Sporting Shooters Association of New Zealand

15/06/2026

For those wondering what last night's post was about, here it is.

08/06/2026

FIREARM SAFETY AUTHORITY WANT LEVER ACTIONS BANNED AND GREATER BAN POWERS UNDER ORDER IN COUNCIL

Recent OIA's have uncovered emails that show that FSA decision-makers want more non-semi automatic fi****ms recategorised as prohibited. These appointed officials believe that any lever action shotguns or centrefire rifles that accept a detachable magazine should be categorized the same as a AR-15. If the Police have their way, any detachable magazine-fed lever action, such as a Browning BLR or Henry Long Ranger will become a restricted/prohibited firearm restricted to not being used by collectors or able to be used pest controllers who will more than likely choose not to.

What was even more concerning was the push to expand the dreaded Order-In-Council powers that allow for law changes to be approved by Cabinet. OIC's sidestep the normaly legislative change processes such as Select Committee submissions and open debate in Parliament, and is more or less lawmaking by decree.

The emails in question make it clear that they want the responsible Minister to effectively be able to recategorise any firearm via OIC on the entirely subjective basis that it can be fired quickly even if its non-semi automatic. This would expand what is in the Bill that limits this power to semi-automatic action type fi****ms. In practical terms this could mean any firearm of any type. This opens the door for non-semi automatic fi****ms to be treated as if they are semi-automatic when they are not. Naturally this subjective label will be applied to the next 'fastest' action type available, if they ban lever actions, it will most likely be straightpulls, if they ban straightpulls then perhaps all that is left will be bolt actions.

The intention of expanding this OIC power, based on the comments in the email thread, are that even if the Arms Bill doesnt ban what they want specificly, they want to be able to have the option to do so later. The FSA and Police are happy to play the long game until they find a government willing to buy back more non-semi automatic fi****ms.

We have not seen any political parties adopting this policy, yet the FSA seems to be going out on their own to lobby to build a legal pathway to ban any firearm, including but not limited to lever actions. They are preparing the means for a future Government to further restrict license holders, and are assuming further restrictions will happen.

And for those that are wondering how many prohibited pump action rifles are being used by P-endorsed Pest Controllers we have that data too. The answer is one pump action rifle with detachable magazines, and no lever actions. Despite Police and FSA insisting they are so dangerous, nobody who has the ability to use them chooses to.

So why should the pump actions and lever actions be treated the same as a prohibited semi automatic action type when those who can access them choose not to? Nobody seems to know.

SSANZ is vigilant for any further encroachments against fit and proper people. Unelected officials pushing to ban additional types of fi****ms from standard licenseholders 6 years after the first wave of bans really does show that the elected and unelected alike wont stop pushing to restrict fit and proper people. It was semi-automatics first, then it was pump actions, now it is lever actions, and we think next it will be straightpulls.

When 'public safety' is the justification, the next best thing will always be able to be banned if the Police and FSA have their way.

We are hopeful that the Bill not only protects lever actions from recategorisation, but also seeks to rectify the absurdity that faces some pump action rifles.

If you like what we do, and the many hours of research it takes to find this stuff out, feel free to join us for $25 a year.

01/06/2026

POLICE CAUGHT PUSHING FOR CALIBER BANS

Recent OIA's from New Zealand Police show that they will continue to push for further restrictions to be placed on firearm license holders. They have engaged in a campaign of influence to push for further bans on the basis of caliber during the drafting phase of the Arms Bill. They pushed for a a ban on .50 caliber or larger fi****ms, note that this is not to ban specific cartridge, but an entire range of calibers. This would include pistol cartridges like 50AE, 500 Smith and Wesson, and 50 GI, rifle cartridges from 50 Alaskan, 577 Snider, 505 Gibbs, .50 BMG, and 600 Nitro Express. It may also potentially implicate muzzle loaders and some shotguns.

The language that Police have been using to push for this is by focussing on 'sniper rifles' whilst omitting the fact that it would capture any firearm that is 50 caliber or larger in diameter. Whilst the 'helpful moderates' who support this policy will latch onto the .50 BMG and say that you don't 'need' that, the issue is actually more complex.

This is not the first time ammunition restrictions have appeared, as "Small Semi Automatic Pistols" are restricted to muzzle velocities under 1,600 FPS. What this does show is that Police are pushing to greatly expand this form of regulation to include caliber-wide bans, with .50 caliber and larger being the proof of concept. Deploying buzzwords like 'military use' and 'sniper rifle' hides the fact that most .50 caliber fi****ms aren't used for 'sniper' activities but for closer range applications such as hunting and target shooting.

