Gun Control

A Radio New Zealand story on the Greens' and Mike Meyrick's reaction to yesterday's Dominion Post story:

Call for ban on military-style weapons

Posted at 7:52pm on 07 Nov 2006

Gun control advocates are calling for military-style semi-automatic weapons to be banned.

It is estimated that New Zealanders own more than a million guns, some of them powerful enough to blow up a tank.

Police figures show there are more than 8,000 military-style semi-automatic weapons in circulation, of the type gun control advocates say should be banned. They include rockets, anti-tank projectors, grenade launchers and machine guns - but many of these are held by collectors.

Gun control advocate and former police officer Mike Meyrick says automatic and semi-automatic weapons have no place in an urban society. He says there are so many firearms in the country that it is easy for them to fall into the wrong hands.

The Green Party says the Government should hold an investigation into why there are so many semi-automatic guns in New Zealand.
Gun laws are adequate - police

However, the police national manager of gun licensing and vetting, Joe Green, says a permit is required to import and obtain the most dangerous weapons.

He says police opted for a system that focuses on tracking gun owners, not the guns themselves, while recording more dangerous firearms. He says other countries are commenting positively on the New Zealand system.

The Council of Licensed Firearm Owners agrees gun control laws are working well in New Zealand, and there is no need to ban semi-automatic guns. The council's chairman, John Howatt, says licensing and vetting processes are adequate and do not need to be changed.

It's been fairly quiet on the media front lately, until the Dominion Post published this cracker (a little late for Guy Fawkes Day) from Mike Steere this morning:

Kiwis go for the big guns
07 November 2006
By MIKE STEERE

New Zealanders' appetite for heavy military-style guns has been revealed by gun-ownership statistics.

In total, Kiwis are estimated to own about 1.1 million guns. There are 222,704 licensed firearm-owners.

Figures issued by police reveal that nine lethal anti-tank projectors, 16 grenade launchers and thousands of machine guns and military-style semi-automatics are in public hands.

The figures have been made public as Parliament's law and order select committee considers the Arms Amendment Bill, which proposes further tightening of gun controls.

The figures have sparked concern from anti-gun lobbyists, but police and pro-gun groups say the situation is under control.

The police national manager of firearms licensing and vetting, Inspector Joe Green, said many of the larger firearms would probably be collectors' pieces or had non-explosive shells.

"Some of them are training rounds that are non-explosive. It may just be the casing and nothing inside."

AdvertisementAdvertisementCollectors pieces included the 18 'walking-stick guns', which were historic Victorian-style collectibles, Mr Green said.

He was unsure how many firearms were owned by the criminal community.

"With illicitly owned firearms you can never know definitively how many there are."

Mr Green said people should not fear firearms because New Zealand had a positive gun-safety record.

"While we do keep an eye on it, people who keep them have demonstrated themselves to be fit and proper," he said.

According to police figures, firearms were involved in 621 violent offences last year, less than 1.3 per cent of all violent offending.

That figure had dropped slightly since 2001, when firearms were used in 1.34 per cent of violent offences.

In recent years, New Zealand also had lower gun-related deaths per capita than in the United States, Canada, Australia and France.

Mr Green said there was an active policy not to increase the number of military-style semi-automatic guns, of which there were nearly 8500 in New Zealand.

Graeme Barber, who owns a collection of military memorabilia, including firearms, said firearm collecting was just like any other form of collecting.

"We are not warmongers, we are people that collect history."

Council of Licensed Firearms Owners chairman John Howat said people often perceived a "gun problem", but in reality the vetting of owners was tight, especially with larger guns.

"It's not a matter that they have been imported and all these dangerous people are walking around with them."

People wanting a military-style firearm needed a special endorsement on their licence.

"The people that are in possession of them are subject to rigorous vetting and their security must be of a higher standard. Very few new people get these licences," he said.

He felt news reports about guns would always be negative.

"It is not news to say 230,000 licensed firearm owners all behaved themselves today. It is only news to say that one of them went mad and shot themselves,"Mr Howat said.

