Most reasonable people are not anti reform. Nor are they pro reform for the sake of reform.
That's how reasonable people think.
I'm in favour of any reform that is over due, is actually required & serves an actual purpose.
So if the Firearms Reform is a good thing, is fair & reasonable I don't have a problem with that.
Having said that, I still await to hear why GunShops were shut down in a Pandemic Lockdown as that seems to go far deeper than any "in the interests of public safety" reasoning. It seemed to come in without detailing what the elevated threat was. Or why the firearms, parts & ammunition was made so utterly difficult to freight around within WA & between WA & other states.
There was also the matter that there was no consultation on this Bill that has already gone to Parliament & was followed with the comment that they would pass this THEN consult with stakeholders, gun industry, shooting competitors or any general public.
So On Consultation. No, none, none at all, none. Concerning.
But I'll try to keep the cynical switch turned off...
One of the big issues for me is Firearms Prohibition Order (FPO)
In principle I'm ok with this, however it needs specificity & detail as to why one is applied AND it also has to have catch clauses to capture any police officer from abusing the power of FPO. Also have a list of penalties they would be subjected to if they abused the system. At first glance if you have a FPO you can appeal to the SAT but the information can be deemed as confidential & won't be released to you. I expect you will have to take it to a higher court to get that information at which point you've spent a enormous of money, you're likely to be unsuccessful & they can withdraw the FPO, retain the information in confidence & if there was an abuse by a member of the WAPolice you won't know & you will not be allowed to find out and they cannot face discipline or face legal action.
How's that sit with you?
Parts diagrams will be banned. Any books with schematics of vintage, military, obselete or any other firearms you could be charged. The intent of this will have to be slugged out in the part of the Legislations passage through parliament called "Consideration in Detail" which MPs often refer to as "CID"
There is a valid reason for this part but it does creep over into (I hope) very unintended areas.
In one area, its very subjective but if a police officer might decide that the cleaning mat (below) is subject to the legislation you might be square in the middle of serious tripping point for you, an otherwise innocent law abiding firearms owner.
If its on your computer you could well be in trouble. If you have a copy of a military history book that has an exploded view of a Owen or Sten gun for example, yes you'll be in trouble. If someone's caught with these guns or it appears they're trying to manufacturing them, yup throw the book at them but if it's on page 238 of a book on your shelf you haven't even looked at in years...yup you could be in trouble. If there's a provision that says prosecutors must prove intent, then it's pretty reasonable but if not...no this is needless over reach with a serious jail time & criminal record attached.
That is an interesting point. Its a basis of the law. INTENT.
I'm not sure how much of proving the presence of intent will be engineered in to the Act but at this point I'm also considering & deeply concerned about the Government, the Department & the upper levels of WAPolice Bureacracy and what their combined "intent" might really be.
Now jumping all over the place, there is apparently a fellow I do not know nor follow who is over east. I think he owns a business & runs a Youtube Channel. I think he is a right stirrer on freedom marches etc and that's his choice but he ended up with a FPO in NSW due to a photo or video (?) of him holding and/or possibly firing an AK-47.
An AK-47 is not a "machine gun" nor an "assault rifle" - It's a Russian designed select fire, semi automatic rifle. The are not new, they are an old design & are among the most common semi automatic rifles on the planet because they have a simple design, easy to manufacture and very easy to operate. They're not the most accurate, but they are among the most fail safe & durable. Hence they are used by many nations and by many terror organisations.
Apparently the photo/footage was taken OVERSEAS where it was 100% legal. I assume he put it on social media & it was spotted & reported.
I gather he does not own firearms & it's not known if he's likely to be a threat to public safety with a firearm.
With the FPO he can be stopped & searched, his vehicle or the vehicle he's in searched or any property he owns, controls or manages can be searched without warrant. And a property he's visiting.
As a result he films every roadside stop by police & puts the footage online.
There's a lot of stops by police.
Back to WA there's also a provision in the Bill to ban bump stops & folding stocks.
That's pretty incredible too...
Why?
Well they already are illegal, everyone knows that, except the people arranging this legislation.
I'm beginning to think someone not very smart is putting together legislation, no one is checking it & it is appallingly embarassing. (Did I mention no consultation with Firearm Dealers, Sporting Groups, Industry or any part of the private sector related to legal fireams?)
And in my best K-Tel presenter voice "BUT WAIT THERE'S MORE..." there's also the part to ban detachable stocks.
