Police Firearms Regulation versus LAW

All NZ firearms users will be aware of disagreement in recent years regarding the status of 'free standing pistol grips' and NZ police concerns with the appearance and interpretation of just what defines a MSSA . This lead to the Arms Amendment Regulations 2013 meant to clarify the polices wishes.

Is there an argument for putting ones political telescope to a blind eye (like Nelson) when viewing the rules and instructions that we are required to accept and comply with ?

For example - Our New Zealand Police routinely carry firearms when engaged in certain duties like   Diplomatic Protection, Witness Protection, Armed Offender Squad, International Airport Security, etc. in a reasonable expectation that they may be required to protect lives under Section 48 Crimes Act 1961, the universal right to 'Defend themself or others'. - Of course at all times the police have to comply with the provisions of The Arms Act 1983 , its Amendments and Regulations, - and detailed Police General Instructions F060, F061, F062, F063.

- However, Police Regulation written on page 41 of the Arms Code states: "Self-Defence is not a valid reason to possess firearms." - If this was indeed the law - why are the NZ Police constantly in breach of it by carrying firearms in case they may be needed?

CRIME ACT 1961:
48. Self-defence and defence of another.
Everyone is justified in using, in the defence of himself or another, such force as, in the circumstances as he or she believes them to be, it is reasonable to use.

Police licensing officers regularly question applicants and those renewing existing licences "How do  you feel about guns and self-defence?" - thereby seeking to eliminate applicants who state their legal rights to use "any such force as they believe it is reasonable to use".

So, who among the ranks of the sworn police officers is making a regulation printed in THE ARMS CODE that seeks to deny licensed firearms users part of their basic legal right to self-defence, while claiming and retaining that right for themselves?

Is there again a need to point-out that it is the function of the police to enforce the law - not to make laws to suite themselves.

Marty K.