Peace Foundation director Marion Hancock said she was concerned about the many powerful weapons circulating in society.

"It's outrageous to think there is so much out there."

Ms Hancock said the foundation was still lobbying to have recommendations implemented from the 1997 report on firearms by retired judge Sir Thomas Thorp.

Sir Thomas examined firearm ownership in New Zealand and recommended that the Government buy back military-style firearms, among other measures to control gun ownership.

"This is something we need to have movement on. We don't want to wait for another Aramoana before something happens," she said.

Of course it's a little sensational but brownie points to Mike Steere for going to John Howat and Jo Green for comment.

One other point worth making is that military firearms and "military-style semi-automatics" (MSSAs) are quite different things. There are many non-military firearms that are MSSAs under the Arms Act and there are many military firearms that aren't MSSAs, such as the many ageing bolt-action Lee Enfields loved by hunters, collectors, and sporting shooters alike.

In today's Herald:

Alpers leads anti-gun team to New York conference

Monday June 26, 2006
By Simon O'Rourke

Aucklander Phil Alpers will lead a New Zealand delegation in New York this week to "strongly support" an arms trade treaty being discussed at a United Nations conference.

When the conference opens today Mr Alpers - a foundation member of a 700-strong network called the International Action Network for Small Arms - will help present a petition to UN Secretary General Kofi Annan.

Called the Million Faces petition, it consists of 1 million photos of people around the world calling for a halt to the proliferation of firearms. There are 12,000 New Zealand faces on the petition, which was compiled with the help of Amnesty International and Oxfam.

Mr Alpers said there was no effective, legally binding international control on the small arms trade - this against a backdrop of enough ammunition to kill every person around the world twice.

He said 1000 people were killed each day by guns, fired from weapons that were part of the 640 million small arms in stock across all countries.

Although Mr Alpers has the blessing of Disarmament Minister Phil Goff to lobby for an international arms treaty at the conference - and to push for more stringent measures to control the illicit arms trade - the New Zealand Government has not signed or ratified an existing UN Firearms Protocol.

Other countries not to have signed include the US, Afghanistan, Colombia, Egypt, France, Iraq and Zimbabwe. In all, 112 have not signed.

Australia is one of the 30 signatories, with Brazil, Canada, Germany and Britain. Countries to have ratified include Belgium, Cambodia, Croatia, Mexico and South Africa - there are 49 in total.

The Firearms Protocol requires committed countries to regulate the manufacture, export, import and transit of firearms. It forces the identification of guns through markings or codes, requiring records to be kept for 10 years.

It also encourages regulation of suppliers of firearms, but it does not provide for regulation of state-to-state gun transfers.

Unlike the the UN's Programme of Action on Small Arms, drafted at the last conference five years ago, the UN Firearms Protocol is legally binding but to date its effectiveness is unclear.

The conference this week is being strongly opposed by American gun lobby group the National Rifle Association.

On its website it lists Mr Alpers as one of the "conspirators" in its "Who's Who of the power brokers behind the UN Global Gun Ban Treaty".

The former television presenter, now Sydney University adjunct associate professor in Public Health, said several reports would be released over the course of the week in New York.

They included a summary of the worldwide impact of the AK47, a case study of women affected by gun violence, and a review of progress by UN member states since the last conference in 2001.

A vigilant reader spotted this shockingly balanced story by Mike Steere published in The Press last month:

Getting guns right
25 February 2006

New Zealanders own almost a million guns, but we have a remarkably good record on gun safety. MIKE STEERE investigates what we're doing right – and could do better.

Moving softly, silently brushing leaves aside, a hunter deep in the Kaimanawa Forest spots the deer he has been waiting for.

He moves into position and lines up his prey. Carefully focused, he takes aim, his finger tightens on the trigger and he fires.

The bullet enters the target's head at great speed and exits the other side – killing it instantly.

