This is the short commentary on what is before the Upper House right now.
There are 2 seperate reforms.
One in the next year or so (based on the Law Reform Commission from 2014-2016 - 114 recommendations- Strangely this wasn't mentioned before but now is...suddenly)
The other is before the Legislative Council (Upper House) now.
Its already passed the Legisaltive Assembly (Lower House).
It's up to the 2nd reading.
It isn't far off becoming law.
To read more on it, go to the link & scroll down to the bottom of Page 938.
Click Here -> C41 S1 20220316 All.pdf (parliament.wa.gov.au)
Below is the very small look & Labor's Hon. Stephen Dawson made some pivotal comments & said the bill contains four key reforms. Again his comments in the Legislative Council are in (black) & some views about them after (red)
REFORM # 1
"The bill contains four key reforms. The first reform introduces a firearms prohibition order scheme into the Firearms Act 1973. Under these amendments, police will be able to make an FPO against anyone who, if in possession of a firearm or related item, would likely result in undue danger to life or property; or if the person is not a fit and proper person to possess a firearm; or it is in the public interest for an FPO to be made against the person."
So this Fire Prohibition Order (FPO) put the wind up many people as it looked like Police could take out a FPO on a person, any person at all that they deemed suitable for whatever reason, firearm related or not. So as perform to search them, their vehicle, their property without a warrant at any time of the day or night. Anyone. No consultation & poorly explained...no wonder lawful people had the wind up. Should have brought people along all the way.
Well the government has no choice now, they will have to come good, and deliver on the claim that it would have "no effect upon lawful owners"
Seems like the criteria applied a FPO is...
- "anyone who, if in possession
of a firearm or related item, would likely result in undue danger to life or property"
- "or if the person is not a fit and
proper person to possess a firearm"
- "or it is in the public interest for an FPO to be made against the person."
We have to wait, in good faith, to see what appeals process is in place for people wrongly assigned a FPO. Also what disciplinary action might be directed at Police for wrongly or maliciously applying a wrongful FPO. And also, can an FPO be applied to a person who does not possess legal or illegal firearms. It raises many questions if that's possible. It will be a "Search Anythime Without A Warrant 24/7 For 10 Years Order"
REFORM #2
"The second reform is new, and refers to illegal manufacturing, participating—termed “take part in”—in unlawful firearms activity and firearms technology offences. The amendments will keep up with technological advances by making it illegal to possess or use “firearms technology” to manufacture plastic 3D firearms. The use of this technology has been on the rise in the United States of America, and can produce firearms capable of firing live bullets and which are difficult to detect through traditional metal detectors and scanning equipment. Although there have so far been very few detections in Western Australia, the McGowan government is seeking to get ahead of this trend."
Who would disagree with this?
If you make it with hand tools that came out with the first fleet or from the latest Metal 3D printer...who cares, they're illegal.
Mind you if someone were to fire a 3D polymer gun with current technology they're likely to have serious surgery from the first shot or possible one very soon after the first shot. That surgery will be before their court appearance. You can't prevent stupid, but you can jail criminal idiots.
REFORM #2
"The second reform is new, and refers to illegal manufacturing, participating—termed “take part in”—in unlawful firearms activity and firearms technology offences. The amendments will keep up with technological advances by making it illegal to possess or use “firearms technology” to manufacture plastic 3D firearms. The use of this technology has been on the rise in the United States of America, and can produce firearms capable of firing live bullets and which are difficult to detect through traditional metal detectors and scanning equipment. Although there have so far been very few detections in Western Australia, the McGowan government is seeking to get ahead of this trend."
If you make it with hand tools that came out with the first fleet or from the latest Metal 3D printer...who cares, they're illegal.
Mind you if someone were to fire a 3D polymer gun with current technology they're likely to have serious surgery from the first shot or possible one very soon after the first shot. That surgery will be before their court appearance. You can't prevent stupid, but you can jail criminal idiots.
REFORM #3
"The third key reform is a suite of increased penalties for firearms-related theft offences under the Criminal Code and the offences targeting drive-by shootings or discharging a firearm at a house or other building under the Firearms Act."
Perhaps 15-25 years jail minimum PER FIREARM?
THAT IS, EACH CONVICTION SERVED CONSECUTIVELY, that is, serve one sentence, then serve the next. Get the minimum of 15 years but it was 3 firearms, serve 45 years.
THAT IS, EACH CONVICTION SERVED CONSECUTIVELY, that is, serve one sentence, then serve the next. Get the minimum of 15 years but it was 3 firearms, serve 45 years.
I mean serious criminals & dangerous people with illegal guns, intent of committing gun crime or supplying someone intent of committing a gun crime, it is a serious matter isn't it?
Imagine if Martin Bryant came to buy those 3 illegal guns he had (he had no gun licence so they were all illegal once he owned them). Imagine if you realised 3 illegal guns is 45 years in jail, how many people would sell him the guns? How manly people would wonder is this a police sting? Would anyone wonder "Will this dimwitted person break the law, get caught & dob me in?" or just make the sale?
I see no problem having the strongest illegal gun penalties on the planet.
I see no problem the jail terms being 2 or three times that of the closest other jurisdication.
I see no problem with that if those sentences were on top of any crime committed with those guns.
I see no problem on such a monsterous penalty that has no effect at all on anyone who is a lawful firearms owner except perhaps reduce the chances of their firearms being stolen.
It won't stop some.
