2017 NFA is here - please read

[Title_II]

O.K.people the ammo restriction was always there but is very generous,Stop acting like its the end of the world.I have 300+ 7mm rem 400+ .243 300+ .222 1000+ 22LR and assorted shotgun ammo.I remember something like you could have 5000 LR and a 1000 each centrefire calibre

I got more than that rolling around the floor of my garage.

Screw these turkeys. They are just trying to limit firearm ownership as much as possible.

[Title_II]

I thought there was already a limit (I'm talking Qld) to the amount of ammo you can possess, from what I remember it is 10,000 rounds in total of any combination of rimfire or centre fire etc so long as it doesn't exceed that amount. If this is the case that's pretty fair I think.

Fair for who?

Individual person possibly living in a city or suburban area to have a massive arsenal and enough ammo to supply a small army.Public safety is paramount

I live in a town house and I must say I agree, I am not even fully comfortable stock piling my crap... In case of fire and what not. I think that's what you meant? What does supplying a small army have to do with anything? E.g. if I had a rural property or free standing garage, yeah, why not, I it's for personal use and should not be anyones business, but mine.

How would this help public safety? Just because you've been told for two decades that if you have too many guns it's dangerous that suddenly makes it true? What if too many of your neighbors own guns? Is that also dangerous, or is it only dangerous if they are all in one home? I mean, perhaps we should limit the number of firearms licenses per municipality. If a massive arsenal in a home is a public safety hazard then a massive arsenal spread across a small number of homes is just as bad.

I really don't mean any offense, but some people have been, shall we say, "conditioned."

You could have a million rounds of ammo in your house and burn it to the ground and it would not result in an explosion.

Here is a video of what happens. Feel free to skip through it, you don't have to watch every minute.

http://bulletin.accurateshooter.com/201 ... als-truth/

[TheDude]

I thought there was already a limit (I'm talking Qld) to the amount of ammo you can possess, from what I remember it is 10,000 rounds in total of any combination of rimfire or centre fire etc so long as it doesn't exceed that amount. If this is the case that's pretty fair I think.

Yep, it's not a hard limit though. Under the explosives act if you have over 10,000 rounds you need to have explosives signage on your storage area/cupboard.

[Archie]

15. Recreational shooters/hunters
(a) Recreational shooters/hunters must produce proof of permission from a landowner.
(b) Firearms permitted for acquisition, possession or use under this genuine reason are:
i. Category A
ii. Category B

So what about those people who shoot on public land ? Who's going to provide a letter of permission for that ... the Queen ?

Don't know how it works in other states, but in NSW when you shoot in a state forest, you need to have booked it online via the DPI and be carrying the confirmation with you while hunting. So, basically yes.

[<<Genesis93>>]

This was the slowwwest train wreck.... we watched these mongrels 'craft' this nonsense for what... 3 years??
We know the end game...... without a massive change in Aus politics - we will eventually see it.

As far as this one goes,
28 days was always there
We knew the Adlers changes were to be implemented
I'm very surprised the hardwood receptacles remain.
There's nonsense monitored alarm stuff, RADIO where no other comms!!
Bit of other fiddling here and there..

Its a wishlist for all states to implement, they're currently furiously drafting changes to implement as much or as little as they deem POLITICALLY EXPEDIENT...... IF the commies go hard in QLD before the election they'll be rightly crucified... so they'll wait, the others will push through where Assent is not required as i've previously said (hence WA couple of weeks ago)

[<<Genesis93>>]

feeling creative.....

[pomemax]

Well its not realy a surprise its a shopping list .
But here,s my take on it i have 20 plus fire arms My safe is 240 kg+
I have a monitored back to base alarm system that I pay for I have closed loop cctv recorded Offsite too ( its not the end of the world they are you guns secure them I feel better for the security I have )
last year I used in excess of 17,000 rounds in different cal and I reload .
Shooting is my chosen sport it has been for years there are costs and risks associated with it if you have one gun not much cost same risk tho ,
So why do people go on about its not right that I have to have a safe or 28 days to get another firearm because they are the laws at the moment live with them , protest to your local member State and Federal the more the better .
I will give you a hint tho no gun laws have ever been relaxed in Australia they just get harder and more complexed we can maybe slow them down but the politicians will keep at gun owners always will .Because we chose to obey they laws they impose over our rights( link below) by the way the Australian Constitution I believe is based on this
.If laws stopped criminals there wouldn't be any criminals.
I bet i could find an illegal handgun in less than 28 hours if wanted to do something stupid!
https://thelibertarianalliance.com/2014 ... r-defence/

