Hunting & Fishing pulls 'military-style' semi-auto

In reclassing the A cat semi autos as E cat, then that will make it unlikely general hunting/shooting fraternity will be able to buy E cats in future (except for pest control etc) The key word is semiautos with "capability' to have magazines larger than 5 hot capacity. That puts military style and some other sporting semi autos out of it. plus some of the WW2 vintage semi autos. (ie 7 shot Gerand) The issue has been, A cat semi autos could be easily fitted with large capacity magazines, immediately making them E cat,(and illegal of an A Cat only licenced user) It was possible to buy large capacity magazines without a firearms licence at all. This legal flaw was never dealt to. However, 5 shot semi autos (A cat) whatever type (military or sporting) can still be used by criminals/terrorists or whoever. and cause a lot of damage. Ditto with 5 shot semi auto shotguns (of which are popular with duck shooters) I gather semi auto shotgun/s were also used in the chch attack I personally have no use for semi autos of any sort, but I do accept that some legit hunters and range shooters do usethem, and under previous law, they were a legitimate firearm to use. FWIW, it was near impossible to legally own what are now A cat and E cat semi autos, but for some reason the rules were relaxed by the govt. also, the view that ammunition can be purchased without a firearms licence, is wrong. My experience has been, that all ammo retailers have requested I produce my firearms licence when buying ammo

Definitely need a firearms license to buy ammo. Back in the day (25+ years ago) when we had rifles on the farm but no-one in the family has a firearms license we would have to get a friend to buy our ammo for us.

Living up to your name there. :)

@M400-1 Ha, I guess so. I was just a kid then and at that stage it seemed much more acceptable to bend the laws a bit. At about that stage the cops did put a lot more emphasis, at least in our area in the rural community, on getting unlicensed people with guns licensed and ensuring you had gun safes etc. My father and one of my brothers did get their licenses. For a while we would have fairly regular visits from the cops (it no doubt helped we had four living in our valley at one stage) to check we were compliant. Having said that our gun cabinet was, and still is, an MDF box with a piddly little lock that anyone with an axe, sledge hammer or pinch bar could break into in less than five seconds.

An intersesting comment from a workmate some 10 or more years ago. He had a collectors plus pistol license and he did own a couple of semi auto guns. He made his own gun safe and when it was inspected he was asked why it was all 6mm steel double braced etc which is about 5 times what was required. His answer was to make sure it could not be broken into. The thing was bolted to the floor studs and it had taken 4 people to carry it into the house. His comment though was that if a crim threatened his girlfriend or kid he would hand over the key.

'Gang bosses say weapons won't be handed back after Christchurch mosque shooting' Just the law-abiding will disarm. Feeling safer already. https://www.stuff.co.nz/national/christchurch-shooting/111594950/gangs-bosses-say-weapons-wont-be-handed-back-after-christchurch-mosque-shooting

When guns are outlawed, only outlaws will have guns.

That's certainly the line the NRA propoganda would like us to believe. Real world results vary. Australia post Port Arthur saw a massive decline in gun crime & deaths. Scotland post Dunblane saw a continued steady increase. Both massacres resulted in very strict gun restrictions and buybacks/amnestys. Would be interesting to know why one failed and one succeeded. At a guess Aus had a much better chance given its tightly controlled borders - remove the existing fireatms and stop new ones arriving. Whereas Scotland had free movement from the EU with few or no border checks and the Soviet Union busy collapsing on its doorstep with all sorts of ex-military items looking for a new home. Which would mean that NZ should have a good chance of making the effects a buyback stick. But thats only a guess.

Gangs tend to keep their guns for special occasions. Considering the sheer number of guns confiscated from them in recent years gang members rarely appear implicated in gun crime except against other gangs. Im happier they have been honest enough to say why should we hand our guns in rather than Of course we will hand everything in (the ones we want you to know about anyway) Gangs these days leave the general public alone except to sell them stuff. (or to put that another way they still deal out misery and mayhem but only to willing customers)

@madpom. If possessing semi-automatics are made illegal, than the civillians possessing them will be criminals. How is that NRA propaganda ?. @Geeves. All gun owners keep their guns for special occasions. Any shooting is a 'special occasion'. We don't have 'Open Carry' in NZ. Unlike you, I am not happy that gangs have firearms illegally. An INFINTESIMALLY SMALL PERCENTAGE of legal NZ firearms holders have been a criminal problem. David Gray in Aramoana acted alone in 1990. He had a simmering problem with his neighbours mistreatment & deaths of pets. The Bain Killings were within a family group. One shooter acted alone. David Bain (now William David Cullen Davies) was awarded the rifle back into his hands by the NZ Courts. https://www.stuff.co.nz/the-press/news/94073397/murder-rifle-going-back-to-the-bain-camp Brenton Tarrant acted alone. He had a thought-out manifesto and had planned ahead for 2 years. Part of his numerous intentions were to stir up an over-reaction. Which he now has. @madpom & geeves. Please mail me if you want to thrash this out without over-heating the forum.