Results 1 to 13 of 13
  1. #1
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Glen Innes, NSW Australia
    Posts
    6

    Default Possible threat or just a Government misunderstanding?

    Firearms and Weapons LegislationAmendment (Criminal Use) Bill 2020 [proposal at this stage]
    https://www.parliament.nsw.gov.au/bill/files/3733/First%20Print.pdf


    "Firearm Precursor definition.
    In this section and in section 51K—
    firearm precursor means any object, device, substance, material or document
    used or capable of being used in the process of manufacturing a firearm or
    firearm part, including (but not limited to) the following—
    (a) moulds for making firearm parts,
    (b) milling, casting or rifling equipment,
    (c) digital blueprints within the meaning of section 51F,
    (d) computer software or plans.
    (4) This section applies in relation to a person regardless of whether a firearm or
    firearm part is actually manufactured."

    Which appears to include any one with a file, a hacksaw and a hand-drill up to those of us who have our own small machine/wood working shops.

    It may well be argued that no Australian Government would harass anyone who has no interest in firearms but subsection (4) above doesn't say that, in fact, it says the opposite.

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Location
    York, North Yorkshire UK
    Posts
    6,439

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Eoin View Post
    Firearms and Weapons LegislationAmendment (Criminal Use) Bill 2020 [proposal at this stage]
    https://www.parliament.nsw.gov.au/bill/files/3733/First%20Print.pdf


    "Firearm Precursor definition.
    In this section and in section 51K—
    firearm precursor means any object, device, substance, material or document
    used or capable of being used in the process of manufacturing a firearm or
    firearm part, including (but not limited to) the following—
    (a) moulds for making firearm parts,
    (b) milling, casting or rifling equipment,
    (c) digital blueprints within the meaning of section 51F,
    (d) computer software or plans.
    (4) This section applies in relation to a person regardless of whether a firearm or
    firearm part is actually manufactured."

    Which appears to include any one with a file, a hacksaw and a hand-drill up to those of us who have our own small machine/wood working shops.

    It may well be argued that no Australian Government would harass anyone who has no interest in firearms but subsection (4) above doesn't say that, in fact, it says the opposite.
    This looks very much like a knee jerk reaction or a ploy to get rid of all firearms. Possibly using the draconian powers presented by the covid19 crisis. Governments have for years given themselves powers in times of crisis that are never repealed even though they were supposed to be when the crisis was over. Just a method of retaining power and control.
    Best Regards:
    Baron J.

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Mar 2020
    Location
    Sa
    Posts
    24

    Default

    That wording leaves a little to be desired.

    Just as a matter of interest, why would anyone want a firearm? Firearms are best in the hands of police, defence and professional shooters licenced and hired to remove troublesome animals

    As an ex defence member I am acutely aware of safety precautions and the damage a firearm can cause. Allowing anybody else to own a weapon is asking for trouble: The vast majority of people I know who own a firearm have no idea on safety!

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    Athelstone, SA 5076
    Posts
    4,255

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by mwork View Post

    Just as a matter of interest, why would anyone want a firearm? Firearms are best in the hands of police, defence and professional shooters licenced and hired to remove troublesome animals
    !
    Most personnel of the police forces have no idea how to accurately shoot a handgun. The recoil scares them!

    The atheletes of the shooting sports want them as their sporting implements. Cant shoot competitivly unless you have one. Cant compete at Olympic and Commonwealth Games shooting sports without also. Not to mention those competition events held locally.

    And then we have hunters who need to gather meat for the table.

    Then there are those non paid volunteers who also do feral pest culling for the various Govt Agencies and farmers.

    Do I need to go on?

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Mar 2020
    Location
    Sa
    Posts
    24

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by eskimo View Post
    Most personnel of the police forces have no idea how to accurately shoot a handgun. The recoil scares them!

    The atheletes of the shooting sports want them as their sporting implements. Cant shoot competitivly unless you have one. Cant compete at Olympic and Commonwealth Games shooting sports without also. Not to mention those competition events held locally.

    And then we have hunters who need to gather meat for the table.

    Then there are those non paid volunteers who also do feral pest culling for the various Govt Agencies and farmers.