[Gun-nut]

Staying on subject I have completely read the NFA and feel it is fair from both sides.Whats 28 days in a life time it is purely a cooling off period.I recently licensed 3 firearms and it took longer than that . If the government declared that all firearms had to be handed in that would be outrageous.Dare I mention semi autos.I dont have all the data but all the roo shooters I have ever known use bolt actions.I am aware of 3 incidents of fatalities that would not of occurred if the firearm in question was not a semi auto.All when climbing fences and handing rifles over.If you lift the handle on a bolt action it can not fire.When pro shooting I never had the safety on always had the bolt up till ready and the rifle sits in mounts on the dash.It gets put out the window the bolt is closed and target acquired and dropped all in one smooth operation less than 3 seconds or it will probably hop off.I have owned a semi auto shotgun and a 22LR that sometimes fired 2 or more times on occasion.Hunting is all about stalking and taking down your quarry with a well placed humane shot with a suitable calibre.Again its only my opinion

Its shooters like you, that aid the Greens and GCA in achieving their goal of total disarmament. Never give in to their demands, as we learnt in 96', once they start taking your guns, they never stop.

[juststarting]

This is beginning to smell of deadkitty...

[juststarting]

Duncan, reason we in VIC freak out about 28 days, is because our second and further PTAs are issued in more or less minutes. It's the same day gun purchase as long as you already own a firearm. So to take a step back like that is just crazy to us. I've been told that in WA (read: wait awhile) it's 6-8 weeks, so it's an improvement. To us in the sane state however this is a huge setback.

[pete1]

Duncan, reason we in VIC freak out about 28 days, is because our second and further PTAs are issued in more or less minutes. It's the same day gun purchase as long as you already own a firearm. So to take a step back like that is just crazy to us. I've been told that in WA (read: wait awhile) it's 6-8 weeks, so it's an improvement. To us in the sane state however this is a huge setback.

It will be worst for WA it will be 28 days before they look at it so 4+6+ 10 weeks

[duncan61]

I agree with you I have changed my attitude.If you already have centre fire rifles you should be able to acquire more with the minimum of fuss.

[<<Genesis93>>]

As mentioned the existing NFA calls for 28days for all permits....... in Vic it was always limited to the first firearm (and licence)..... there is absolutely ZERO logic to justify a wait for a firearm WHEN YOU ALREADY HAVE ONE IN THE SAFE..... by reasoning its a "cooling down period" [i so detest that inference that LAFOs only buy guys, or indeed buy guns when theyre pissed off at their ostensibly female partners.....]

Of course I've mentioned elsewhere that the 96 NFA refers to the intended reasoning for the 28days as:

that the issue of a permit should be subject to a waiting period of at least 28 days to enable appropriate checks to be made on licensees in order to ascertain whether circumstances have occurred since the issuing of the original licence which would render the licensee unsuitable to possess the firearm or which would render the licensee ineligible for that type of firearm.

So really, given the state of tech and interconnectivity there is no argument to maintain the 28days......just as Vic take from minutes to an hour or a little more to run the 'checks'...

Of course the 2017 version has been updated to take into account the changes in actual tech (as opposed to fantasy tech a la Adler);

Jurisdictions agree that the issuing of a permit must be subject to a waiting period of at least 28 days to enable appropriate checks to be made on licensees in order to ascertain whether circumstances have occurred since the issuing of the original licence which would render the licensee unsuitable to possess the firearm or which would render the licensee ineligible for that type of firearm.

That current for the sharped eyed among us, the only change is that the issue of the permit becomes the 'issuing' of a permit....no doubt some consultant was paid big bucks to add the 'ng' and of course remove the 'e'... luckily he used spell checker...