Ummmm, dear Sherlock in the Department...all and every single long arm has a detachable stock.
If that provision was passed you will make every single firearm in WA illegal except handguns that are owned by revolver/pistol clubs. Is there an adult you can phone for help please?
I assume they mean detachable butt stock which is different to a rifle stock. They seem to not know what they meant or said or both. Some shotguns of course have detachable butt stocks but the trigger mechanism goes with it & if remove that the barrel goes seperate. You cannot fire it when its seperated.
I've heard of Yes Minister & Yes Prime Minister the TV Show. Big fan of those shows, big fan of The Hollowmen too. I'm beginning to think perhaps they were actually documentaries of Training videos for up & coming professionals in the department hoping to get upwardly mobile.
Suppresors are finally got better definition but its a pity as most only reduce the sound signal to below 120 or 130db where its then safe for the shooter to use without ear protection. Brilliant on the competitive range or when hunting pigs or dangerous vermin in thick scrub. That would be common sense as they are easily available over the counter in NZ but point is, as before chances on the Police Bureaucrats relenting on that are still zero at this stage.
Interesting as you can use one with approval as a Ag Department employee. Now how on earth are they so damn evil due to (we can only assume) possible misuse or part of a crime that they're allowed for a Government employee yet not for legitimate use hunting mroe safely or range use more safely?
Now there's also...a firearm that is not working or is parts, be careful. If you've got a hammer off a vintage gun or may even extend to, for example, magazine on grand dad's de-acvtivated World War II .303 (de-activated or rendered) you could possibly be charged at present under this mess. Don't stress but this will have to be clarified & much of this hasn't. Now don't blame anyone for jumping the gun & getting anxious & worried. With the deliberate lack of information, the currently woeful content as well as what looks like a deliberate lack of clarity let alone consultation who wouldn't jump to conclusions. Who wouldn't expect the worst. I think contact your usual lobby groups, shooting clubs, SSAA, Shooters Union, Firearm Clubs, Firearms Dealers, local MPs & get to learn more.
But first glance, this advert for "parts" in Queensland buying it, transporting it here & possessing it here (even if you legally own the correct firearm for the parts) might get you a very serious date with a judge.
It will be an expensive date in court, you might end up with a criminal conviction, a criminal record & lose not only all your properly registered firearms, you will lose the ability to seek a licence for decades & you might find the criminal record a barrier in your life applying for a job etc. Oh lets just add on top, should a member of the WA Police Force decide so, you might end up with a Firearms Prohibition Order & be subject to all the problems that has.
Likewise, the idea that reloading ammunition is said to be likely to be banned, but I'd hold off here, just wait & see. It will come out in the wash but it maybe confined to people who cannot have firearms anyway, so would not be able to have ammunition or powder, casings, primers etc anyway. Wait & see.
At present if your spouse is in Perth & you're 100s of kilometres away & you ask her to pick a packet of blank casings for reloading, basically just brass shells...well you may not be able to buy them, if you can unless she has the identical licence to you she may not be able to purchase & transport them. we just don't know. Imagine had there been proper consultation. I know, I know, total crazy talk.
The part the MPs will have to address is why is each reform required. It will be pushed as clamping down on Organised Crime or to clean up the current Act to help maintain or improve Public Safety. MPs need to identify which is which. Then they will have to ask, how does that work?
We have far too much, far too many examples of people living their lives whilst separating rights & responsibility. They are inseparable. That should always be the case, rights & responsibilites are inseperable.
So too it should apply to police officers, with powers installed there MUST BE A CLEAR LINE OF RESPONSIBILITY ATTACHED. CLEAR LIST OF PENALTIES, PROCESSES OF APPEAL & COMPLAINT FOR BOTH AN ALLEGEDLY WRONGED MEMBER OF THE PUBLIC AND A POLICE OFFICER.
They must know their responsibilities, they must be trained to know whether a firearm is dangerous or illegal. I hope they do. They should be liable if they don't know & make a move on a member of the public out of ignorance. If an FPO can be made against you, without it going before a judge or court & there's very limited justification to be provided if you appeal it, well we've arrived in a very thuggish state.
Its going to get messy...
