Shoot anything this weekend?
Got your adler yet or are you waiting for the ban on the 7 shot to expire?
Also to any WA posters, did you remember to make a submission for the Review of the 1973 Firearms act review before the cutoff?
Melbfags get out
Lawfag here. I might be able to shed some light on the process and the politics behind the Adler and NFA review.
>Got your adler yet or are you waiting for the ban on the 7 shot to expire?
If I were people with Adlers I'd be happy with a 5 shot for the moment. You can always just by the [inevitable] kit that arrives to convert them to 7 shot, assuming they remain legal on a Cat A or B licence. Similarly if they decide to limit them to 5 shots there will be conversions back to 5 shot made available by Nioa.
>Personally holding off on any lever guns till the big NFA review comes out.
I think this is a prudent move. If I owned say a Winchester L/A .22 with a 15 round mag I wouldn't expect to keep it for long, but I’ll come back to this.
>Any idea as to what will change?
This is the million dollar question. You have to remember that this review is taking place in the middle of a number of major political, social and security challenges. Let me outline it over a couple of posts as I’m a verbose cunt.
The anti-gun movement has spent 20 years brainwashing people that guns are bad. There's no need for facts, just emotions. If you ever try to debate one they'll just go straight for the appeal to emotions argument.
The reality is while there are increasing numbers of firearms owners in Australia (and firearms). There are less as a percentage of the population in the major cities. The product is many people will never encounter the use of firearms in their lifetimes. If they do it comes as a shock, i.e. they go to a country retreat and are frightened when they see a man with a dog and a pair of rabbits. Oh the horror!
So, the electorate is mostly ignorant to facts, but holds a general hostility to firearms.
This links to the political arguments
I get right into other lawfags time and time again whenever one of them brings up gun laws but they will always ignore me. The reason is the educated in Australia are beholden to the left. Why does the Left hate guns. Firstly, because the left love emotional arguments. Secondly, because the Left have held a doctrine of disarming populations since the October Revolution. The Cold War might be over but the ideological arguments seeded by the Marxists decades ago are still deeply entwined in the world’s Leftist parties. An armed population threatens Leftist governments, so therefore disarming the population is always a priority for them.
Here in Australia this manifests as the Greens’ policies. The ALP are competing with the Greens for the Left’s vote, so the ALP will sell shooters out at the first moment things look shaky for them.
>think of the children!
Next we have the Nationals. The Nationals have become increasingly weak over the past 20 years. Perhaps this will turn around, but as the weaker partner in the Coalition they will tow the line more and more often. Remember the Nats didn’t manage to stop the 1996 laws so how will they stop the next ones seeing as they are weaker now?
Do not trust the Liberal Party with this one. The LP is stretched at the moment and has shown it will sell out classic liberal principles if needed. The LP will win the next election. Only the most foolish would suggest otherwise. That means the NFA review will be under the Liberals’ control. The issue with the LP is Howard’s relentless reminding everyone of the 1996 reforms means many MPs are brainwashed into thinking they were effective.
But, the LP are vulnerable in the senate. They know this and I’ve warned several frontbenchers I know about the risk of centre-right populist parties to their vote.
We’re in the middle of a war against Islam. Make no mistakes about it despite the media’s attempt to pretend otherwise, we’re in the middle of a theological clash of civilisations. It’s been going on for a long time but it’s got to the point where widespread violence in our community is only one crisis away. For those of you not involved in law enforcement or the legal fraternity the police and other agencies are presently stretched to breaking point containing the spread of radical Islam in Australia. Well, to put it more accurately we’ve already lost the battle to contain it and we’re just trying to stop its adherents from committing acts of violence. This is a separate debate, but the product is the federal and state ministers are acutely aware of the issues with firearms in the Muslim community.
It’s important to remember that licenced firearms owners have amongst the lowest rates of criminal offences of any group in Australia, with IIRC police and ambos being the only lower group. So the issue isn’t with licenced firearms owners. But… if you refer back to the social and political issues it means we’ll be the whipping boy for any measures.
