New Zealand Keeps Doxxing Registered Gun Owners
The events expose an underappreciated downside to government registries: In addition to civil liberties concerns, so much information in a concentrated database is a potential privacy nightmare.

A data breach in New Zealand exposed the personal information of some of the country's gun owners, and not for the first time. It's another indication of how even well-intended government policies can become civil liberties nightmares.
After the 2019 mass shooting at a Christchurch mosque, the country enacted a series of reforms intended to prevent such tragedies in the future. Along with a ban on most semi-automatic firearms and a gun buyback that netted more than 50,000 weapons, one provision empowered New Zealand's Firearms Safety Authority to "effectively regulate the legitimate possession and use of firearms." In other words: a national "firearms registry" that will "link firearms to licence holders, so there is a clear picture of the legally held firearms in New Zealand and improved ability to trace firearms," according to Executive Director Angela Brazier.
Last week, a joint email went out from the Firearms Safety Authority and the Auckland Central Police District to 147 registered gun owners, advising them that their addresses might need to be updated. Unfortunately, the emails were all listed in the CC field instead of the BCC field, which would be hidden. As a result, each recipient of the email not only saw every single other recipient's email address but, in many cases, first and last names as well.
As The New Zealand Herald noted, "The visible addresses included various prominent Auckland residents, including lawyers, company directors, police officers and government officials."
This is not the only, or even the most severe, breach of New Zealand gun owners' data in recent memory. During the 2019 gun buyback, the government set up a website for gun owners to register their weapons for relinquishment. Police later admitted that visitors to the site could easily access other registrants' personal information, including names, addresses, dates of birth, and bank account information. And in 2022, thieves stole as many as 400 gun owners' records from an abandoned police precinct after police officials neglected to destroy the files before moving operations to a new building.
In the U.S., national gun owner registries are prohibited by federal law, though they do exist in some form in certain states, and some progressive lawmakers and advocates support wider adoption. Giffords, the gun control advocacy organization named for former Rep. Gabrielle Giffords (D–Ariz.) who was shot and nearly killed while in office, says registries are "a useful method of curbing illegal gun activity and encouraging responsible gun practices." Sen. Cory Booker (D–N.J.) proposed a national licensing system for gun owners in 2019 as part of his presidential campaign platform.
Gun owners would have reason to fear that a registry today could be used to confiscate guns tomorrow. Not to mention, a plan like Booker's would require the federal government to keep accurate and copious records so as not to accidentally arrest the wrong person—not exactly its strong suit. There's also the issue of noncompliance: In New Zealand, it's estimated that somewhere between one-third and one-half of all newly forbidden weapons were actually turned in. In neighboring Australia, often touted as an example of gun control done well, only about one-fifth of banned weapons are estimated to have been turned in.
But the events in New Zealand demonstrate an underappreciated downside to government registries: the possibility that such a mass of personal information could be leaked or otherwise improperly accessed. Nicole McKee, firearms spokesperson for New Zealand political party ACT, told The New Zealand Herald that the latest leak "shows once again that police are incapable of keeping licenced firearms owners' information secure."
Editor's Note: As of February 29, 2024, commenting privileges on reason.com posts are limited to Reason Plus subscribers. Past commenters are grandfathered in for a temporary period. Subscribe here to preserve your ability to comment. Your Reason Plus subscription also gives you an ad-free version of reason.com, along with full access to the digital edition and archives of Reason magazine. We request that comments be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment and ban commenters for any reason at any time. Comments may only be edited within 5 minutes of posting. Report abuses.
Please
to post comments
Make money online from home extra cash more than $18000 to $21000. Start getting paid every month Thousands Dollars online. I have received $26000 in this month by just working online from home in my part time. every person easily do this job by.
just Open This Website.....> https://aprichs.blogspot.com
"It's another indication of how even well-intended government policies can become civil liberties nightmares."
There is no such thing as a well intentioned government policy.