ARROW 1 - So the commissioner has to be "satisfied" the firearm (legal or not), major part of a gun (unspecified), prohibited accessory (not listed) or ammunition & it's likely to end up being a danger to life & property. The commissioner has to make a judgement call on what the person's intent is, but they won't be talking to them. No I'm no legal expert but does seem that its a bizarre departure from legal process
Not sure how the Commissioner can be satisfied with whatever unmentioned criteria of whatever "reasonable persons test" is being used or that anything or everything the police decide is confidential is kept suppressed from the person accused.
That's going to get messy (even if its going to be rammed through.
That is an interesting point. Its a basis of the law. INTENT.
I'm not sure how much of proving the presence of intent will be engineered in to the Act but at this point I'm also considering & deeply concerned about the Government, the Department & the upper levels of WAPolice Bureacracy and what their combined "intent" might really be.
Now jumping all over the place, there is apparently a fellow I do not know nor follow who is over east. I think he owns a business & runs a Youtube Channel. I think he is a right stirrer on freedom marches etc and that's his choice but he ended up with a FPO in NSW due to a photo or video (?) of him holding and/or possibly firing an AK-47.
An AK-47 is not a "machine gun" nor an "assault rifle" - It's a Russian designed select fire, semi automatic rifle. The are not new, they are an old design & are among the most common semi automatic rifles on the planet because they have a simple design, easy to manufacture and very easy to operate. They're not the most accurate, but they are among the most fail safe & durable. Hence they are used by many nations and by many terror organisations.
Apparently the photo/footage was taken OVERSEAS where it was 100% legal. I assume he put it on social media & it was spotted & reported.
I gather he does not own firearms & it's not known if he's likely to be a threat to public safety with a firearm.
With the FPO he can be stopped & searched, his vehicle or the vehicle he's in searched or any property he owns, controls or manages can be searched without warrant. And a property he's visiting.
As a result he films every roadside stop by police & puts the footage online.
There's a lot of stops by police.
Back to WA there's also a provision in the Bill to ban bump stops & folding stocks.
That's pretty incredible too...
Why?
Well they already are illegal, everyone knows that, except the people arranging this legislation.
I'm beginning to think someone not very smart is putting together legislation, no one is checking it & it is appallingly embarassing. (Did I mention no consultation with Firearm Dealers, Sporting Groups, Industry or any part of the private sector related to legal fireams?)
And in my best K-Tel presenter voice "BUT WAIT THERE'S MORE..." there's also the part to ban detachable stocks.
Ummmm, dear Sherlock in the Department...all and every single long arm has a detachable stock.
If that provision was passed you will make every single firearm in WA illegal except handguns that are owned by revolver/pistol clubs. Is there an adult you can phone for help please?
I assume they mean detachable butt stock which is different to a rifle stock. They seem to not know what they meant or said or both. Some shotguns of course have detachable butt stocks but the trigger mechanism goes with it & if remove that the barrel goes seperate. You cannot fire it when its seperated.
I've heard of Yes Minister & Yes Prime Minister the TV Show. Big fan of those shows, big fan of The Hollowmen too. I'm beginning to think perhaps they were actually documentaries of Training videos for up & coming professionals in the department hoping to get upwardly mobile.
Suppresors are finally got better definition but its a pity as most only reduce the sound signal to below 120 or 130db where its then safe for the shooter to use without ear protection. Brilliant on the competitive range or when hunting pigs or dangerous vermin in thick scrub. That would be common sense as they are easily available over the counter in NZ but point is, as before chances on the Police Bureaucrats relenting on that are still zero at this stage.
Interesting as you can use one with approval as a Ag Department employee. Now how on earth are they so damn evil due to (we can only assume) possible misuse or part of a crime that they're allowed for a Government employee yet not for legitimate use hunting mroe safely or range use more safely?
Now there's also...a firearm that is not working or is parts, be careful. If you've got a hammer off a vintage gun or may even extend to, for example, magazine on grand dad's de-acvtivated World War II .303 (de-activated or rendered) you could possibly be charged at present under this mess. Don't stress but this will have to be clarified & much of this hasn't. Now don't blame anyone for jumping the gun & getting anxious & worried. With the deliberate lack of information, the currently woeful content as well as what looks like a deliberate lack of clarity let alone consultation who wouldn't jump to conclusions. Who wouldn't expect the worst. I think contact your usual lobby groups, shooting clubs, SSAA, Shooters Union, Firearm Clubs, Firearms Dealers, local MPs & get to learn more.
But first glance, this advert for "parts" in Queensland buying it, transporting it here & possessing it here (even if you legally own the correct firearm for the parts) might get you a very serious date with a judge.
