Thread: surrender your FAL

Originally Posted by KeyMod

I think what you’re looking for is page six of that document

“Our Reputation

We act professionally, exercise good judgement and are accountable for our behaviour. We must not do anything that may bring Police into disrepute. We consider the impact of our behaviour on Police at all times, including online or in social media, and outside of work. We protect Police’s integrity and reputation by speaking up about any inappropriate behaviour we see and hear. By addressing inappropriate behaviour either directly or through managers, we make Police a safer and healthy workplace.“

I guess if somebody got fired from, resigned or retired from police that won’t apply?��

Originally Posted by norsk

Thats it.

Discussing a topic and voicing your support or explaining your reasons against would not be bringing the organisation into disrepute?

End of the day it’s up to them.

Reading that I’d say actively voicing opinions etc that run counter to those of the organisation in a public forum where people know you’re employed by police would run foul of it.

“We must not do anything that may bring Police into disrepute. We consider the impact of our behaviour on Police at all times, including online or in social media, and outside of work.”

That’s awfully broad..

Originally Posted by Finnwolf

I guess if somebody got fired from, resigned or retired from police that won’t apply?��

Can’t imagine it would, once the employment relationship has ceased it wouldn’t mean anything unless there’s something in their employment agreement that stipulates it remains in force for x amount of years post employment or something

Been down this road before with my old man. As a licence holder, you need to be able to secure a firearm for 24hrs.

Chain around the hot water cylinder worked for him.

Arms officer told him that there were too many instances of fire arms left unsecured due to the person not having access to the ‘off site’ gun safe due to late evening hunts for example..

Fair enough IMHO.

I really cant believe that anyone would use the HWC as an anchor point for a firearm, a HWC would be a hell of a lot easier to remove with a tow rope than a gun safe...and messy....no thief worth his pinch-of-shit is going to turn the power or the water off before driving off with the HWC in tow.

The idea is to secure against a casual opportunist thief.

Not much anyone can do to combat a battery angle grinder, no matter how thick the steel (or someone running a tow rope down your hallway)

Originally Posted by Tui4Me

The idea is to secure against a casual opportunist thief.

Not much anyone can do to combat a battery angle grinder, no matter how thick the steel (or someone running a tow rope down your hallway)

A crescent and a screw driver and maybe side cutters is all it takes to remove a HWC, any thief should have them

Originally Posted by 7mmwsm

If it is under the supervision of a licence holder, a firearm does not have to be secured.
You can sleep in a tent with a firearm with you unsecured.
So technically, unless you leave the premises it doesn't need to be secured.

Is there a maximum/minimum distance as to how far one can be from the unsecured gun?

Agree about the angle grinder. Those 1mm cutting wheels go through stuff like light sabres.
Also (hoping against hope it falls on its arse and gets shit-canned) the registry will be used for a shopping list by criminals. Either through misadventure from someone leaking stuff by accident, leaking stuff through coercion/affiliation or just plain hacking.
Then you could quite possibly have someone breaking into your home if they find a number of firearms they want in one spot, and use someone's family to make you open the safe.
It will happen. The shopping list thing happens in Aussie more than they like to admit.
Joe public FAO gets his firearms stolen within a few months or even weeks of renewing his license and firearms details generally when they aren't home as that is probably just easier

Originally Posted by csmiffy

Agree about the angle grinder. Those 1mm cutting wheels go through stuff like light sabres.
Also (hoping against hope it falls on its arse and gets shit-canned) the registry will be used for a shopping list by criminals. Either through misadventure from someone leaking stuff by accident, leaking stuff through coercion/affiliation or just plain hacking.
Then you could quite possibly have someone breaking into your home if they find a number of firearms they want in one spot, and use someone's family to make you open the safe.
It will happen. The shopping list thing happens in Aussie more than they like to admit.
Joe public FAO gets his firearms stolen within a few months or even weeks of renewing his license and firearms details generally when they aren't home as that is probably just easier

I think that might have been one of the uses of the Canadian registry before they abandoned it too....I know it was recorded as having never being used in the solution of any crime but it had been involved in the commission of a few (That and it went over budget by a factor of more than 100 on its original costings...)

yup. from memory the antis suggested it was only going to cost 70 million or so it to do the whole lot. Well make it closer it a billion, but here is a wiki page about it. Does anything seem familiar?
Cost overruns, security issues, taking too long, inaccurate due to a stupid online form (amongst other things) etc, etc.
One of the things that happened was something I was hinting at on purpose. A lot of issues with the database when heaps of people where doing it online at the last minute causing major dramas
something to be learned from that
The second link is obviously a bit firearms biased but we all get the picture. It does look a little different as it suggests that coppers and taxpayers had some concerns over registration actually being useful

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Canadi...earms_Registry


https://justiceforgunowners.ca/the-c...am-has-failed/

https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/tru...lure-1.1278739

wiki link makes interesting/disturbing reading.

Originally Posted by Micky Duck

wiki link makes interesting/disturbing reading.

Like this sentence? "The firearms registry is long on philosophy and short on practical results considering the money could be more effectively used for security against terrorism as well as a host of other public safety initiatives."[16]"