    Do I need to go on?
    That's rubbish, police are trained in firearm safety and like defence are required to qualify.
    Typically, hunters do not shoot for food, they get some sort of enjoyment from shooting signs and killing wildlife. Very rare for a hunter to actually eat what they shoot. Not a good idea anyway, animals in the wild have all sorts of parasites,
    Govt should licence professional shooters for eradicating feral and unwanted animals.
    Giving a firearm to a farmer or John Citizen is like giving a canon to a five year old: no sense, no training and no idea of safety.

    Your statement with regard to police is disrectful, disingenuous and irresponsible. Police receive profession instruction from qualified instructors in the use of firearms. I have shot in a number of inter service competitions against police and found their handling of weapons to be safe, practiced an responsible. To suggest otherwise is irresponsible.

    I would suggest that perhaps you have an issue with your dealings with police. Police are there to enforce the law, if you have issues then I would suggest you examine your issues and why they had issues with you.

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    Bendigo
    Age
    60
    Posts
    419

    Default

    That's rubbish, police are trained in firearm safety and like defence are required to qualify.
    You obviously have not been involved with any gun range where police or DOJ do their training sessions.
    The amount of rules broken, damage done and complete disregard for the rules under which the range is certified is unbelievable.

    Police receive profession instruction from qualified instructors in the use of firearms
    The amount of rules broken during their training sessions indicate that their instructors do not care for or follow the rules that their own authority apply in the first place, how is a trainee expected to respect the safety and rules when their training session openly break those rules and safety that are supposed to be in place.

    Police are there to enforce the law
    And should be applied to all, not one rule for their own members and another for the rest.

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Mar 2020
    Location
    Sa
    Posts
    24

    Default

    There appears to be more than one member here with police issues. Just because you have been caught breaking the law and being held to account does not give you licence to disrepute the police service, your opinions are both irresponsible and false. I served almost three decades in defence and shot on multiple occasions with members of the police Force. On no ocassion did I have cause for concern.

    I would suggest you join eskimo and examine your own actions which gave cause for the police to take exception with your actions.

    Reports of civpol shooting indescrimately without pause for the safety of people are rare.

    Before taking aim at our law enforcers I would suggest you observe a responsible attitude.

    I would also ask admin to take a responsible attitude in examining posts denigrating our law enforcement professionals.

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    Bendigo
    Age
    60
    Posts
    419

    Default

    Just because you have been caught breaking the law and being held to account does not give you licence to disrepute the police service,
    I will assume you are referring to the previous post.
    Nope not me, just observed as someone involved with rifle ranges observed first hand. I am unsure where the rest of your statements stem from they were not issues previously raised.

    Nothing further from me you obviously appear to be trolling for a fight.

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Mar 2020
    Location
    Sa
    Posts
    24

    Default

    Nope, not trolling at all. Our police have a very difficult job and I take issue with anyone who disrespects their professionalism and sullies their name.

    I'll be reporting your and eskimos posts, I consider them irresponsible.

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Location
    York, North Yorkshire UK
    Posts
    6,439

    Default

    Mwork,

    Definitely a troll !

    Not only do you come across as anti gun lobby, but you seem to have no regard for the freedoms that you might not be entitled to much longer.

    Whether the police or what have you are trained in firearm safety is not the point.

    Then having the audacity to threaten people that disagree with you is utter cowardice !
    Best Regards:
    Baron J.

  11. #11
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    near Rockhampton
    Posts
    6,216

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Eoin View Post
    It may well be argued that no Australian Government would harass anyone who has no interest in firearms but subsection (4) above doesn't say that, in fact, it says the opposite.

    You did not include the entire part of the legislation.

    Sections 51J and 51K
    Insert after section 51I—
    51J Offence of taking part in unauthorised manufacture of firearms or firearm parts
    (1) A person who—
    (a) knowingly takes part in the manufacture of a firearm or firearm part, and
    (b) knows, or ought reasonably to know, that the manufacture of the firearm
    or firearm part is not authorised by a licence or permit,
    is guilty of an offence.
    Maximum penalty—imprisonment for 20 years.

