Black Power affiliates are slamming the Government's proposal to ban patches during a Select Committee briefing on Tuesday, with one saying it brings "extreme risk".
The Select Committee was discussing the proposed Gangs Legislation Amendment Bill, which would ban gang patches in public spaces as well as give police more powers to crack down on gangs.
Former Black Power member and advocate Eugene Ryder said the Bill overlooks why gangs exist and banning patches won't do anything.
"I was a state ward. I was abused and I found solace in the Black Power community here in Wellington," Ryder said.
He said many of the other members had similar experiences in state care and the gang was a family for him.
Ryder said the Bill would punish people for who they associate with, not their actions, which he sees as an "extreme risk".
He added gang members will simply start wearing colours or get full-face tattoos in response to the ban.
"Whether you are part of a gang whanau or not, you should enjoy the same rights as every other New Zealander," he said.
He added wahine and children associated with gangs could stop utilising services because they would be worried about being punished by association.
He said instead of this Bill the government should address the reasons people join gangs such as abuse in state care, poverty and subpar housing.
It was a stance shared by lifetime Black Power member Denis O'Reilly who said both Labour and National are constantly looking to blame things on gangs, instead of fixing the reasons why people join gangs.
O'Reilly hit out at the Government, saying: "Putting facts before the current coalition seems to be a waste of time."
O'Reilly said he has no time for people intimidating the public and agrees with the intent of the Bill, but hit out at the approach.
He said the police already have plenty of tools to deal with poor behaviour from gangs and there is no need for a ban on patches.
"I think the trajectory the police have been on in the last couple of years is good."
He suggested gang harm has been hyped up in the media and it creates "panic and disruption".
Several other submitters, including the Free Speech Union and Human Rights Commission, voiced concerns over how the ban would be implemented and how it's likely to disproportionately affect Māori.
Free Speech Union's President Jonathan Ayling said the Bill isn't precise and it's not clear what would be considered a gang. For example, he questioned whether climate activist groups would be considered gangs under the legislation.
Ayling said he's concerned the Bill would suppress New Zealanders' freedom of expression – which is a fundamental right.
Meanwhile, Mana Mokopuna - Children and Young People's Commission said it was worried about how the Bill could directly and indirectly impact children.
Chief Children's Commissioner Dr Claire Achmad said for some young people leaving a gang means leaving their families.
Additionally, the New Zealand Law Society said the legislation should be sent "back to the drawing board" and warned it could have a myriad of unintended consequences.
NZ Law Society representative Chris Macklin warned the ban could capture people unintentionally wearing gang-affiliated material.
However, the Bill had support from New Zealand Police Association President Chris Cahill who said it simply gives police another tool to use against gangs.
Cahill added it's important police have the ability to use discretion on how the Bill is implemented though, specifically in rural areas where gang members greatly outnumber officers.
However, Justice Minister Paul Goldsmith has signalled submissions from gang members are unlikely to change the legislation.
In fact, earlier in the year Goldsmith said that even if the ban is found to breach the Bill of Rights that wouldn't stop the Government from enforcing it.
"There's always a balance and we'll work our way through the human rights implications but of course we campaigned on bringing in these policies, we've been elected, the Cabinet's made the decisions, we've prepared the legislation and we're going to do what we said we're going to do," he said at the time.
He added that ultimately if it was found in breach it wouldn't stop the Government from making it law.