^^^
Great article, Mike. I appreciate your work, I’m now creating over $35,200 dollars each month simply by doing a simple job online! I do know You currently making a lot of greenbacks online from $28,200 dollars, its simple online operating jobs.
.
.
Just open the link———————————————>>> http://Www.OnlineCash1.Com
What about vaccine cards? Asking for the true libertarians like sarc and Jeff.
"The visible addresses included various prominent Auckland residents, including lawyers, company directors, police officers and government officials."
Wait a minute; how could a government official ever want to have one of those evil gun things that crawl out of locked closets and murder thousands of innocent citizens?
Because they have the pull to get all the permits they want, and screw the proles.
I’m making $90 an hour working from home. I never imagined that it was honest to goodness yet my closest companion is earning sixteen thousand US dollars a month by working on the connection, that was truly astounding for me, she prescribed for me to attempt it simply. Everybody must try this job now by just using this website… http://www.Payathome7.com
Many have heard of "suicide by cop"-- a suspect behaves in such an irrational and dangerous way that a responding cop must kill him or face being killed himself. The response of authorities (and other rational people) is to excuse and defend the cop (if they want other cops to continue doing their jobs).
(2) But public gun-owner registries potentially raise another issue: "suicide by lawful gun owner." If a mental case invades a lawful gun-owner's home and forces him to kill in self-defense, will authorities and media respond with understanding? Or will they cite the mental case as a holy martyr in their crusade against self-defense?
Everybody knows being an anointed agent of the state immunizes people from the evil magic of guns.
"a useful method of curbing illegal gun activity and encouraging responsible gun practices."
The only responsible gun practice they will admit to is confiscation.
It's another indication of how even well-intended government policies
Really? A national gun registry gets the "well-intended" pass? Fair. All restrictions on abortion are well-intended.
You know only democrats are well intentioned. It is only used in conjunction with their authoritarianism.
steer clear of New Zealand. check.
But, they've got.... Lord of the Rings. And sheep.
And that toothbrush fence.
"says registries are "a useful method of curbing illegal gun activity and encouraging responsible gun practices." *cough*bullshit
We already had a pistol registry. Guess how well that has prevented pistols from being used in crimes.
When you outlaw the guns, the outlaws still have the guns. But the citizens can't defend themselves. No thanks.
Judging by the compliance rates, just as a bonus you now have a whole lot more people who are technically criminals. This is a great boon to the state, as Dr. Floyd Ferris so kindly explained.
I do enjoy that when a foreigner came to New Zealand and committed a terrorist attack, the response was to outlaw guns held by citizens.
We need a Royal Commission to determine why criminals do not voluntarily turn in their guns to authorities.
This is why we need a national registry of government employee email users. So that all of their email accounts can be frozen so they can't pull stupid shit like this.
They are probably conservatives anyway so this is good in most cases.
Kiwi firearms owner here. The Police are incompetent at IT - it took them 3 tries to get a working criminal investigation database system up and running.
Article above doesn't mention that last year an abandoned police station was broken into and the paperwork covering 15 years of firearms licensing applications was stolen (along with pieces of uniform and some tear gas). This was paperwork for roughly 1/3rd of the NZ population's firearms owners. (https://www.stuff.co.nz/national/300608068/gun-licence-information-among-documents-stolen-from-former-auckland-station)
My one hope is that ACT form a significant chunk of the next government (elections in October this year) and as part of the governing agreement get this register abandoned.
Otherwise I'll be taking the full five years to register ANYTHING to give the Police the maximum opportunity to leak/be hacked first.
You assume incompetence over intention after their every action is proven to be based off of absolute lies? I'd assume malice as you're more likely to be right and have protected yourself than if you just assume they are a modern hapless Barney Fife.
Yeah I've dealt with enough of them that incompetence is the mostly likely source. Malice would require an intellect not detected. The firearms licensing part of the police force has long been where they dropped their less capable members.
