McKelvie Ian: Arms (Military Style Semi-automatic Firearms and Import Controls) Amendment Bill — Second Reading 
Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume 
McKelvie Ian: Arms (Military Style Semi-automatic Firearms and Import Controls) Amendment Bill — Second Reading 
[Sitting date: 22 May 2012. Volume:680;Page:2289. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.] 
IAN McKELVIE (National—Rangitikei) 
: 
 I learnt more about guns in the last 5 minutes than I knew in my lifetime. I am not sure whether it is right or wrong and I am totally confused by it. It was certainly a masterpiece of a speech on guns. I will not take a lot of time on this Arms (Military Style Semi-automatic Firearms and Import Controls) Amendment Bill because I think we have pretty well summed it up tonight already and it seems that pretty much around the House there is unanimous agreement on the necessity for it. I want to comment briefly on the eloquent introduction by Minister Tolley and certainly by the chairman of the Law and Order Committee Jacqui Dean on this bill. It seeks to alter the Arms Act 1983 to define a military-style firearm versus a traditional hunting gun—and we have heard a lot about that from the last speaker Richard Prosser—and to provide for an appeal process for those people bringing guns into the country who think they should not be included in this legislation. It also places restrictions on airguns that replicate real guns. There are currently no restrictions on the import of those types of guns.  
If you go online and look at the type of airgun that you can import it is quite staggering. The models of them replicate all sorts of real-life guns and certainly I think it creates quite a dangerous position in our community where anyone can get hold of these types of guns and they are threatening to those around us. Police estimate that the type of event where people use these guns to threaten people takes place on average about once a week which is pretty worrying when you think about it from that perspective and the ramifications of that of course can be pretty serious as well.  
The discussion regarding regulatory powers again reared its head in the course of debate on this bill. There was mention made in relation to section 74 earlier in the night. As a result of this the police will explore the formation of an arms advisory forum which I think has got some great potential for both the police and the outcomes this bill provides for. Unfortunately as with everything else in any country in the world the vast majority of law-abiding citizens who deal with life in general without threatening anyone and without causing any problem are again being compromised by the activities of a very few people who use this type of armoury and this type of environment to create problems for the rest of us. It is a great shame that we have got to legislate to restrict the activities of a whole lot of people when in fact it is only a very few people who are causing that problem.  
It would be amazing to display as I said earlier the pictures of these replica-type arms. They are quite extraordinary and they are so freely available. I guess the other challenge for us as a Parliament is to control the importation of those arms by any kind of a market because in fact they can be brought into the country just by buying them on the internet—a challenge I think for all. Of course I understand that these arms or these types of replicas are already banned in Australia.  
The Rangitikei electorate the home of Linton Ohakea and Waiouru has a special interest in this type of legislation as the firing ranges at all three of those locations are the recipients of some very real military weaponry as it is tested. I think that we probably have more military-type guns owned by the military in the Rangitikei than any other part of New Zealand. So it is pretty important to us that this legislation is managed through the House in a good fashion. I have no problem commending this bill to the House and wish it every success as it goes along. Thank you.