[juststarting]

Seriously though, would love Ethanboris to weigh in here...

[Heckler303]

Ahh good, lets take a look...


Five seconds later:

[BluEsky]

Heckler303 One can only agree with you! It is by Design the start of the Firearm Grab, and is the Thin edge of the Wedge and the start of the slope!

. ..

[BluEsky]

[quote="juststarting"]Seriously though, would love Ethanboris to weigh in here...[/quote :

Will you be OK? I think we All need to hear from the SF&F Party!

[bigM]

https://www.facebook.com/pbaimportsau/posts/1450973111604043

Dear Paul.

I refer to our various conferences of even date concerning the brand new “National Firearms Agreement” of 16 February 2017 (“The February 2017 NFA”)

I am of the view that the “February 2017 NFA” makes illegal handgun disciplines other than those handgun disciplines that form part of either the Olympic Games or the Commonwealth Games.

There has been a significant omission from the February 2017 NFA, which formed part of the original National Firearms Agreement dated 10 May 1996, through the removal of the words “or World Championships” from the definition of “Genuine Reason” to apply for a handgun license. For ease of reference, I will refer to the original National Firearms Agreement as the May 1996 NFA.

Clause / Item 3 of the May 1996 NFA set out the various “Genuine Reasons” for owning, possessing or using a firearm.

The first bulleted dot point on page 3 of that agreement prescribed:
“Sporting shooters with valid membership of an approved club (defined as participants in showing sports recognised in the charters of such major sporting events as the Commonwealth Games, Olympic Games or World Championships).;

Paragraph 7 of the February 2017 NFA prescribes the following:

“Jurisdictions will restrict the importation, possession and use of handguns for sporting purposes to individuals meeting recognised sporting shooter classifications in the Olympic and ` Commonwealth Games and for other accredited events that meet the conditions in paragraph 14(c)).”

Paragraph 14(c) of the February 2017 NFA prescribes the following:-

“Handguns with a calibre greater than .38” but no greater than .45” are permitted only where shooters are competing in the two accredited events knows as Metallic Silhouette and Single (Western) Action.”

Of Concern are the following:-

A) The International Practical Shooting Confederation (“IPSC”) discipline is neither an Olympic Sport or a Commonwealth Games Sport.

B) The National Rifle Association (“NRA”) discipline is neither an Olympic Sport or a Commonwealth Games Sport.

C) The “Service Pistol” Events administered by “Pistol Australia” (25 yard service, 50 yard service and WA 1500 events) are neither Olympic or Commonwealth Games sports.

D) 50 meter “Free Pistol” is no longer an Olympic Sport.

E) “Double Trap” (Shotgun) is being removed from the next Olympic Games in Tokyo.

ALL of these events are shot at a World Championship level and are heavily patronised by Australian Shooters.

My view is that paragraph 7 of the February 2017 NFA makes possession and use of handguns in events that are not Olympic or Commonwealth Games Sports now illegal. None of the IPSC, NRA or Service Matches are mentioned in paragraph 14(c) of the February 2017 NFA.
In my view, urgent overtures need to be made at a Commonwealth and State Political Level to amend paragraph 7 to reinsert the “World Championships” clause from the May 1996 NFA OR include the IPSC, NRA, Free Pistol and Service Pistol disciplines in paragraph 14(c).

To these ends, I strongly recommend calling an urgent meeting of the “Dealers’ Association” as well as alerting “Pistol Australia” to the ramifications of paragraphs 7 and 14(c) of the 16 February 2017 NRA to their participants.

Similarly, urgent and immediate attention and action needs to be taken at both a State and Commonwealth Political Level. It is my experience that if this is only confined to attempting to deal with the NSW regulatory body without Political involvement, the affected disciplines will cease to exist.

To these ends, I recommend urgent correspondence with Federal Senator David Leyonhjelm, the NSW Shooters and Fishers Party and other sympathetic political entities.
Additionally, all must think of the ramifications of this new NFA - are the various governments going to compensate owners of firearms AND owners of firearms businesses for the massive losses that will flow from this new NFA?