For example the Australian terrorist who shot up Christchurch in 2019 didn't qualify to get a license but the local police force were both lazy and incompetent and said "yeah why not" anyway.
Not to justify the violation of your liberties, and there's quite possibly a big piece of something that I'm missing, but this sounds like the opposite of a concern to me.
That is, leaving paperwork lying around sounds more like general incompetence rather than strictly IT related, an abandoned police station sounds the opposite of a police state, and unless you've way undersold the break in, some burglars breaking into an abandoned building in the middle of the night sounds distinctly unlike the sort of organization that would firebomb police stations, ICE detention centers, Federal courthouses, or otherwise seek out armed individuals for confrontation.
Again, not to get all "'murika, fuck yeah!" kinda specifically because the 'murika situation is so much worse, but NZ's national police force is about the size of CPD and the IRS "80K new personnel in a decade" is something like 5.5X the size of either one.
Violation of my rights to privacy via incompetence are just as egregious as those done by design. Far better that they never had that information to lose in the first place.
As a general rule Kiwi's are too apathetic about politics to get worked up enough to firebomb police stations (or abortion clinics). The rare terrorism events have all been imported from Australia, Somali, Sri Lanka or whathaveyou.
Meanwhile the red and blue teams swap governments every six to nine years and the main changes are the colour of the ties worn by the minister.
Violation of my rights to privacy via incompetence are just as egregious as those done by design. Far better that they never had that information to lose in the first place.
Unless "incompetence" means something different in New Zealand, we're going to have to go with something between "agree to disagree" and "the latter sentence resolves any discrepancies with the former".
You're missing a lot, as usual. First off, if they can't even secure paper records, why on earth would anyone expect them to properly secure more vulnerable electronic records? Second, the station was only abandoned because they'd moved to a new one, not because the police had been "defunded" or whatever. Finally, the kind of burglars who would break into an empty building to steal random junk might just try and break into houses whose owners aren't at home to steal guns. Even if not so inclined themselves, there's nothing to stop them from giving or selling the information to people who would.
They are probably conservatives anyway so this is good.
That was worth posting twice.
Why do they need bank account info for a gun registry? Well, whatever the reason, I am sure it is well intended.
The bank account info was for paying compensation for the confiscated firearms in 2019.
Which was another sore point as the amounts paid out were ... at best described as inadequate, at worst pathetic. As example I was "offered" NZ$900 for an AR-15 that had cost NZ$2500 new and had been fitted with a very nice RISE drop in trigger that was another NZ$400. "Offered" as in an offer I can't refuse" and $900 as it was "used". Even brand new still in the box firearms they refused to pay more than 90% of value on.
Seeing that doxxing is happening, perhaps it wasn't such a bright idea after all.
Pretty sure that was the whole point of the article.
They couldn't just cut you a check? They had to have your bank account info? You didn't see this a big red herring? Look what Canada did to the truckers.
I haven't touched or even seen a cheque in .... 15+ years. I'm not sure they're even legal anymore. It takes less than an hour for an electronic funds transfer to go through.
If I want to do anything semi-legal I'll use cold hard cash. For things that are cromulent I'll do a bank transfer.
I am, indeed, pleased that I ended up not moving to Zedland.
The events expose an underappreciated downside to government registries: In addition to civil liberties concerns, so much information in a concentrated database is a potential privacy nightmare.
Uh, Joe, is privacy not a civil liberty in your universe or have you lost any conception of liberty or semblance of libertarian cognition to the point that you're just stringing together liberty-sounding n-grams like a retarded AI?
Even if you meant in the gun debate issues like privacy tend to take a back seat to the right to self-defense, is self-defense not a, if not *the* quintessential, civil liberty? To whom do you presume to be speaking that regards self-defense as a civil-liberty but not privacy?
Seems like you're speaking of/for/by/to people who, like an AI, pretend to care or present themselves as caring about one but really don't care about either.
Digging this hard for shit to fling must be exhausting.
Drown in it.
I think mad.casual has a point. What did you have, Wizfart?