The Police keep touching on .50 BMG yet their policy recommendations use that specific cartridge as a justification to push a ban on entire calibers. This proposed caliber ceiling could very easily come down and capture very common calibers or cartridges that are deemed 'too powerful' or for 'military snipers'. If you know anything about the cartridges being used by marksmen in militaries around the world, you will know that they employ common hunting and target shooting cartridges like 6.5 Creedmoor, .308 Wi******er, 300 Win Mag, 338 Lapua and the list goes on. The Police have shown no intention of stopping their push for more restrictions since 2019, and they clearly wish to bring caliber and cartridge restrictions from Australia to New Zealand.

This Police pressure campaign has even managed to make its way to Aide Memoirs for the Minister of Police to refer to in meetings with the Associate Minister of Justice throughout 2025 as well as advice given to the Ministry of Justice. These documents show that the Police are not happy about their caliber ban not making it into the first draft of the Arms Bill. And whilst it is not in the current version of the Bill, it is something that we still need to watch for in the future.

Hunters and target shooters will continue to be in the firing line and must remain vigilant as the Arms Bill continues through the legislative process.

30/05/2026

SSANZ is proud to support the CNIGC Rimfire Rapids 2026 alongside Delta Mike Ltd. This match is designed for any rimfire caliber, with the stage design tailored to semi autos and distances of up to 100m. Bring your mates and have a go.

Location: NZDA Rotorua Range
Date: 14 June
Round Count: 154 Rounds Minimum

Entry form and information found below:

https://tinyurl.com/mtumvjnx

28/05/2026

Today the Government released its 2026 Budget, and it delivers for licenced firearm owners.

As the Minister responsible for fi****ms law reform, I’m putting in the work to deliver fair and practical rules that respect licence holders. But without the funding to implement it, the cost of doing so would have fallen on LFOs.

Thanks to the Government's disciplined focus on cutting waste, Budget 2026 has been able to invest where it matters. This includes $44.9 million to implement the new Arms Act and establish Fi****ms Safety and Education New Zealand – the new independent fi****ms regulator.

Without this funding, the fi****ms system was facing a major shortfall. That could have meant fi****ms licence fees increasing to up to six and a half times their current level.

That would have been unmanageable for many licenced firearm owners. With ACT in Government, that’s not happening.

For years, licenced firearm owners have been targeted, blamed, and vilified. Rushed firearm law changes under the Labour-NZ First Government in 2019 treated you as the problem, while criminals and gangs continued to ignore the law.

After everything LFOs have been through, hiking fees before the benefits of the new system have even been delivered would have compounded years of unfair treatment.

ACT said we would stand up for licenced firearm owners and we are delivering.

This Budget funding means fi****ms licensing fees will not need to increase for at least two years.

A well-functioning fi****ms system benefits the whole country. It supports public safety, pest control, conservation, hunting, sport shooting, and rural communities.

This funding will help deliver the reforms we have fought for.

In addition, ACT continues to oppose the costly, bureaucratic fi****ms registry. We have been clear from the start that it creates privacy and security risks for LFOs, while doing nothing to stop criminals who do not register fi****ms in the first place.

We have not won every argument. That is the reality of coalition government. But we are making real, practical progress for fi****ms owners after years of being ignored.

The Bill is progressing, the reforms are funded, service will be improved, and there are no fee hikes for licensing or renewals.

Step by step, we are replacing the broken old system with one that is fair, practical, and built to last.

25/05/2026

Firearm ownership limits, destruction reframed as compromise.

We have heard some misguided murmuring in corners of the community about how a (insert arbitrary number here) firearm limit is appropriate, and how they would just sell their excess guns and all will be well (for them at least).

After watching Australia try to do this,we expect a similar attempt here to have the below implications:

FIREARM FIRESALE
A mass sell-off drives prices down as everyone tries to offload their fi****ms, as the compliance deadline gets closer the prices would only continue to plummet. It would be a race to see who can offload their collections the fastest to a minority who are willing and able to buy them.

INDUSTRY FAILURE
Dealers would struggle to sell their own stock, and won't have capacity to store any second hand trade-ins as that is just another thing they will struggle sell. Domestic gunsmiths and manufacturers of fi****ms and accessories like stocks and suppressors for civilian sales will fold. We would lose skilled manufacturing jobs in our community and they would have no reason to return.

NO NEW FIREARMS/ACCESSORIES IMPORTED Dealers and distributors would struggle to financially justify importing new models of fi****ms. The effective market cap would mean that imports would only get more costly and harder to organise, and the wait on export and import approval would cause delays spanning months or even over a year. If your firearm needs to be repaired or replaced, good luck. This will force people to use fi****ms that are potentially unsafe due to a lack of spare parts or replacement fi****ms.

NO BUYBACK
As the deadline approaches, what happens to the 'excess' fi****ms that can't be sold? Well the current compensation provisions in the Bill seem to kick in only when a firearm is recategorised. A fi****ms cap does not change the category of a firearm, so you would be handing your firearm in for free, much like the Prohibited Ammunition confiscation post-2019. Crushing your excess A-category Tikka or Howa doesn't entitle you to anything. The only way compensation would happen is if Gun Control NZ's policy of moving all rifles that take detachable magazines to P-category is allowed to happen and we will do our best to stop that from happening.