    (2) For the purposes of this section, a person takes part in the manufacture of a
    firearm or firearm part if—
    (a) the person takes, or participates in, any step, or causes any step to be
    taken, in the process of that manufacture, or
    (b) the person provides or arranges finance for any step in that process, or
    (c) the person provides the premises in which any step in that process is
    taken, or suffers or permits any step in that process to be taken in
    premises of which the person is the owner, lessee or occupier or of
    which the person has the care, control or management, or
    (d) without limiting paragraph (a)—the person possesses a firearm
    precursor for the purposes of manufacturing a firearm or firearm part.


    (3) In this section and in section 51K—
    firearm precursor means any object, device, substance, material or document
    used or capable of being used in the process of manufacturing a firearm or
    firearm part, including (but not limited to) the following—
    (a) moulds for making firearm parts,
    (b) milling, casting or rifling equipment,
    (c) digital blueprints within the meaning of section 51F,
    (d) computer software or plans.
    (4) This section applies in relation to a person regardless of whether a firearm or
    firearm part is actually manufactured.
    (5) This section does not apply in relation to a person who is acting in the course
    of the person’s duties as a member (other than a police officer) of the Police
    Force.
    So the legislation says you have to own a device for the purpose of manufacturing firearms. You could own a milling machine because it has many other uses, but owning a rifling button like this https://www.ebay.com.au/itm/Rifling-...m/153306337836 could land you 20 years in jail in NSW if this legislation passes.

    NSW already has laws on owning g-code for firearm parts.
    Gold, the colour of choice for the discerning person.

  12. #12
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Glen Innes, NSW Australia
    Posts
    6

    Default

    I think that it is vague enough for misinterpretation, this is the second time that the Government has brought up this draconian legislation.

  13. #13
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Mackay North Qld
    Posts
    6,446

    Default

    It stops RIGHT NOW!.
    There are inaccuracies on both sides of this argument. In any case it is not a post suitable for this forum. Instead of disrupting and upsetting our normally harmonious environment in our forum why not be committed and proactive and push against the legislation through your own gun club of contact your local member,write letters to the newspapers, it is not effective here and just serves to disrupt the forum.

    1. Eion. Click your own link provided and read the document- especially the preceding paragraph to what has already been cut and pasted.

    It mentions specific intention and specific activity and PROHIBITED Weapons.

    Unless you are are making UZIS eg or similar PROHIBITED WEAPONS in your shed, I doubt anyone is going to going to jail over some screw drivers and a files.

    Common sense indicates that could be half of Australia headed for the klink. The SSAA has been through this with their lawyers and I checked today on their website doesn't indicate a problem.I can tell you if there was a problem they would be all over it.

    2. Some police training or the lack of frequency is a cause for concern.I am aware that our Qld police only do few hours individually per year.I respect our police and it puts them at risk if their proficiency training is limited.I understand this to be true as I have it from the source.

    To expect our police to place their lives at risk on the basis of a few hours training per year is scandalous. This, I believe may be occurring in other states but can't document it.. As far as the unsafe actions of range supervisors goes if you cannot substantiate it, don't post it here.

    3. mrwork It is not acceptable to accuse our members as in post 7 "Just because you have been caught breaking the law and being held to account does not give you license to disrepute the police service, your opinions are both irresponsible and false. "

    As far as your opinions of who should have firearms you seem to know far better than the State governments who legislates that to own a firearm there must be obligatory training and testing. Certainly there will be people who don't show good gun safety but they are way outnumbered by licensed and trained people who drive cars and kill far more people than guns through their own lack of safety and responsibility.

    Believe it or not we shoot with police too ,they are club members and better shots than their non club colleagues.

    Baron J.
    The date on this proposed legislation way predates Covid 19 though I understand Covid 19 is used as a reason to close gunshops in some states though this has been partially reversed through SSAA action.Similar nonsense occured in the US as well.How it helps prevents infection is beyond me.


    This thread is now closed.

Similar Threads

  1. IMPORTANT Just entered and it said "Threat Detected"
    By gazza2009au in forum FORUMS INFO, HELP, DISCUSSION & FEEDBACK
    Replies: 23
    Last Post: 28th Dec 2016, 10:37 AM
  2. Government Censorship Thread
    By Barry_White in forum FORUMS INFO, HELP, DISCUSSION & FEEDBACK
    Replies: 7
    Last Post: 2nd Jan 2008, 11:11 AM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •