The ASSOCIATE Minister of Justice wants to rewrite THE ARMS ACT. sign up to our submission to show your support for strong gun laws
we know there is a lot of submission writing fatigue out there. We are making the process easier by letting you just add your name to our submission
Sign up to show your support for:
Keeping in place the ban on prohibited semi-automatic firearms
Strengthening the ban by requiring collectors to permanently disable their prohibited semi-automatic firearms
Introducing a 5 year licence for everyone
Increasing the minimum age for holding a firearms licence to 18 and prohibit children under the age of 10 from using firearms
Requiring a firearms licence to purchase lethal airguns
what am I signing up to?
By adding your name to our submission, this is what you are supporting:
• Do you have any other views not covered in this document on how the Act protects public safety?
Australian firearms laws have been extremely successful in almost eliminating mass shootings in Australia. This is demonstrated in the following infographic. Researchers estimate that about 16 mass shootings were prevented by their law changes in 1996. We note that the Arms Act is not as strong as some elements of the Australian law in limiting access to firearms.
The discussion document is focussed on individual policies but there are synergies between policies. Recent US research shows synergy between firearms safety policies: individual policies may show only small or uncertain effects but the most restrictive set of firearm policies was associated with a 20% lower firearm mortality than the most permissive set.
We cannot just rely on one policy to improve safety. Before 2019, the system relied only on licensing. No licensing system on its own can protect public safety. Licensing screens large numbers of people to try and prevent relatively rare events (such as homicides and suicides). It’s not possible to predict before hand everyone who will commit crimes or suicide, we can only screen out those with obvious red flags. The licensing system needs to be supported by other public safety measures such as the ban on prohibited semi-automatics and registration of firearms. The very successful Australian system relies on the combination of licensing, prohibiting semi-automatics and registration.
Theme 1: Purpose of regulating firearms access, possession, and use
• What do you consider the main principles and purposes of the Act should be?
We support the current purpose statement in the Act. The purpose statement acknowledges the responsibility that all firearms users have to ensure both personal and public safety. For too long, the law prioritised the convenience of individual gun owners over public safety, with horrific consequences. The purpose statement also helpfully clarifies that firearms ownership is a privilege and not a right.
Theme 2: Products controlled by the Act
• In your view, is the focus on regulating firearms (and associated products) based on the risk profile of each product an appropriate approach to the maintenance of public safety?
We are strongly supportive of the current regulation of prohibited semi-automatic firearms and parts. Restricting access to prohibited semi-automatic firearms reduces the risks of mass shootings occurring. In a study of mass shootings in the United States “more people were wounded and killed in incidents in which semiautomatic rifles were used compared with incidents involving other firearms. Semiautomatic rifles are designed for easy use, can accept large magazines, and fire high-velocity bullets, enabling active shooters to wound and kill more people per incident.”
Public safety could be further enhanced by requiring the permanent disabling of prohibited semi-automatic firearms held by collectors and theatrical armourers, as in Australia. These groups have no need to fire these weapons. We note the recent case of a collector, Dr Ian Dallison, who despite all the extra vetting associated with his pistol and collector endorsements, attempted to shoot his landlord. The victim’s life was only saved by the failure of the firearm.
Theme 3: Responsible possession and use
• What are your views on the length of time a firearms licence is issued for?
We support shortening the licence period from 10 years to 5. A person’s circumstances can change significantly over 10 years. For example, relationship breakdowns, loss of employment and online radicalisation are all risk factors that can have a significant impact on a licence holder. Canada and the UK both have 5 year licenses. Australian states have a range of terms, that vary from 1-5 years, depending on the types of firearm owned.
• What are your views on the minimum age?
Police have provided data which shows that people who obtain a firearms licence as teenagers are more likely to commit crimes than their unvetted peers. Given this data, we recommend that a higher minimum age is established for holding a full firearms licence. We recommend that the minimum age should be at 18, as it is in Australia.
Anybody can use a firearm, provided that they are under the supervision of someone who holds a firearms licence. This has led to situations where children use firearms when they are as young as three years old. Children this young obviously lack the mental and physical capabilities to safely use a firearm, even under close supervision. They are also at higher risk of adverse effects from lead exposure. In Australia, the minimum age for the use of firearms is 10 years old. We recommend that the same age is adopted in New Zealand.
• What are your views on the regulation of airguns?
Recent research shows that modern air rifles can inflict lethal shots at 10 metres. Higher powered air rifles should be regulated in the same way as firearms, rather than being sold to any adult.
• What are your views on endorsements relating to pistols, prohibited firearms and restricted weapons?
We are supportive of the current system. We do not support any increase in access to prohibited semi-automatic firearms, no matter the levels or types of vetting undertaken, given the risks that these firearms pose for mass shootings. We would like to see collectors and theatrical armourers have to permanently disable them. Please see comments on Theme 2 above on this point.
Theme 7:
• Are there roles and responsibilities which should be shared between the FSA and Police?
We are strongly opposed to moving the Firearms Safety Authority away from Police. The only country that has experimented with moving firearms regulation away from Police was Canada and it was an expensive failure. There needs to be real time information flowing between the FSA and Police. Removing the FSA from Police will almost certainly disrupt the flow of information and reduce community safety.
we are providing a draft of gun control nz’s detailed submission
We are providing this as a guide for others who are drafting their own submission
Signing up only shows your support for the summary submission above. It does not commit you to the detailed submission. Our full submission is in draft form and we welcome feedback from like-minded individuals and organisations. The whole consultation document can be found on the Ministry of Justice website.