This is an update to my earlier post (found here https://www.richard-prosser.com/post/firearms-ownership-in-new-zealand-a-privilege-or-a-right ).
Reading the above will give you a full explanation of the legal basis of the argument that has led to the conclusion I have come to, as stated below, which is this:
Don't hand in your semi-automatics; the Government's requirement that you do, is unlawful.
The English Bill of Rights 1688 is enshrined in New Zealand Statute Law. It is current. It is valid. It may be found here:
The BOR is included in the body of New Zealand statute because adherence to it is a requirement imposed upon the Crown by Parliament. Both the New Zealand Parliament and the New Zealand Crown, now a legally separate entity from the British Crown, have inherited from their British forebears the responsibility to ensure that the rights and freedoms of citizens outlined within it are maintained. It is the foundation for lawful authority in this country.
The seventh tenet of the English Bill of Rights 1688 states:
Subjects’ arms
That the subjects which are Protestants may have arms for their defence suitable to their conditions, and as allowed by law:
"suitable to their conditions" is what it says, plain and simple, in black and white.
Well the conditions are that criminals have possession of semi-automatics, or so we are frequently reminded; it is the justification offered for the current attempt to ban private ownership of them.
Thus if criminals have semi-automatics, so semi-automatics must be available to subjects, in order that they might make account for their defence. I defer to the word "subject" not only because it is the word used in the BOR, but also because it includes both citizens and permanent residents, and visitors, come to that.
Anyone subject to the rule of the Crown - and that's everyone within the jurisdiction of the Realm (yes, New Zealand is officially a Realm) - is protected in this regard.
I will go so far as to say that people should not hand in their semi-automatics, because the Government's requirement that they do so, is unlawful.