What can you do?
The temporary import ban and the NFA review will both occur this year. The temporary import ban is the remit of the federal justice minister, whereas the NFA is a mix of state Attorneys-General and federal ministers.
What you can do specifically is write to your state and federal MPs advising them that you take this matter seriously and reject being treated as a presumed criminal in waiting.
On a broader note the only reason we didn’t have an outright ban on the Adlers is because the senate is controlled by cross benchers. I would strongly advise people to vote in the senate for one of the minor parties which supports firearms owners. Doesn’t matter which one, they all share preferences with each other. Make sure you remind your local MPs about this too, as it will force them to at least consider the matter.
The SSAA is about 30 years behind the NRA in terms of political developments. I’ve been really disappointed at how slow they’ve been mobilising a coherent political strategy which supports us. Remember there are several hundred thousand licenced shooters in each of the major states, more than enough to control the upper houses/senate come election time.
Been doing load development for the 686 (just 38 special target loads with wadcutters) and have not been able to create an accurate load with AP70N.
Going to pick up some Trailboss this week hopefully and use load data from the US forums for cowboy action so hopefully get something accurate from that.
Also I want the trailboss to load 32ACP projectiles (60gr .311" dia) into the 303 for shits and giggles.
>Shoot anything this weekend?
Here, took the Tikka T3 CTR out albeit with the Lantac Dragon muzzle brake. It literally cuts recoil in half, and feels like shooting 223 now. Bloody brilliant.
Lastly some legal advice. Most of you would be aware of the film The Castle and how they have to be compensated for their property.
Well, if the Commonwealth acquires any property through a change in law (such as banning certain types of firearm imports etc) it must provide compensation on just terms. This is because s 51(xxxi) of the Commonwealth Constitution requires it to do so.
There is no requirement for states to do the same. The states have what's called plenary powers. A state can legislate on any matter not exclusively the prerogative or jurisdiction of the commonwealth, or any matter the commonwealth has not legislated on.
What does this mean? Well any of the States can change the law and require you surrender your firearms without any compensation. It's rarely used but it remains a power they possess.
So if you've bought an Adler [7 shot] but can't import it until June, your state could ban it and prevent you receiving any compensation whatsoever.
I'll be on here for the rest of the afternoon if anyone has questions.
I work in a different field but as I'm a shooter myself I try to keep abreast of what's going on in that area.
Essentially they are looking to "rationalise" the laws. As the laws are already very restrictive what it means is there are only a few areas they can go further.
Likely topics to be put forward for consideration:
>Re-categorising lever and pump action CF rifles to Cat C
>Re-categorising lever action shotguns to Cat C
>Limiting the number of CF rifles you can own to 5
>Limiting CF magazines to 5 rounds
>Examining the "genuine needs" permitted. This is vague and there are many proposals, the most restrictive of which would see you need to complete X number of meets at a club each year for Cat A and B licences.
>Providing state ministers the ability to cancel licences without reasons - basically a terrorism preventative measure.
there aren't many Australian hooters bro, why do melbfags have to fuck off?
mad our PTA's are done on the same day?
Ok, hypothetically of course.
Let's say the NFA review puts a 5 round cap on all CF rifle. Could I, go and permanently block the magazine on my 7615 to 5 rounds (weld it, pin it, whatever) then transfer it to a m8, then back to me, while changing the "magazine capacity" bit on the PTA to 5 rounds instead of 10? Would I then get to keep my gun as it now only holds 5?
Hypothetically of course.
It has nothing to do with "the left wants to disarm everyone" and everything to do with fear of the unknown and a lack of understanding of other's perspectives.
Most left leaning people are city dwellers. They've probably never seen a gun before and struggle to imagine why anyone would need one or enjoy using one. The probably struggle to figure out why farmers need one too. Many of them will be 20 something university students who have never had to pay taxes. They don't understand why people get pissy when the government squanders our tax dollars. Many of them are greenies that don't understand that everything we do as a species has some impact on the environment. Those wind turbines they love didn't just sprout out of the ground - they had to be mined and built. The food on their tables required the clearing of land.