Unknown to the shooter, the victim is no deer. Taupo father Mark Leathwick, who was hunting in the same area as the shooter, was killed instantly by the bullet that entered his head through his cap.

The shooter, 24-year-old Christopher Martin Davies, was sentenced to nine months in prison and ordered to pay reparations of $5000, and has to face the horror of having killed someone.

Though an awful tragedy, Leathwick's death in 2003 is one of just 11 fatal hunting accidents to occur in the last 10 years in New Zealand, which, for the high number of guns owned by Kiwis, has a remarkably good record for gun safety.

Most people's experiences of guns are limited to hearing of their use in crimes or seeing them in the entertainment media.

Fortunately for Kiwis, the reality here is not as frightening as some of the excesses routinely reported from around the world or created by Hollywood.

Police estimate there are about 1 million guns in New Zealand – or roughly one gun to every four people. There are 239,000 licensed users, many of whom own more than one gun; an unknown number are held by unlicensed people, including criminals.

Although comprehensive international statistics on gun ownership are quite old (1994), they place New Zealand with higher per household gun ownership than Australia and Italy, and similar to Canada, Switzerland and France.

Yet, figures collected by the New Zealand Mountain Safety Council show relatively few gun-related deaths: 48 in 2003 and 55 in 2002. The Public Health Association previously reported an average of 80 gun deaths and 65 hospital admissions a year. The statistics are dominated by suicides, which account for 80 to 90 per cent of gun-related deaths; the balance is typically hunting accidents, accidental shootings, police shootings and homicides.

Compare this to the United States' 30,136 gun-related deaths in 2003 – nearly eight times higher per capita than New Zealand's figures – and our reason for being satisfied becomes more clear.

Earlier figures also show favourable comparisons for New Zealand. In 1998, Associated Press reported that New Zealand's gun-related deaths per capita were six times fewer than the United States, nearly half that of Canada, and fewer than Australia, France and Switzerland.

Not surprisingly, most people are primarily concerned with firearm homicides – they, in our minds, constitute the biggest threat from guns. Dairies get robbed, homes are invaded, people are mugged by firearm-wielding criminals. But, again, that concern should be low. Homicides with firearms make up less than 15% of all homicides – a rate lower than Australia and Canada.

*

Our record is drawing international recognition. The director of the United Nations Regional Centre for Peace and Disarmament in Asia and the Pacific, Tsutomu Ishiguri, was in Christchurch this week for a gun-safety seminar and says he is "very impressed" with the low number of gun-related deaths in New Zealand.

Ishiguri feels nongovernmental organisations play a huge role in keeping the injuries minimal in New Zealand, and says this week's event showcased their ability to operate freely.

"If this sort of thing was organised in some countries it would be all police and politicians," he says of the conference.

Experts here credit other factors.
"We need society to help recognise if someone is no longer `fit and proper', because police can't monitor this all of the time." _Jack McConchie, Mountain Safety Council

Police national manager of firearms licensing and vetting, Inspector Joe Green, feels there are two major reasons for the statistics: legislation and education.

Green says the 1992 Arms Amendment Act put in place many safety measures for licensed gun owners, who have to be deemed "fit and proper" by police to own a gun.

He also speaks highly of our education programmes, implemented by the Mountain Safety Council.

The convenor of the council's firearms committee, Jack McConchie, is also happy with New Zealand's current system.

"What we have is a system that is almost the perfect balance between legislation and enforcement, and the community buying into the process."

He says the security measures put in place for the storage of weapons with the Arms Amendment Act has greatly improved safety around the home, where many accidents occurred in the past.

The act also attracted praise from Annette Beautrais, head of the Canterbury Suicide Project. She says that after its implementation, firearm suicides fell by 46%.

McConchie feels licensed gun owners in New Zealand are responsible, and the potential problem group is unlicensed owners, who are hard to track down.

But David Gray, who was responsible for New Zealand's worst mass killings – at Aramoana in 1990 – was a licensed gun owner, whom most people would not describe as "fit and proper".

