The weapons used by white supremacist Brenton Tarrant to kill 51 worshippers at Friday prayers in Christchurch were semi-automatic assault rifles (SAARs).

Within a month of the massacre, the government drew up an Arms (Prohibited Firearms, Magazines, and Parts) Amendment Act 2019, aimed at banning semi-automatic firearms, magazines, and parts.

The act was passed by 119 votes to 1. The Act Party’s sole member, David Seymour, dissented, not because he disagreed with the act in principle, but because he felt it was being passed too hastily.

he government introduced a six-month firearms buy-back amnesty, until December.

During the buy-back period, 56,250 firearms and 194,245 parts were surrendered to police.

A tighter firearms licensing system was also introduced.

Shock at petition

Many people have therefore reacted with shock that, barely five years after the massacre, a petition has been presented to allow competitive shooters from gun clubs to own these banned SAARs for competition.

Many have commented that it is an insult to the memory of the 51 innocent, unarmed human beings that were killed, that such a petition could be considered.

The Federation of Islamic Associations of New Zealand (FIANZ) responded to this petition with evidence to support their stand that the petition should be opposed.

However, as so often seems to be the case, the Muslim voice is going almost unheard. FIANZ’s well-researched, thoughtful and detailed response received very little coverage in the media, just a line here and there acknowledging that they do not want SAARs back in circulation.

In the case of one press story, a single sentence to that effect came at the very end of a relatively long story detailing exchanges in parliament on this important issue.

The underlying argument for the petition is that (i) New Zealanders would be able to practise with SAARs and “compete on an equal footing” in competitions organised by the International Practical Shooting Confederation (IPSC), based in the USA, and the US National Rifle Association (NRA), and (ii) it would enhance New Zealand’s global recognition and prestige.

Not based on evidence

The petition seems to be based on aspirations, not evidence.

It states that New Zealand has “excelled in the past” in such shooting competitions.

As the FIANZ response makes clear, there is little evidence that this is the case.

The number of medals won by New Zealanders in such competitions was 47 in 2018, but actually increased to 65 in 2022 – despite the ban on SAARs.

These 65 medals are also more than the 40 won by the USA in 2022 – despite the USA’s lack of a ban.

The claim that such competitions “give New Zealand global recognition and prestige” runs counter to the fact that in such competitions, competitors are only identified by their name and team, not their country.

IPSC competitions are promoted as marketing events for arms suppliers and manufacturers, not for countries. The IPSC says the competitions are used for collecting “marketing data”.

There seems to have been only one SAAR championship, held in Kyrgyzstan in 2020, where only 27 competitors, all from Kyrgyzstan, took part.

The Arms Registry cost over NZ$200 million to set up. Extending it to include SAARs would add another $30 million to this expense.

Law-abiding citizens?

The petition says that only gun club members would be allowed to own SAARs because they are “law-abiding” and “exemplary citizens”.

However, the FIANZ response quotes incidents where gun club members have used their weapons to commit crimes.

Tarrant was himself a member of a gun club – Bruce Rifle Club in Dunedin.

(Concerns about this club had been raised in 2017. It closed shortly after the 15 March attack.)

Potentially thousands of SAARs

An estimated 10% of New Zealand’s 250,000 licensed shooters belong to a gun club. So 25,000 would be allowed to buy and use SAARs. But the number of weapons in circulation could legally be higher – Tarrant, for example, owned 10 guns.

Another risk factor is that guns are often stolen in burglaries, ram raids, etc, putting them in the hands of non-law-abiding people.

Citizens – not just Muslims at prayer, but the whole of society – will be put at risk if this petition is not rejected.

Gun law changes on the way

On 28 February this year, Radio New Zealand reported that National and Act have agreed to rewrite the Arms Act as part of their coalition agreement.

Associate Justice Minister Nicole McKee (an Act Party member) said wholesale firearms reform will likely be introduced to Parliament before the end of 2024.

She wants to roll back “rushed” and “knee-jerk” regulations introduced by the previous government and “… stop treating firearms owners like they’re nothing more than common criminals … Gun ownership is a normal way of life.”

McKee may be less than objective as a law-maker: she is a sport shooter and was the spokesperson for the gun lobby group Council of Licenced Firearms Owners (COLFO NZ) and for its “Fair and Reasonable” campaign. On their website, COLFO say they were set up in 1996 “to combat firearms-related disinformation.”

At Question Time in parliament on 28 February, the prime minister, Christopher Luxon, would not rule out changing the law around the ownership of SAARs, claiming no decision had been made.

The views of Muslims leaders from the Islamic Women’s Council of New Zealand and from FIANZ are clear.

So are those of Opposition leader Chris Hipkins, who served in the cabinet when Labour’s legislation was enacted in 2019: “…the debate around semi-automatic weapons has I think been resolved; we shouldn’t have them.”

Also see:

How they knew it was his posts