Thread: Firearms ban in Western aussie

I have over the years collected studies relating to this issue and almost universdally they show that the imposition and maintainence of what is effectively "gun control" for want of a better term requires a hell of a lot more preparation and finesse than simply throwing a legal act on the table and saying in effect youve got 5mins to comment on it before it goes into circulation.

Cuddly costers croisant and coffee circle no longer have the protection of the socialist princess ,instead now Emperor Chrstopher has resaddled them with the court fool Nash!,a situation that may very well recoil nd bite the shinyarsed budgie shit wearing desk soldiers on their derrieres.That is down the line .

To my original point-my collection of studies shows a common theme -in considering this issue one also must gauge the inputs of health ,education , employment, policing ,judicary to name a few into the issue for it impacts on all albeit indirectly. The studies also show conclusively that such legislation is often a hasty political kickback resultant from the intransigence of legal entities to detect and control illegal activities which impact on society in general, but also ensure that these are not allowed to flourish.
some could well argue with justification that this presently could do with some major improvement in the top echelons of CCCCC and judiciary for that matter
What interests me and as yet Im unable to discern is the mention of mental health.a nation with good mental health supports and systems is a happy nation -we have neither!!

the well studied canadian l;ong arms register also clearly shows how a politically contrived act of law can become a humungous millstone about the mooters neck!

sorry if I deviated from the them vs us them of this conversation but as a voter impacted by this I thought id throw in a few observations whilst i could.

@Tahr, I’m happy to be a forum “fudd”. Just looked it up. Learn something new every day.

It’s really interesting to me how this thread has gone. It’s no surprise though. Question the thinking behind of some of the posters’ comments - e.g. the making stuff up, the “PNHQ want all guns gone” comments, etc - and it doesn’t take long for the snide remarks and general bitter & twisted comments to start rolling in.

This, sadly, is normal.

The snidey remarks are water off a ducks back to me. If that’s all you’ve got to offer, then you’re on a one way ticket to nowhere. What I would prefer to see though is ideas, organisation, planning, actions. What are you actually going to do about it?

Originally Posted by Flyblown

@Tahr, I’m happy to be a forum “fudd”. Just looked it up. Learn something new every day.

It’s really interesting to me how this thread has gone. It’s no surprise though. Question the thinking behind of some of the posters’ comments - e.g. the making stuff up, the “PNHQ want all guns gone” comments, etc - and it doesn’t take long for the snide remarks and general bitter & twisted comments to start rolling in.

This, sadly, is normal.

The snidey remarks are water off a ducks back to me. If that’s all you’ve got to offer, then you’re on a one way ticket to nowhere. What I would prefer to see though is ideas, organisation, planning, actions. What are you actually going to do about it?

The thread hasn't gone anywhere?

It's always the same people with the "I'm okay Jack" opinions that are surprised and indignant when some people don't agree with their rose-tinted view on things, even in the face of evidence to the contrary.

All the Firearms just banned in Western Australia were Registered. Anyone who thinks that same sort of behaviour will not happen in New Zealand is delusional. NZ Police have gone from Administrators to Regulators. Just saying.

Originally Posted by BSA

All the Firearms just banned in Western Australia were Registered. Anyone who thinks that same sort of behaviour will not happen in New Zealand is delusional. NZ Police have gone from Administrators to Regulators. Just saying.

Yup, less than 5 years is my estimate at this point...

Will be interesting to see if WA cops pay compensation for associated gear such as dies, cases, projectiles etc.

Originally Posted by Ryan

The thread hasn't gone anywhere?

It's always the same people with the "I'm okay Jack" opinions that are surprised and indignant when some people don't agree with their rose-tinted view on things, even in the face of evidence to the contrary.

If anyone thinks "Im ok Jack" I doubt that they would be contributing to this discussion. And I haven't heard or read anyone saying that. Just because you imply it doesn't make it the truth.

Every one has their line in the sand. Mine is in a different place to yours no doubt. I think I'm realistic, you no doubt will have some labels for me. But do I feel threatened by the creep? - hell yes.

Our methodology and approach might be different but we are actually on the same side. No matter how unpalatable that might be for you.

Originally Posted by Tahr

If anyone thinks "Im ok Jack" I doubt that they would be contributing to this discussion. And I haven't heard or read anyone saying that. Just because you imply it doesn't make it the truth.

Every one has their line in the sand. Mine is in a different place to yours no doubt. I think I'm realistic, you no doubt will have some labels for me. But do I feel threatened by the creep? - hell yes.