There also seems to have been no consultation of the affected persons. Perhaps this is reticent of the ill fated Grey Hound ban as recently abandoned by the NSW parliament. That result was only achieved with both Political and Public pressure. To these ends, all affected persons and clubs should be mobilised into action.

Kindly refer to the writer should any points of clarification be necessary.

W.J Wilcher
Barrister.
HB Higgins Chambers
Level 6, 82 Elizabeth Street, Sydney.

20 February 2017

[doc]

Am I correct in my understanding that the NFA will require safes for C, D & H to be bolted regardless of the weight?

Going to be difficult for those who can't get into the home market and/or plan on renting for most of their lives...

[1886]

Bloody hell that guys a Barrister !!!!.

IMHO there was no need to go overboard as shown other than draw to attention what is obviously a typo.

Surely it's fairly obvious that the specific reference to para 14[c] in para 7 should have just been para 14.

ie, 14(a) and 14(b] covers all the handgun events mentioned.

It's more likely a simple typo that requires rectification.

[shouta]

Bloody hell that guys a Barrister !!!!.

IMHO there was no need to go overboard as shown other than draw to attention what is obviously a typo.

Surely it's fairly obvious that the specific reference to para 14[c] in para 7 should have just been para 14.

ie, 14(a) and 14(b] covers all the handgun events mentioned.

It's more likely a simple typo that requires rectification.

All due respect but if it is a mistake as you mention then that is why a Barrister who specialises in Firearms Law needs to respond in great detail as anything missed will be pushed through. And if it's not a mistake then....we are stuffed

[Cryptic]

Am I correct in my understanding that the NFA will require safes for C, D & H to be bolted regardless of the weight?

Going to be difficult for those who can't get into the home market and/or plan on renting for most of their lives...

QLD always has required bolting down for those classes. I think NSW too with the addition of 6mm plate thick.

[bigM]

Mr Wilcher has acted in a number of firearms cases in NSW and interstate. He has a good understanding of the law and the politics behind it.I do not believe he has misinterpreted what has been written and already agreed between the states.

There is now some suggestion that a mistake has occurred in the production of the document which is exactly what I would be saying if I was a politician who had been caught out. We need to keep the pressure on until a 'corrected' document is published.

[on_one_wheel]

Disarmament by "mistake"

[Gun-nut]

Mr Wilcher has acted in a number of firearms cases in NSW and interstate. He has a good understanding of the law and the politics behind it.I do not believe he has misinterpreted what has been written and already agreed between the states.

There is now some suggestion that a mistake has occurred in the production of the document which is exactly what I would be saying if I was a politician who had been caught out. We need to keep the pressure on until a 'corrected' document is published.

Hmmm a mistake in the document, I'm sure thats all it was, I'll sleep easy tonight then. In all seriousness may I ask where you heard a politician make those claims. I'd like to read and/or watch what he/she has said.

[bigM]

No formal statements yet. Just some verbal statements from NSW FAR. The 2017 NFA still stands in its current form.

[<<Genesis93>>]

So ON has removed their "keep gun laws as is".... line from their firearm policy.
Watch this space, if they take at 'worse' balance of power in QLD......

Let the games begin.....

[1886]

All due respect but if it is a mistake as you mention then that is why a Barrister who specialises in Firearms Law needs to respond in great detail as anything missed will be pushed through. And if it's not a mistake then we are stuffed

I know what you are saying and I totally agree.

BUT this guy indicates he is a Barrister and contrary to your comment given his rant he does not give me the impression he is an expert on firearms legislation.

I will endeavour to spell it out.

His lengthy expose’ to Paul ? goes on about the words “World Championship” being left out of Para 7 otherwise many other current matches become illegal. He then goes to great lengths to indicate that these words need to be included in para7 OR include the matches by IPSC,NRA,Free Pistol and Service Pistol disciplines be included in 14(c) to make these matches legal.

FFS these are all covered in 14(a) and 14(b), which he has completely ignored.

14(c) is ONLY included as an exemption from the 14(b) restriction to not exceed 38 calibre for all disciplines EXCEPT Metallic Silhouette and Single Action who may use up to 45 calibre.

All this because he noted Para 7 makes mention that events must meet the conditions of para 14(c).