It will be an expensive date in court, you might end up with a criminal conviction, a criminal record & lose not only all your properly registered firearms, you will lose the ability to seek a licence for decades & you might find the criminal record a barrier in your life applying for a job etc. Oh lets just add on top, should a member of the WA Police Force decide so, you might end up with a Firearms Prohibition Order & be subject to all the problems that has.
Likewise, the idea that reloading ammunition is said to be likely to be banned, but I'd hold off here, just wait & see. It will come out in the wash but it maybe confined to people who cannot have firearms anyway, so would not be able to have ammunition or powder, casings, primers etc anyway. Wait & see.
At present if your spouse is in Perth & you're 100s of kilometres away & you ask her to pick a packet of blank casings for reloading, basically just brass shells...well you may not be able to buy them, if you can unless she has the identical licence to you she may not be able to purchase & transport them. we just don't know. Imagine had there been proper consultation. I know, I know, total crazy talk.
The part the MPs will have to address is why is each reform required. It will be pushed as clamping down on Organised Crime or to clean up the current Act to help maintain or improve Public Safety. MPs need to identify which is which. Then they will have to ask, how does that work?
We have far too much, far too many examples of people living their lives whilst separating rights & responsibility. They are inseparable. That should always be the case, rights & responsibilites are inseperable.
So too it should apply to police officers, with powers installed there MUST BE A CLEAR LINE OF RESPONSIBILITY ATTACHED. CLEAR LIST OF PENALTIES, PROCESSES OF APPEAL & COMPLAINT FOR BOTH AN ALLEGEDLY WRONGED MEMBER OF THE PUBLIC AND A POLICE OFFICER.
They must know their responsibilities, they must be trained to know whether a firearm is dangerous or illegal. I hope they do. They should be liable if they don't know & make a move on a member of the public out of ignorance. If an FPO can be made against you, without it going before a judge or court & there's very limited justification to be provided if you appeal it, well we've arrived in a very thuggish state.
Its going to get messy...
ARROW 1 - So the commissioner has to be "satisfied" the firearm (legal or not), major part of a gun (unspecified), prohibited accessory (not listed) or ammunition & it's likely to end up being a danger to life & property. The commissioner has to make a judgement call on what the person's intent is, but they won't be talking to them. No I'm no legal expert but does seem that its a bizarre departure from legal process
Not sure how the Commissioner can be satisfied with whatever unmentioned criteria of whatever "reasonable persons test" is being used or that anything or everything the police decide is confidential is kept suppressed from the person accused.
That's going to get messy (even if its going to be rammed through.
ARROW 3 - Not list of what constitutes "the public interest" - Says otherwise...by who's reckoning, the Police Officer or the Commissioner & what's the avenue for appeal?
ARROW 4 - If the person subject of a FPO appeals their decision, they're going to have a poor time appealing if the "intelligence" remains secret & it's not available to them. This is going to be apparent to anyone fair minded & sensible & yet the WA Govt is behind this.
ARROW 5 - Seems a FPO can be applied to anyone. In fact it applies to firearm owner or even if the person doesn't own, never has owned are firearm and doesn't have an application pending. So ANY WESTERN AUSTRALIAN CITIZEN can be a subject of this mechanism to allow searches of them, their vehicle, the vehicle they're passenger in, any any prioperty they're visiting, be it friend or acquatance.
We're still to check, but if you have a FPO against you & you get invited to person's home for a BBQ you better check if they have legally owned firearms on the premises. If they do, even if they're safely stored & secured to the highest standard someone might still get in trouble due to a FPO person being near firearms. Waiting to confirm this one...you should be remarkable disappointed & yet totally unsurprised should it be the case.
Meanwhile, if you have upgraded the stock on your rifle, got a spare grip, these may be illegal to possess & you could be in deep trouble.
THIS IS WHAT HAPPENS WHEN A GOVERNMENT DEPARTMENT MAKES LEGISLATION WITHOUT CONSULTING THE STAKEHOLDERS OR THE GENERAL PUBLIC. IF EVER THERE WAS A PROVEN REASON FOR BUREACRATIC REFORM IN WESTERN AUSTRALIA, HERE IT IS. ITS "YES MINISTER" GONE MAD & ON STEROIDS.
Contact your local MP, your clubs, sporting group, lobby group, WAFarmers, PGA etc ASAP
