firearm is discharged; allowing the operator to fire follow up shots without losing focus on the target. Compare a traditional stock and the butt-stock recoil pad is below the level of the barrel. So if anything, the functionality of the modern semi-automatic rifle and any additional capability it may have to be deployed as an assault rifle is in fact borne out of the alignment of the barrel and the butt-stock, not the fact that it has a pistol grip. In the real world, the alignment of the barrel and butt stock is a safety feature to allow clean, accurate, repeated fire. The problem of course with aligning the barrel with the butt stock is the design does not allow a thumb position extending over the top of the stock (in the traditional style)… hence the evolution of the pistol grip and thumbhole stocks on modern semi-automatic rifles. Unfortunately the science behind the evolution seems to have escaped the Police executive.

The Police can’t seriously expect that there will be no development and technology in firearms. Just as the modern carbon fibre fly-rod has surpassed fibreglass, which in turn surpassed split-cane, so also has composite thermoplastic and carbon-fibre surpassed the old traditional stock material; wood. New materials mean new colours, SL8s were initially grey, at the moment the fashion is black, camo also features strongly, but who-knows somewhere sometime there will probably be a girl’s gun done in brilliant pink. New stock designs improve safety and efficiency. Old desk-bound guys like me can carry a lightweight plastic SL8 further than a traditional heavy rifle. They’re more weather proof and easier to maintain – my SL8 is the only semi I’ve ever owned that I can (and always do) rod-clean from the action end of he barrel – 2 screws & 1 pin and the butt stock is off and the barrel exposed.

The intention of the MSSA laws as I recall the debate back in the early 90’s was to prevent people owning firearms that cosmetically looked like assault rifles. This of course is where the word “style” (second letter of M[S]SA) comes from. Further evidence of this is seen in the magazine clause – “a magazine that is capable of holding, or that, by its appearance, indicates that it is capable of holding” more than 7 rounds. The desire of Police to prevent ordinary folk toting around black sinister looking semi’s bristling with aggressive looking tactical gear is understandable but there is also the small matter of the law, made by Parliament, to which we all have to account. If the Police want to change the law they need to talk to our government; a predetermined chat among their collective executive self’s is not the correct procedure. I would have expected better from the organisation charged with ensuring that the law is upheld.

One also has to ask the question – if the Police are correct in their “classification” then what is a legal non-mssa pistol grip on a semi-automatic firearm? It would seem obvious that there isn’t one. Which begs the question – If there is no legal pistol grip option available to a semi-automatic firearm why doesn’t the Arms Act simply state that instead of saying “military pattern free standing pistol grip”? It is hard to imagine a more blatant attempt to misinterpret the law. A good analogy would be legislation that says you are not allowed to drive a six-wheeled vehicle on a public road, and the Police then ordering all cars off the road because they have four wheels, a spare and a steering wheel.

What does all that mean? Well in a nutshell it means the reasoning behind the Police agenda about pistol grips is based on emotive speculation and ignorance that has no sound science behind it. There is no evidence in the advisory of any independant research or field testing in regard to so called - "assault weapon" capability. The Police may have a 'legal opinion' from the Crown law office... as I'm sure they did in PSI (NZ) INC v Commissioner of Police, HC, Christchurch 23rd August 1991, Tipping J. It also means that the Police classification is ultra vires and in contradiction with statue law (or for non-wordsmiths) – “its all bollocks”.

Additionally none of the firearms MSSA or not, regardless of stock design or pistol grip, can be deployed as assault rifles in New Zealand because that would be illegal. Only criminals, acting outside the law would try and use any firearm as an assault weapon and the criminals aren’t going to front up to their local arms dealer and buy a traditional stock and retrofit it to their stolen AK47 assault weapon because the Police issue an advisory.

What might be a better approach is for the Police to spend less time reviewing and writing advisory’s and more time chasing the criminals that are not supposed to have firearms. Maybe then they will bring on board the very group of responsible law abiding firearms owners that they need to work with to ensure arms safety and security instead of disenfranchising, alienating and antagonising them.

A responsible firearms owner

Please leave your comments by clicking on the comments link below

New stuff and voting reminder

2009-06-30T11:54:00.003+12:00

I have posted links to the actual documents filed in the Palmerston North High Court .. see the side bar ----->

PLEASE REMEMBER TO VOTE !!!

We have over 800 hits but many of you are not getting your vote in. See the side bar and scroll down to the polling section ------>

Keep up the good work

2009-06-29T21:25:00.006+12:00

Thanks... all the emails are flooding in. Offers of financial support and encouragement. Good to see our group of enthusiasts taking part in self determinination !

I may not have replied to you all but you have been added to the newscast email list.

Dont forget to vote in the Poll on the sidebar ----------->

Anyone wishing to have their support emails posted here... please let me know when you mail me.. and please specify if you'd like your posted email to be anonymous.