For a similar comparison, many country folk have never seen a gay person or never encountered/smoked weed. Which is why many rural Australians are more conservative that city folk - they've never encountered these things associated with the left.. Many of them run or manage their own business. they know how much they spend on taxes and gasp in horror.
In the end, both the left and the right are disconnected from reality. That is the problem.
Oh, and vote LDP next election. They're essentially the party of "I don't give a fuck what you're doing as long as it isn't hurting me or wasting my tax dollars". This busy-bodiness is the cancer in our society.
To continue. Thank fuck for the internet. As society gets better connected we have better understanding and hopefully naive leftys will understand how why people would want to own guns.
canadafag here, good luck with your situation i really hope you guys manage to stall the anti gun movement and hopefully even make some gains
im not very informed on your laws but i know they suck hard, my uncle lives over there
again, good luck komrades.
You're right about there being a bit of a city/country divide. With guns this is especially true.
Most people who give guns a go, start liking them or at the very least begin to understand why we are sick and tired of fuckers trying to ban them. Most city people I run into have never seen a gun and have never met anyone who owns them. They have this image in their head that gun owners are either complete psychos or gun totting hillbillies (which are both obviously uncivilized folk), then as soon as they meet average Joe the gun owner it shatters their little ideal of what gun owners are like.
These discussions almost always play out the same.
Country people have weed everywhere though, they know all about that.
Depends on which state you're in but it would be classified as either an explosive or incendiary round. If they couldn't get you for the ammunition they would get you for the respective crimes of "using a firearm in a dangerous manner" etc.
If you did this you'd be charged with modifying a firearm without a licence, which is a crime in every state and territory.
Secondly, it's an offence to possess a firearm with different details to that recorded with the registries.
Unfortunately they've got every part of this sewn up mate.
>If you did this you'd be charged with modifying a firearm without a licence, which is a crime in every state and territory.
It's perfectly legal to modify a firearm in most states. All you usually ahve to do is inform the registry if it changes a firearms category.
>It has nothing to do with "the left wants to disarm everyone" and everything to do with fear of the unknown and a lack of understanding of other's perspectives.
It's a factor in the implementation of the Greens' policies, but those regarding firearms are part of their core beliefs they've held for decades. These are almost universal across the "old" Left globally, and can all be traced to the Marxist doctrines the Soviet Union funded back in the 50s-80s.
Unfortunately it's a time capsule from another era.
>Oh, and vote LDP next election.
Fully support this position in the upper house. In the lower house unless you live in one of those quirky seats that have independents then vote for the LP. There's no chance the LDP will win so the LP are better than the ALP or the Greens.
>It's perfectly legal to modify a firearm in most states
Without going through every state have a look at:
Section 134A of the Firearms Act 1996 (Vic)
Section 62 of the Firearms Act 1996 (NSW)
>All you usually ahve to do is inform the registry if it changes a firearms category.
So perhaps suggesting he inform the registry he's going to try a sleight of hand to get around a change in the law isn't the best approach.
Honestly, expect the absolute worst because it's the 20th anniversary of port arthur and they WILL bring that up and use it.
Will that even work in their favor though?
GCA tried getting relatives of victims of Port Arthur to speak on their behalf about the adler and it is seeming pretty fruitless for them so far.
By that I mean the majority of public opinion is still pretty anti-fun, but it hasn't really got worse.
Also the Hunting episode of Living with the enemy recently had a 2nd airing on SBS,
here it is if you missed it or if you want to watch it again.
>mfw the hunting scene where Robert Borsak shoots the pigs and Felicity has a small mental breakdown
It will pick up, watch this year will have massive PA stories and documentaries that will always end up being segway'd into the NFA review. Would not be surprised if I lose my lever gun and all my guns with a cap over 5 rounds.
Are you sure? That seems a bit retarded.
>Repair or modification of firearms
(1) A person must not repair or modify a firearm unless the person is authorised to repair or modify the firearm by a licence or permit.