Gray had fallen through a loophole which, before 1992, meant all registered users were issued new licences automatically.

McConchie says this area could still be tightened up today. "We need society to help recognise if someone is no longer `fit and proper', because police can't monitor this all of the time."

He is happy with the Mountain Safety Council's education programmes, but notes that continuing education is needed to keep gun- related deaths to a minimum. The council has made a submission on the Arms Amendment Bill now before Parliament. The submission argues that removing 100,000 firearms from circulation could be beneficial. It suggests old and unsafe guns could be collected in a "buy in" scheme.

Researchers at this week's firearm- safety seminar singled out individual areas where injuries and deaths could be prevented.

Although hunting accidents are only a small portion of New Zealand's gun- related deaths, American hunting accident investigator Rod Slings says investigating accidents is the key to alleviating future problems.

Slings, who describes his job at the Iowa Department of Natural Resources as "the CSI for hunting accidents", says New Zealand could benefit from carefully analysing the cause of incidents.

"We have to learn from these things, so we can warn hunters of the biggest dangers and fix problems that are occurring."

He says the use of bright orange clothing to make hunters visible in the bush is one of the benefits to have developed from this sort of research.

Many of these developments would be helpful in maintaining a low level of gun-related injuries in New Zealand – but only among licensed users.

The worry is stopping the thousands of unregistered firearms in New Zealand from becoming a bigger problem. In criminal cases, they often feature in robberies, but the trigger is rarely pulled. Authorities can only hope that part of the firearms equation, too, remains at a low level.

New Zealand First MP Ron Mark again calls for tougher sentencing for breaches of the Arms Act:

Tougher Sentencing On Firearms - Mark
Wednesday, 1 March 2006, 4:34 pm
Press Release: New Zealand First Party
1 March 2006

Tougher Sentencing On Firearms - Mark

New Zealand First law and order spokesman Ron Mark today called for tougher sentencing in cases involving on firearms charges, following the conviction of a man who discharged a gun in a public. The offender admitted to being in possession of a stolen submachine gun, from which he fired 57 rounds while drunk.

“The fact that he was in receipt of a stolen submachine gun is bad enough. That alone warrants a serious sentence. That he fired it so recklessly in public is downright dangerous and I am appalled that he received only a token four months on a total of seven firearms charges,’ said Mr Mark.

“Instead of calling for stricter licensing laws that will impact on legitimate firearms owners who respect the law and use firearms in a responsible manner, we should be cracking down on those who flaunt existing laws and handing out longer sentences.

“There is a strongly held view among legitimate firearms owners that people who illegally obtain firearms who are not themselves police-approved holders of a firearms licence, and who then go on to commission a crime with that firearm, should receive a minimum term of five years.

“If needs be, perhaps we should to look at the possibility of removing judges’ discretion and imposing mandatory sentences,” concluded Mr Mark.

ENDS

New Zealand First MP Ron Mark asked a question in the House yesterday about the Government's plans to destroy the Police's old Remington's rather than sell them to the public. Here's the transcript:

Police—Destruction of Rifles

5. RON MARK (NZ First) to the Minister of Police: Are the police to proceed with plans to destroy more than 800 Remington bolt-action rifles; if so, why?

Hon PHIL GOFF (Acting Minister of Police): Yes, for the reasons given to the member in July 2005 and again in December 2005.

Ron Mark: How can the police legitimately justify the destruction of these sporting rifles, therefore denying taxpayers the opportunity to recover approximately $300,000, by their “obligations under an international convention to prevent and eradicate the illicit trade in small arms.” when New Zealand has not signed the protocol of which they speak; further, New Zealand has not ratified that protocol and will not do so unless the House completely supports the Arms Amendment Bill (No 3), which is still before the House?

Hon PHIL GOFF: I should advise the member that the police routinely destroy hundreds of seized weapons every year—some of them quite valuable weapons. The principal reason that the police have independently made that decision is they believe that dumping 800 high-powered weapons on to the market would create risks that it does not wish to incur. Secondly, it believes that that decision is consistent with the United Nations recommendations and therefore wants to be in line with what other responsible countries do.