Once I figure out a way to have good accountability for any donations made, I will get back to those who have made offers with the details.

Cheers Again and keep it coming !

Richard

Update

2009-06-29T18:21:00.001+12:00

The High Court at Palmerston North has accepted filing of our application for judical review / declaratory judgment.

So far its set me back $400 bucks in filing fees (and $250 bucks insurance excess for the guys car who I reversed my Landcruiser into outside the Court house.. oh well shit happens :) So anyone who can make a small contribution towards my efforts to save our collective butts.. please feel free to touch base..

Next step is that the High Court will give me a service copy of the proceedings to serve on the Police. At that time we will also have a hearing date for the "1st" hearing... a pretrial judicial confererence to discuss various process issues.

Just cos I know a thing or two about the Police .. let me record here that the gas piston and rod have been removed from my H&K SL8-4 and sent to an arms dealer for safe keeping. Therefore my SL8 is currently not a semi-automatic; It is now a straight pull bolt action and is accordingly not able to be "classified" as an MSSA.

Update again soon

Cheers
R

United we stand... show your support now

2009-06-29T15:02:00.000+12:00

Please show your support of the efforts made to ensure your interests are protected and your endorsement that it should be the government who make the laws... not the New Zealand Police. Any person wishing to make submissions on this issue, appear as a witness in support of this case, or make a financial donation to cover the legal expenses, please contact me here; leaving your email address and phone number.

Police Advisory Letter

2009-06-29T14:29:00.000+12:00

Military style semi automatic firearms (MSSA) - advisory to Arms Officers and Arms Dealers

As a result of concerns about the application of the definition of 'sporting configuration' as it applies to semi automatic firearms Police have reviewed the definition of MSSAs. The result of this review was considered by the Police executive in the week beginning 1 June 2009.

'Sporting configuration' in relation to a semi automatic firearm means being without certain features, one of which is 'a military pattern free standing pistol grip'.

If the semi automatic firearm has an obvious pistol grip that allows a full hand pistol grip, enabling the firearm to be used as an assault weapon then the qualifier of 'military pattern free standing pistol grip' is met irrespective that the pistol grip may be connected to the stock. The HK USC .45 and SL8-4, and the druganov style stock retain the practical functionality of a pistol grip and much of the appearance and thereby fall within the definition of being MSSAs.

A montage has been compiled by way of explanation.

A fore grip also comes within the definition of 'military pattern free standing pistol grip'.

The provisions of the Arms Act 1983 as they apply to MSSAs are now to be applied to these firearms.

Police are now developing policy to address those who possess what are now considered MSSAs.

Superintendent A W McLeod

National Manager Operations

9 June 2009

Application for judical review / statement of claim

2009-06-29T14:19:00.000+12:00

NOTICE OF APPLICATION FOR JUDICIAL REVIEW

TAKE NOTICE that on the day of 2009 at oclock in the or as soon thereafter as the parties can be heard, The above named applicant will move this Honourable Court at Palmerston North on judicial review of an administrative decision of the New Zealand Police.

The Plaintiff says

1. During the week beginning 1 June 2009 the defendant conducted a review and consequently “reclassified” particular firearms.

2. The defendant subsequently wrote an advisory to Police Arms Officers and Arms Dealers stating that they had reclassified, in particular, Heckler and Koch SL8-4 sporting rifles and that this make and model of firearm was now classified as a military style semi-automatic firearm for the purposes of section 2 of the Arms Act 1983.

3. A “montage” was included in the defendant’s written advisory which includes an image of a Heckler and Koch SL8-4 thumbhole butt stock.

4. The defendant claims in the advisory that the Heckler and Koch SL8-4 sporting rifle has a military pattern free standing pistol grip within the terms of section 2 of the Arms Act 1983.

5. The Plaintiff claims that the Heckler and Koch SL8-4 sporting rifle does not have a “military pattern free standing pistol grip” but instead it has a “thumbhole stock”. The defendant’s interpretation of a military pattern free standing pistol grip as it has been applied to the Heckler and Koch SL8-4 sporting rifle is factually incorrect.

THE PLAINTIFF THEREFORE CLAIMS

(a) A declaration that;

1. the Heckler and Koch SL8-4 sporting rifle does not have a military pattern free standing pistol grip for the purposes of section 2 of the Arms Act 1983, and

2. that the defendant was in error to reclassify the Heckler and Koch SL8-4 sporting rifle as a military style semi-automatic firearm for the purposes of section 2 of the Arms Act 1983, and

3. that the Heckler and Koch SL8-4 sporting rifle is an ‘A’ category firearm for the purposes of the Arms Act 1983, and possession and control thereof does not require an ‘E’ category endorsement pursuant to section 30 of the Arms Act 1983.

(b) The costs of an incidental to this proceeding.