Some people are deterred from importing/exporting drugs in some Asian countries with a death penalty. But many would be put off & convicted offenders do not reoffend.
A dangerous criminal banged up for 15 to 20 is causing no gun crime in the community. That is a great way of improving community safety.
Mind you penalties rarely deter people, the likelihood of getting caught does. With each conviction, the likeihood will increase in the minds of most criminals. If a large percentage can be deterred & some bad criminals go to jail, that's a good result.
Regarding the firing, discharging of a firearm at a building. Well throw that up to a ridiclous level too. If you do a drive by shooting & are convicted I have no problem with our taxes keeping you behind bars for 20-30 years. If someone is injured & killed, add those seperate charges with penalties to run consecutively. (That is one jail term is served, then the next and so on. Some ends up with several jail terms from a drive by, serve the complete total of time)
REFORM #4
"The final reform is to legislate a permanent firearms amnesty."
Well that's great. Firearms industry, stakeholders, lawful shooters have been pushing for this for...well decades. If any amnesty was announced it always had a cut off date presumably to add some hoped for urgency to get anything handed in on time. Not sure but I think most police were happy to recieve a firearm in good faith between amnesties without penalty & the only exception might be if it was reasonably thought to have been used in a crime. That was fair.
Again the main thing to remember are the 4 reforms in the Bill before the Legislative Council are above. The third reading is coming. It didn't come this week. More will be fleshed out. WALabor control both houses. So they can even snip back debate time & they have the numbers to prevent any committess & oppose any & all amendments if they want.
We wait in good faith.
BUT OVERALL, REMEMBER THAT THE POLICE MINISTER HAS SAID THERE WILL BE NO NEGATIVE EFFECTS ON LAWFUL FIREARMS OWNERS.
WE HAVE TO TAKE HIM AT HIS WORD UNTIL WE SEE MORE.
FOR NOW, HOLD TIGHT, TALK TO YOU LOCAL FIREARMS DEALER/SHOP.
KEEP BUYING WHAT YOU NORMALLY BUY. TRY TO BUY LOCALLY OR AT LEAST IN WA.
STAY COOL, CALM & COLLECTED.
TALK TO YOUR LOCAL MP & LET THEM KNOW YOUR DISPLEASURE & GET THEIR ASSURANCE THAT THEY SUPPORT THE MINISTER'S CLAIM THAT LAWFUL FIREARM'S OWNERS WILL NOT BE NEGATIVELY AFFECTED.
Imagine if Martin Bryant came to buy those 3 illegal guns he had (he had no gun licence so they were all illegal once he owned them). Imagine if you realised 3 illegal guns is 45 years in jail, how many people would sell him the guns? How manly people would wonder is this a police sting? Would anyone wonder "Will this dimwitted person break the law, get caught & dob me in?" or just make the sale?
I see no problem having the strongest illegal gun penalties on the planet.
I see no problem the jail terms being 2 or three times that of the closest other jurisdication.
I see no problem with that if those sentences were on top of any crime committed with those guns.
I see no problem on such a monsterous penalty that has no effect at all on anyone who is a lawful firearms owner except perhaps reduce the chances of their firearms being stolen.
It won't stop some.
Some people are deterred from importing/exporting drugs in some Asian countries with a death penalty. But many would be put off & convicted offenders do not reoffend.
A dangerous criminal banged up for 15 to 20 is causing no gun crime in the community. That is a great way of improving community safety.
Mind you penalties rarely deter people, the likelihood of getting caught does. With each conviction, the likeihood will increase in the minds of most criminals. If a large percentage can be deterred & some bad criminals go to jail, that's a good result.
Regarding the firing, discharging of a firearm at a building. Well throw that up to a ridiclous level too. If you do a drive by shooting & are convicted I have no problem with our taxes keeping you behind bars for 20-30 years. If someone is injured & killed, add those seperate charges with penalties to run consecutively. (That is one jail term is served, then the next and so on. Some ends up with several jail terms from a drive by, serve the complete total of time)
REFORM #4
"The final reform is to legislate a permanent firearms amnesty."
Again the main thing to remember are the 4 reforms in the Bill before the Legislative Council are above. The third reading is coming. It didn't come this week. More will be fleshed out. WALabor control both houses. So they can even snip back debate time & they have the numbers to prevent any committess & oppose any & all amendments if they want.
We wait in good faith.
BUT OVERALL, REMEMBER THAT THE POLICE MINISTER HAS SAID THERE WILL BE NO NEGATIVE EFFECTS ON LAWFUL FIREARMS OWNERS.
WE HAVE TO TAKE HIM AT HIS WORD UNTIL WE SEE MORE.
FOR NOW, HOLD TIGHT, TALK TO YOU LOCAL FIREARMS DEALER/SHOP.
KEEP BUYING WHAT YOU NORMALLY BUY. TRY TO BUY LOCALLY OR AT LEAST IN WA.
STAY COOL, CALM & COLLECTED.
TALK TO YOUR LOCAL MP & LET THEM KNOW YOUR DISPLEASURE & GET THEIR ASSURANCE THAT THEY SUPPORT THE MINISTER'S CLAIM THAT LAWFUL FIREARM'S OWNERS WILL NOT BE NEGATIVELY AFFECTED.
WHILE YOU'RE AT IT & FIRED UP, NOW MORE THAN EVER TRY TO GET OTHERS INTO RECREATIONAL HUNTING OR COMPEITION SHOOTING. BUILD THE CULTURE.
No comments:
Post a Comment