Thread: How to immobilise old fiream to create safe wall hanging

Originally Posted by gundoc

Police sent me a letter telling me to stop doing it or they would prosecute me. I ignored the letter as I knew what I was doing did not constitute any offence. The letter was over 20 years ago and I haven't heard from them yet.

I don't need legislation to "guide me" as I read and understand English quite well and make the effort to keep familiar with the law. Legislation does not tell you what you can do, it only tells you what you can't do, and is required to be quite specific and written in "plain English". There is nothing in the law about modifying a firearm to such an extent that it is no longer able to be considered a "firearm" as defined by law. Once it is a non-firearm then possession is not covered by the provisions of the Arms Act or Arms Regulations. You have realise that the law works both ways, a fact that Police have been known to overlook in the past with some of their policies.

Sure, whatever. It is my opinion, and, only my opinion, that what you are espousing here has the potential to lead licenced firearms owners in a direction that could see them in breech of our firearms laws. To be fair I have unfairly picked on you as your presented a case with the most authority I have read here. It was not my intention to single you out of the crowd who thinks they know how our legislation should be interpreted. I also have no alternative nor definitive answer to the question.

If, as you assert, that you 'read and understand English quite well', what is it that you are reading and understanding to keep familiar with the law if not legislation? What else 'guides you' in these understandings?

Your assertion that the law only tells you what you can't do is misinformed and also dangerous. If this is what you think of law then you have no place suggesting to anyone what their lawful obligations may or may not be. You potentially have a case for being right if you are talking about tax law, which we are not.

I agree with you that there is nothing about modifying a firearm to the extent that it is no longer a firearm. What you then propose by suggesting once it is a 'non-firearm' seems to mean that you are self determining this? By what qualification or professional standard are you able to make this determination?

The only definitive answer we could gain is that is any of this has been tested in a court of law. I have been unable to find any such case. I will look further into it only so that I may be of some use in this discussion in a positive way.

I must reiterate, this is not an attack on you personally, but on the ideas you and others have proposed and thinking about how that might be interpreted by others. If someone were to take your advise, or any of the other suggestions made, and feel that they were complying with the firearms law, they may not be. This is why I am asking these questions to seek clarity on the matter. We are as a group vilified enough in the public eye without further interpreting things in a manner where we think better than anyone else.