The Kiwi Gun Blog found an insane situation in Canada.

It allows some people to hide their faces for their gun license.

So we checked the situation in New Zealand….

Would This Happen Here?

We asked Ali Sedgwick, the Ministerial Services Advisor at Police National Headquarters.

Please advise if a veiled Muslim woman can get an exemption from having a photo on a firearms license.

She ignored the simple Yes / No question and responded:

As per the Police website, firearms licence photos are ‘passport style’. This means the requirements follow that of the Department of Internal Affairs.  You can find more information about photo requirements here.

You can find information about covering the head for religious reasons here.

We checked out the two links and they are in direct contradiction of one another.

This one appears to demand a clear view of the face:

While this one explains how to avoid the requirements of the first:

An endorsement is available if “you wear a head covering for religious or medical reasons”.

So… Is that a “Yes”?

We wrote back for confirmation – citing the contradictory information.

Sedgwick responded with: “I stand by my earlier email”. Then simply ignored further communications. 

The arrogance of these people…. Also a clear breach of the Official Information Act.

The Kiwi Gun Blog have now asked the Police Minister for an answer.

Stay tuned.

A reader of the Blog puts this best on our Facebook page:

“…the idea of having a reliable form of ID, and then completely undermining it by allowing exceptions that blatantly open the door for fraudulent use, is just plain bonkers!” JT

No Religious Requirement

In a 2004 case the Herald covered two accused women wanting to remain veiled in court:

Malaysian lawyer and Islamic law expert Kamar Ainiah Kamaruzaman said:

“There are extreme members of the Muslim community who would love to use this as an excuse to protest that Muslims are being discriminated against.”

But she is also adamant that “in Islam it is not obligatory to veil your face in public” and says the few Muslim women who do veil their faces do so for cultural or historical reasons.

Nafreen Hannif, a national representative for the Islamic Women’s Council, agrees.

“Covering of the face is not actually compulsory in Islam. One school of thought is that you do cover, but there are exceptions for business transactions and giving evidence in court so that people you are dealing with know who you are.”

Then came a local cuck:

University of Auckland law professor Paul Rishworth believes it’s better for the court to avoid the religious debate altogether and simply accept any claim that removing the veil violates religious precepts.

“It would be wrong for a court to rule on whether Islam truly requires veils.”

This is a classic example of a hand wringing liberal from the west making it harder for moderate Muslims to make progress.