Our methodology and approach might be different but we are actually on the same side. No matter how unpalatable that might be for you.

I'm not implying anything - I recall your stance on MSSAs very well.

You may feel that you're being realistic and that we're on the same side but it's perhaps because now it is your shooting interests that are under threat. The very thing I have been warning about for the ~decade I've been on this forum.

Originally Posted by Ryan

I'm not implying anything - I recall your stance on MSSAs very well.

You may feel that you're being realistic and that we're on the same side but it's perhaps because now it is your shooting interests that are under threat. The very thing I have been warning about for the ~decade I've been on this forum.

Opposing the MSSA ban cart-blanche was an exercise in futility. The weight of public opinion for it was overwhelming. Personally I supported in my submissions (I made submissions) their restricted use for pest control and gun sports. Never owned one and they had no appeal to me. So what?
But for everyone there is a bridge too far. And when that is reached everyone has their own approach to the problem

Originally Posted by Tahr

Opposing the MSSA ban cart-blanche was an exercise in futility. The weight of public opinion for it was overwhelming.

Ah yes, the old herd / lemming mentality. That's precisely why we're in this position now.

Do you think public opinion is going to suddenly change if there's a heinous crime committed with <insert firearm type here>? Hint: it won't.

Originally Posted by Ryan

Ah yes, the old herd / lemming mentality. That's precisely why we're in this position now.

Do you think public opinion is going to suddenly change if there's a heinous crime committed with <insert firearm type here>? Hint: it won't.

The majority are not lemmings. They actually think they are doing the right thing. As you do.
It could be argued that your minority views reflect those of a lemming. Following the line that will gain you the most approval from your peer group inspite of the futility of it and the many failed strategies.

You are correct, if there is another heinous gun crime committed public opinion will be galvanised as strong as previously or stronger against us. Get ready for it and get ready to lose - because your bloody minded and blinkered opposition wont mean a shit. Regardless of who is in power. With your approach you will be left negotiating for crumbs.

Fortunately in the main the people who will be lobbying on our behalves, even the most conservative of them, will be taking a more reasonable and nuanced approach so not all will be lost.

Yeah. Im going to throw and idea out there that might not be popular, but I think there is an element of common sense to it.

Ok

So we as a community knew there were problems with the old system pre Christchurch. basically it boils down too, it was too easy to get a licence, and magazines over a certain capacity should have been restricted too a certain class of licence. Such as is seen with pistol licences.
It would have done us a world of good as a community if we had of pushed for some such to happen- even if it was declined, we then could have justifiably said I told you so.

Now I dont think the same danger is there re these large calibre weapons. But they are a special class and thier ability is overwhelming in magnitude. I dont want to see them banned as the people who use them have a special sport and dont harm anyone. But recognising they are especially powerful, and that if one is used incorrectly in a high profile manor, that we will lose them. Does it not make sense for our community to suggest some sensible regulations aimed at stopping thier miss use before something happens? Or someone decides they just dont like them.

‘Thoughtcrime and other dystopian terms come to mind when reading about the Aus cops logic with this crappy legislation - banning even though those calibres have never been used in a massacre or to shoot cops but “we’ll ban them just in case they MIGHT get used in a shooting”
Spare me days! (as Mr Crump would say!)

@whanahuia, what you typed in above sounds fairly reasonable...

when you dig into it a little deeper, the reality is unfortunately a bit more complex.

most guys involved in service rifle will be able to tell you long stories how for years and years before CHC, we tried to point out to police how crazy their ever changing rules around MSSA's were. the number of iterations these rules went through, and the amount of loops genuine sport shooters had to go through would surprise you. magazines over a certain capacity WERE restricted to certain endorsement holders. the big failure by police was to allow non-endorsed shooters to buy AR style rifles (this and the ease of purchasing 30 round mags was pointed out to them time and time again).

restrictions on functional characteristics would have made some sense, but what we ended up with was a poorly administered system of rules that really revolved around appearance rather than function.

the reality is that in terms of some lunatic deciding to commit an atrocity with a centerfire rifle, there is very little difference between a 7mm-08, a 7mm RM and a 338 Lapua. in fact, it takes significantly more skill and expense to become proficient with the types of calibers the WA police are now banning...

I would also suggest that getting a license wasn't easy. It was the fact the procedure wasn't followed. Because bureaucracy failed they have now put in so much that it shouldn't. But there is still the human factor and as such it can always fail

I'm guessing this is about the government being terrified of Mark and Sam after work...
https://youtube.com/@markandsamafterwork