Thread: surrender your FAL

Know Army personnel who live on site but store their personal weapons at private addresses of mates with the blessing of the Arms Officer.

Originally Posted by GDMP

Its now a requirement for retailers to keep ammo locked away, so its no longer accessible to the public.If that's the case then there should only be a requirement for one or two individuals who work there to have a license, not all employees, as they no more have access to it than a member of the public who walks in off the street.

but that would be common sense so we wont be doing that will we!!!!

So what happens if you buy a flash harry safe specifically as part of your application and your application is declined.

Well any minute now, one of those bloody good cops who enjoys shooting will be along to explain why these new applications of an existong law are a good idea.

Surely?

Originally Posted by schwen

Talking to the son of a friend last night over dinner. He registered a change of address as required (has a FAL but no guns). Apparently, as he was moving into a rental apartment in which he could not install a gun safe he was asked to surrender his licence or face arrest.

Apparently the new law changes require FAL holders to have secure storage, and without it, you don't have the right to hold the licence. Sort of makes sense, but seems OTT.

It seems like a total over reach of authority given that all firearms will need to be registered soon

Originally Posted by GDMP

Its now a requirement for retailers to keep ammo locked away, so its no longer accessible to the public.If that's the case then there should only be a requirement for one or two individuals who work there to have a license, not all employees, as they no more have access to it than a member of the public who walks in off the street.

Oh, for goodness sake. Stop it! You're applying logic. Simply not needed.

Originally Posted by mikee

Following along you must need a garage now if you apply for a drivers licence ??

Not a garage but a current WOF and registration on the vehicle being used.

The requirement for having security at your own place of residence instead of at an alternative FAL holder's place is based on the experience that some FAL holders won't or haven't got around to returning the firearm after using it to the alternative security. They go to work or away for a day or more and their place is burgled and the unsecured firearm is stolen. Similar thing happened to an acquaintance of mine who subsequently had his licence revoked for five years. Most people are honest and the average firearms licence holder would be more honest and law abiding than the majority of society from what I've seen. Unfortunately though, there are always those few who that let the rest of the law abiding FAL holder's down.

maybe.....just maybe instead of all guessing and taking pot shots at the police anyone interested in actually finding out could ring their local arms officer for clarification.
Trying to goad police officers who are members on here into responding is very likely to get no response as I'm sure like most government agencies police are likely bound by a code of conduct that precludes them from speaking about operational information publicly or on social media.

No hate guys but arguing about this kind of stuff on here never ends well.
In reality is it really that hard to have a padlock and chain around your water heater or a shackle fixed to a truss in your roof space if it is indeed a requirement ? I'd be inclined to do either of those before handing in my FAL with the current format and amount of mucking around it takes to get your FAL reinstated.
I mean even having a gun rack securely mounted to a stud in your linen closet or built in robe would be compliant if done properly and easily removed and no evidence it was ever there if you moved out of said rental property.
It seems to me like it would be very easy to comply with the secure storage component quite cheaply and effectively if so required, but it's much more fun to argue about it on the interweb and make ourselves look dumb instead of fit and proper

firearms-secure-storage-guidance (3).pdf

There is no reason he cannot install a gunsafe in his flat, permission from the landlord or property manager is not required.
He will have to make good any holes etc when he leaves

If it introduces a dynamic into the flat, that might be another issue

Originally Posted by jackson21

Attachment 213359

No, you'll have to do better than that.
The current iteration is version 4.0, dated 30 Nov 2022.

Originally Posted by no1_49er

No, you'll have to do better than that.
The current iteration is version 4.0, dated 30 Nov 2022.

It says V4 on front page, which I assume is version 4. Published July 2022 and on Police website August 2022.

Originally Posted by OGM

Also the word "apartment" says Body Corporate to me. If this is the case (s)he may be pushing the proverbial uphill.

If they don't want to give permission I could see them citing s.42b(1) which says:

42B Minor changes

(1) Without limiting section 42A(1), it is unreasonable for a landlord to withhold consent to a minor change to premises.
(2) In this section and section 42A, a minor change is any fixture, renovation, alteration, or addition of or to the premises that—
[...]
(d) does not compromise the structural integrity, weathertightness, or character of any building; and
[...]
(g) does not breach any obligation or restriction relevant to the premises (for example, an obligation or a restriction imposed by a bylaw, a planning or body corporate rule, or a covenant).

Emphasis added.

Yes and No, internals of a unit in a Body Corporate should still exist as private property to that particular unit. However as you have pointed out this could easily cross over as outer shell would most likely come under BC or 50% to outer BC and 50% to inner private and any intertenacy walls would likely be 50% each unit. So you would have to be very careful and quite open to any interpretation to decline on risk to watertightness which is a fairly touchy subject. This would be viewed on the over cautious side if even a remote risk exists.

Only chance of any pragmatic solutions put in place to these situations will be if Nicole McKee is in office in 2023.

Overall most apartments are fairly secure compared to older freestanding houses with quite a bit of external measures in place. Maybe this should be taken into account? I wonder what the stats are like on apartments and firearm thefts?

Originally Posted by mikee

Following along you must need a garage now if you apply for a drivers licence ??

agree 100% and this MUST be pushed.... and pushed hard.....

Originally Posted by jackson21

It says V4 on front page, which I assume is version 4. Published July 2022 and on Police website August 2022.

Rather than upload a now out of date document, I would suggest that the better option is to provide a link to the current version which in this instance is version 4.0 dated 30 Nov 2022, here https://www.firearmssafetyauthority....transportation "Your" version has a blue title page; the current one is green.
Don't blame me; I'm only the messenger.

the price of a secure lockup in commercial premises is not over the top these days.....its relatively easy to store some bits of your guns there...and other bits,bolts n barrels of shotguns at your residence...both locations now do not hold a complete firearm.... and secure storage lockups are pretty bullet proof,pun intended.