>"repair or modification", of a firearm, does not include work performed by a person on a firearm registered in the name of the person if the work is not of a nature likely to affect the safe operation of the firearm.
Adding a smaller magazine does not affect the safe operation of the firearm. Otherwise would it not be illegal for me to use ANY magazine that is not 10 rounds as that is what was written on the PTA, and I'm assuming is what is on the registry?
What if the cops come round to the local range and I'm there with my AR mag in? They going to charge me for having a firearm that's not the same as what's in the registry? If so that's fucking retarded but I don't think that's how it is.
>A person must not increase the magazine capacity of a firearm if the increase in the magazine capacity would cause the firearm to become a different category of firearm unless, before doing so, the person obtains the consent of the Chief Commissioner.
You would be decreasing it so not relevant.
>(1) A person must not, unless authorised to do so by a permit:
>(a) shorten any firearm (other than a pistol), or
>(b) possess any such firearm that has been shortened, or
>(c) supply or give possession of any such firearm that has been shortened to another person.
>Maximum penalty: imprisonment for 14 years.
>(2) The regulations may provide that certain kinds of firearms are to be considered as having been shortened for the purposes of this section only if they (or specified parts of them) have prescribed characteristics.
In this case if it was a Government passed law restricting the mag capacity, all you would need to do is to get the magazines modified and certified by an armourer (who will issue a certificate) and then update your license particulars.
No need to dick around with transfers.
If magazine restriction happens the Govt. will issued guidelines.
>Got your adler yet or are you waiting for the ban on the 7 shot to expire?
Friendly reminder you can still buy a 10rd magazine completely legally.
No but I had my safe inspected. Copper was nice, asked if my SMLE was passed down to me from family (it wasn't). Didn't even bother to give my safe a shake, was just satisfied to see that it was secured to the brickwork and floor. Checked my rifle's serial no. and license no. and was on his way.
I was a bit worried that I couldn't keep my ammo locked in with the bolt in the top compartment of the safe, but that was fine apparently.
Also forgive my monumental retardation, but if I sell my .303 to a gun shop in hopes of doing an exchange, am I going to get heavily jew'd? I paid $550 and was hoping to get enough out of it to get a cheap 12G shotgun. The bore is nice, all matching numbers, has a sling with it and there's only the tiniest of scratches in the stock, but I have a hard time seeing the sights on it.
Just casually fighting to clean up the bad name the Australian press has given America. One shitty liberal at a time.
America-senpai pls notice me.
What sort of argument is that guy making with copy pasting opinions of people who disagreed with the ruling?
They're still making their arguments on the premises that you've already debunked.
Yeah don't ask. I actually refuted most of them by stating that I wouldn't bring up NRA talking points, so he shouldn't bring up Brady talking points.
turns out he's less liberal than I think but he still wants limitations on guns so he can get fucked but it's a step towards change in Australia.
His whole intent was to reduce it to 5 rounds to get around a potential recategorisation, then play a game through transfers to get his rifle back with the same capacity. No way you could achieve this with s 134A of the Firearms Act 1996 (Vic). You would need the consent of the Chief Commissioner, who obviously won't give it out without recategorising the firearm.
My mistake, it's s 63 not s 62.
Section 63 has a more difficult statutory construction but when you read it together with the definitions in s 4(1) and the list of firearms in Schedule 1, it becomes clear that any amendment to limit Cat B to CF with 5 round mags max would be captured by Schedule 1, therefore becoming a "prohibited firearm" per the definitions in s 4(1), therefore creating an offence under s 63(3).
Oh boy, haven't laughed that hard in a while.
It's a real shame they didn't show the woman actually how much damage wild animals do to the environment when left alone.
Then again, she is a brain dead activist, probably wouldn't have made a difference
Do Geelongfags count?
You should get that money back easy if you sell it on one of the used guns sites.
Seeing as how cars sell better in a private sale, It's pretty safe to assume it'd be the same with guns.
If you have trouble seeing the sights, then you should get a No.4 instead. They cost about the same as an SMLE anyway