LOSS OF VALUE FOR EXISTING COLLECTIONS Those who still own fi****ms and don't have to sell will still have their collections irreversibly devalued. The existing supply will be trapped in a market with little to no demand. As explained above, compensation only appears to be for recategorised fi****ms; so any loss in value is your problem. Target shooters, hunters, farmers, collectors, and dealers will all be impacted by this.

So why do people in the community seem to be pushing for this? Is it a selfish attempt to appease the powers that be by sacrificing somebody else's interests? To throw others under the bus in the hope these forces wont one day come for what you like, as has continued to happen in Australia. Is it a deliberate disregard or disdain for any other context of firearm ownership as not being 'legitimate'? Or is it just the apathetic Kiwi need to be seen to not be 'extreme' and by extreme they mean advocating for what the current law says a license holder can do? Having an opinion about how your sport, industry, occupation, or pastime is regulated and protected is no more extreme than voting in an election.

Being a fit and proper person gives you the ability to choose how big or small your collection is. If you don't think you should own a certain number of fi****ms, feel free to choose not to. As long as all the fi****ms in your possession are stored in a compliant way, then what is the issue?

We are yet to find somebody with these opinions who can articulate why decimating the entire lawful firearm owning community is somehow a good thing for the community. If you are one of these people, feel free to chime in and show your point of view.

22/05/2026

A date for your diary.

19/05/2026

Get amongst it, have your say.

Our Annual Trust & Confidence Survey is still open, but it closes in just 2 weeks!

https://www.colfo.org/trust-and-confidence-2026

This is your chance to share your honest views on how the Police handle fi****ms licensing, with some questions now split to rate the Police and the Fi****ms Safety Authority separately — vital as we head into the election and the Arms Bill is finalised.

✅ Takes less than 5 minutes
✅ Closes Monday 1 June
✅ Your feedback directly strengthens our advocacy

Don’t miss your opportunity to be counted. Licensed firearm owners’ voices need to be heard loud and clear.

18/05/2026

Shotgun Tubular Magazine Capacity - A Cautionary and Entirely Avoidable Tale

First of all, this is not legal advice, or a substitute for legal advice, if you need legal advice, see a lawyer. This post is provided for informational purposes only.

SSANZ recently followed the story of a shooter who had found themselves incorrectly stuck in the FSA's compliance pipeline when he registered a 3-inch chambered shotgun. They did what most people would do to check their shotgun magazine capacity... they checked how many cartridges would go in the tube. In this case ... 6, and you can see how the FSA got all hot and bothered about that.

Then followed several strongly worded emails and phone calls which demanded that the shotgun be surrendered by a certain deadline. The situation didn't look great for the owner who had owned this shotgun for decades. They were looking down the barrel of a daunting and potentially expensive compliance process with the FSA.

And then we asked them a very important question, "how long are the shotgun shells you are using to measure capacity?" Turns out his shells were not 3 inch magnum cartridges. They were instead the considerably shorter 2.75 inch cartridges. This explained how a 6th cartridge managed to fit in the tube. With 3 inch shells, his tubular magazine length was fully compliant as it could not fit more than 5 cartridges.

After FSA realised the error of their ways (which took multiple emails from the owner explaining the cartridge length issue) all was well. It was clear the shotgun was compliant and the conclusion to this issue was a positive one, they still have their shotgun. But had the owner not double checked their cartridge overall length, the opposite would have likely occured.

SSANZ cannot overstate the importance of measuring magazine capacity for a shotgun with the right length cartridge. An incorrect calculation could result in the entirely preventable destruction of your firearm or worse.

Sporting Arms and Ammunition Manufacturers' Institute (SAAMI) specifications determine the industry standard for maximum cartridge overall length (COAL). Whilst it may say 3 inch or 76.0mm magnum on the box, it is important to double-check that the cartridges' overall length that you use in your measurements are to SAAMI-spec. The same goes for snap caps. If you are using snap caps or inert cartridges, make sure the COAL is correct.

Using shorter shells will likely make your magazine capacity calculation incorrect. That incorrect information is likely to be relied upon by the FSA to determine if further action is needed or not. So it is crucial that you get the right information the first time to avoid confusion and stress.

Below are the maximum COAL for the three most common cartridge lengths for shotguns chambered in 12 Gauge.

MAXIMUM COAL FOR COMMON 12 GAUGE CHAMBERS:
12GA - 2.75 Inch = 62.23mm (2.450 inches) COAL
12GA - 3 Inch = 70.10mm (2.760 inches) COAL
12GA - 3.5 Inch = 80.14mm (3.155 inches) COAL

If you are not sure how to measure your magazine capacity, or require assistance, get in touch with your local gunsmith or dealer. They can inspect the firearm and confirm magazine capacity for you if needed.