Ron Mark: If the police are so concerned about dumping 800 sporting rifles on the market into the hands of police-authorised, licensed firearms dealers and police-authorised, duly accredited, fit and proper firearms owners, what does that now say about the police’s confidence in their own vetting systems, and what does it say about the taxpayers’ right to have money recouped back into their coffers, which could so easily be done?

Madam SPEAKER: I just remind members again that questions are for questions, not speeches, and in the case of supplementary questions, the Minister is only obliged to address one of them.

Hon PHIL GOFF: I and, I think, most members of this House would have every confidence in the police vetting system. It is very good. But that member knows as well as I do that weapons that are acquired legitimately do not always end up in legitimate hands.

So to put it another way, the government is willing to trust gun dealers -- in fact, any licensed firearms owner -- to import rifles just like these and to sell them to other licensed firearms owners but it wouldn't trust the Police to do the same? If I was a policeman I'd be offended!

This from Newstalk ZB:

Tougher firearms laws pay off

23/02/2006 6:40:03

A controversial law introduced 14 years ago, is being credited for bringing about a drop in the rate of suicides from shootings.

New research conducted by the Christchurch School of Medicine, shows the number of shooting suicides has almost halved since an amendment to the Arms Act in 1992. The new Act brought in tougher criteria for firearms owners, including tighter security and revetting of gun licence holders.

The Council of Licensed Firearms Owners says it appears as if the legislation has been very successful.

Chairman John Howat says one in four New Zealanders owns or uses a firearm, yet there is a very low rate of firearms misuse. He says the research emphasises that New Zealand is doing something right about gun laws, without being too Draconian.

Bouquet to Newstalk ZB for seeking comment from COLFO!

The Herald has also managed to get itself wound up about the gun-safety conference. The most absurd claim of Keith Locke's that the Herald reports is that there is a "pro-gun faction" in the police! Perhaps he could tell us their address so we'd know where to send our applications for permits to import!

Gun lobby infiltrating seminar, says MP

22.02.06
By David Eames

Police Minister Annette King has defended a gun-safety conference against claims that it had been infiltrated by the pro-gun lobby.

Ms King was last night to open the three-day seminar in Christchurch, which features guest speakers from around the world.

But Green MP Keith Locke - the party's police spokesman - criticised the choice of speakers at the event, which he said included five anti-gun-control lobbyists.

He said the seminar was a thinly-veiled attempt to allow a "pro-gun ownership" voice to make it opinions known in this country.

"How else can you explain that such prominent people ... have been invited here.

"They are using gun safety as a cover ... then they slip in their core message."

Local experts, including criminologist Greg Newbold and suicide researcher Annette Beautrais, are also attending the seminar.

But Ms King said that Mr Locke had got "the wrong end of the stick in his misguided attack" on the speakers and the event.

She said the conference - In the Right Hands? - was "a bringing together of international experts who aim to promote the responsible and safe use of firearms".

"The fact that it is being led by the police, the Mountain Safety Council and the Council of Licensed Firearm Owners gives a very good indication of the objectives, of what the organisers are trying to achieve.

"Participants are looking at the research and exchanging ideas and strategies about firearm safety, about what works well for them.

"I understand one objective is to encourage community participation and buy-in into firearm safety, which I totally endorse," Ms King said.

"The seminar is also open for MPs to go along and listen, and I would suggest that Keith Locke, rather than firing from the lip with his press release, should actually go along and see what it is all about."

The seminar has also been defended by organiser Inspector Joe Green, gun licensing manager at the Office of the Commissioner in Wellington.

"This is a firearms safety seminar, and the focus is on safety ... their contribution to the seminar is in firearm safety."

He said the personal opinions of the speakers were of no consequence to the people attending the seminar.

"We are not interested in what these people's personal opinions are in terms of firearms ... it is the contribution they make to firearms safety."

