The Government’s answer to gangs with guns will be passed into law sooner than expected, as new Police Minister Chris Hipkins looks to address growing concern over violent crime.
Firearm prohibition orders (FPOs) are billed as a way for the Government to target violent offenders – particularly gangs – by giving police and the courts greater powers to restrict who can own, use, or be around, guns.
However, the Government has faced criticism from both sides: The National Party says the proposed law doesn’t give police the search and seizure powers needed to truly make a difference; others say they infringe human rights and are an example of politics winning out over policy.
Meanwhile, those working in this space, including the Police Association, have warned More than one firearms offence a day by gang members since 2019
* The life and times of anti-gang firearm prohibition orders
* Public needs crime ‘reassurance’, but arming police not justified: Chris Hipkins
* ‘We need action against gangs right now’: Chris Luxon details new gang plan
“>these orders are not a silver bullet.
READ MORE:
* More than one firearms offence a day by gang members since 2019
* The life and times of anti-gang firearm prohibition orders
* Public needs crime ‘reassurance’, but arming police not justified: Chris Hipkins
* ‘We need action against gangs right now’: Chris Luxon details new gang plan
Simply put, FPOs are specific orders, applied to a certain person, that prevent them from legally owning a firearm. That could include people classified by police as a patched member of a gang or a gang associate. An order could also be made against a person who has been convicted of a specific violent offence, including strangulation or suffocation.
Police Minister Chris Hipkins says the Government has the balance right on its latest response to gang crime.
If the court grants an order against a specific person, police have further powers to go after them and confiscate illegal firearms. Under this bill, an order would last for 10 years.
On Tuesday, Hipkins announced the Justice Select Committee had reported back to the House sooner than expected, meaning the FPOs are expected to become law by the end of next week.
This comes as the Government faces mounting pressure to bolster its law and order response in the face of drive-by shootings and violent crime in city centres. The FPOs are a first step in the Government’s suite of law changes aimed at tackling the so-called gang problem.
Stuff
FPOs have long been debated as a potential response to illegal firearm use by gang members, but there have always been questions around the effectiveness of these laws and the human rights implications.
“Firearms prohibition orders will help to further reduce firearms violence in our communities by prohibiting high risk offenders from accessing, being around or using firearms or ammunition,” Hipkins said.
The proposed law would also see greater penalties for those breaching an FPO.
For example, someone who breached an order by residing in a location with firearms or visiting a gun shop would be facing up to two years’ imprisonment; five years’ for someone in possession of a firearm; and seven years’ if that gun was a prohibited weapon, like a semi-automatic rifle.
ROBERT KITCHIN/Stuff
National Party police spokesperson Mark Mitchell is one of the members saying the Government’s proposed law should go further, giving police warrantless search powers.
Someone supplying a weapon to a person covered by an FPO, or someone illegally discharging a firearm in public, would also face harsher penalties.
The Justice Select Committee reported back to the House on Friday, with the majority recommending the bill become law. It also recommended two amendments to the bill.
The first amendment adds strangulation and suffocation as offences that could qualify a person for an FPO. This directly relates to family violence incidents, which shows those who had been strangled were seven times more likely to later be killed by an intimate partner.
The second created clarity and tighter rules around the court’s power to add special conditions to an FPO.
But National MPs held a differing view, saying they were “disappointed” the police commissioner, police minister and Government had not sought or recommended stronger warrantless search powers be included in the bill.
The Government does have a separate, wide-ranging bill in the pipeline, which will give police broader search and seizure powers – more in-line with what National is calling for.
This is not the first time FPOs have been debated, with successive governments floating the idea. There has long been a question mark over the public appetite for a law that infringes upon human rights, and whether there is enough evidence in support of these powers to make the trade-off worthwhile.
But Hipkins said the Government had the balance right, in this case.
The bill is due to come before the House for its second reading on Thursday, and it’s expected to pass into law by the end of next week.
التعليقات