Mr Green said anyone could make a presentation to the group - so long as the papers were intellectually sound.

"This is a seminar with academic rigour ... it's a public seminar and anyone can present a paper if they apply it to academic scrutiny."

But Mr Locke said Ms King should look into how the seminar was allowed to be sabotaged by pro-gun factions within police, the Mountain Safety Council or the Council of Firearms Owners.

The seminar finishes tomorrow.


Taking aim

Speakers at the conference include:
Washington firearm industry lobbyist Mark Barnes.
John R. Lott, the author of a popular book More Guns, Less Crime, who has said carrying concealed handguns in schools would reduce shootings.
Rick Patterson of the US Sporting Arms and Ammunition Manufacturers' Institute.
Colin Greenwood, a former British police officer.
* Gary A. Mauser, who has criticised the effectiveness of Canada's firearms registry.

Well, not really. But you'd be forgiven for thinking that's what the following RNZ story was about when it was posted on the TVNZ website with this picture.

Gun safety conference under fire
Feb 22, 2006



New Zealand Police are facing criticism for their involvement in an international conference on gun safety.

The Green Party claims the conference is a guise to allow a large contingent of pro-gun lobbyists to push their views in New Zealand.

MP Keith Locke says at least five of the keynote international speakers have publicly argued against restrictions on the use of firearms and represent firearm manufacturers or pro-gun lobby groups. Locke says the line-up is unusual for what is supposed to be a forum on safety and he is questioning how giving them a platform for their hardline views promotes safety.

The party has described one of the speakers, John Lott, as the world's most controversial pro-gun researcher. But Lott says he is not sure how he gained such a title. He says that overall gun control usually causes more problems than it helps and he says that as an academic he looks at the net effect.

And convenor Joe Green says the conference will present a broad range of views with a focus on public safety.

He says all the speakers were asked to submit their papers prior to the seminar to ensure the information presented was not just opinion.

Police Minister Annette King says she has no concerns about the conference's content as the speeches and research focus primarily on firearm safety.

And the convenor of the Mountain Safety Council's firearms committee has rubbished claims the conference underway is a forum for pro-gun lobbyists. Jack McConchie says if it was a pro-gun lobby he and the Mountain Safety Council would not be there.

McConchie says all speakers are academics whose work is peer-reviewed and they cannot risk their reputations by promoting or opposing the gun lobby. He says they are just presenting the facts about what safety issues have worked or failed in other countries.

There will be 22 presenters at the conference from all over the world, which has been jointly organised by the police, the NZ Mountain Safety Council and the NZ Council of Licensed Firearms Owners.

Source: RNZ

From FreeMarketNews.com:

The United Nations is trying to ban guns again. The latesst "small-arms treaty" seeks to abolish the right of any citizens to own virtually any kind of firearm. In the United States, such an effort would strike at the heart of the Constitution’s Second Amendment. Recently appointed U.S. diplomat John Bolton has already stated his view on this activity, as quoted by NRA Executive Wayne LaPierre in The American Rifleman, “The United States will not join consensus on a final document that contains measures contrary to our constitutional right to keep and bear arms.”

LaPierre references a document circulated by the International Action Network on Small Arms entitled “Ownership” which spells out what the organization has determined to be “minimal” goals toward this end. Among other things they recommended – with LaPierre’s translation in parentheses:

• Prohibit civilian ownership of certain weapons (read: handguns and semi-automatics).

• Prevent the build-up of private arsenals (read: ban gun collecting).

• License all legal users. Register all small arms. Implement safe storage requirements (read: U.N.-imposed site inspections of your home with power to take your guns).

• Limit the carrying of guns (read: the end of Right to Carry).

• Restrict ammunition sales to license holders only.

Since it is unlikely that the United Nations will be dissuaded from pursuing these changes anytime soon, LaPierre sets out the job at hand. He concludes, “For us the task is daunting, and the fight is enormous. The world gun-ban crowd is deadly serious. As NRA members, this is our fight. And it is a do-or-die battle for freedom.”-DS