NO, wombat they must meet the conditions of Para 14, which includes a,b & c.

Ironically, he also seems to have missed that the old NFA actually restricted events to only those of Olympic Games, Commonwealth Games and World Championships status.

We all know many States have approved other uses not bound by these 3.

But the new NFA now says;

Para 7. “Jurisdictions will restrict the importation, possession and use of handguns for sporting purposes to individuals meeting recognised sporting shooter classifications in the Olympic and Commonwealth Games and for other accredited events that meet the conditions in paragraph 14(c)).”

Note the now inclusion of “other accredited events” which basically means it's now open ended and would also cover “world Championship” events that he makes his whole issue about.

There is nothing wrong with the general wording of the NFA in this regard. 14 (a) and 14(b) remain and covers all current club matches and now even allows for any others proposed. The club matches he states have NOT been removed in the new NFA.

"Sports shooters – handguns

(a) Sports shooters must have a valid membership with an approved club.

(b) Firearms permitted for acquisition, possession or use under this genuine reason are:
i. Category H – the firearm must be designed or adapted for competition target shooting, or must have a barrel length of at least 120mm for a semi-automatic handgun or 100mm for a revolver or a single shot handgun. If the firearm is fitted with a firearm magazine or cylinder, it must have a capacity of not more than 10 rounds. The calibre of the firearm must not exceed .38” (with the exception of cases listed under paragraph 14(c))."

The only problem is just a simple typo. In para 7 the (c) after 14 requires removal otherwise nothing makes sense and I suspect other jurisdictions may have now also noted this error as there is no reference made to satisfying the requirements of 14 (a) or (b) which STILL remain in the NFA. For him to suggest that all these and other club matches will now be banned is just lunacy.

He makes strong overtures that we need WW3 and all and sundry need to be contacted and brought aboard to fight this when there is virtually nothing to fight other than fix a simple typo.

I have no idea who Paul is but perhaps before this goes viral and we actually look like fools maybe the OP, bigM could pee in someones ear.

[bigM]

Paul is Paul Britton, owner of PBA Imports and Vice President NSW Firearms Dealers Association.
This was originally posted on the PBA facebook page - link already provided.

W J Wilcher is a barrister who specialises in firearms law.

Rant ? - he simply provides supporting references for all of his points.

!4 (a) refers only to being a member of a club
14 (b) makes no reference to match types.

Only 2 events are accredited events under 14 (c)

Perhaps you are not aware of the significant s/f in 1996 about IPSC and the only reason we can shoot it now is because of "World Championships"

This IS a significant issue.
We do have some breathing space until the states enact new firearms laws but left unchalleged this will effect us.


The only question is whether this is purposeful change or just a bureaucratic oversight.
.

[1886]

No offence bigM but you are missing the point and don’t seem to understand legislation .

Rant ? - he simply provides supporting references for all of his points.

But he’s gone off on a totally misinterpreted wild goose chase over what is just simply a small typo. There is no purposeful change or just a bureaucratic oversight, just a small typo requiring amendment.

This issue is basically about the use of handguns in various club matches.

Para 7 is what generically covers their use and I will quote it again BUT it requires the removal of (c) after 14. Matches do not have to be named individually and never have even in the 1996 NFA.

7. Jurisdictions will restrict the importation, possession and use of handguns for sporting purposes to individuals meeting recognised sporting shooter classifications in the Olympic and Commonwealth Games and for other accredited events that meet the conditions in paragraph 14(c)).

!4 (a) refers only to being a member of a club

Yep, that’s condition 1. Tell me how a sporting shooter can have a handgun without being a member of a club ?

14 (b) makes no reference to match types.

Huh, this condition is only to describe basic handgun requirements, ie no greater than 38 calibre with the specified barrel lengths. ALL various matches are covered under Para 7 providing they satisfy these conditions in Para14, ie you are a club member and any firearm must be as described and no greater than 38 calibre as per condition 14(b) EXCEPT for calibres as used in 14(c).

Only 2 events are accredited events under 14 (c)

This condition has nothing whatsoever to do about accrediting events. It is purely included as an exemption from the 38 calibre condition in 14(b) to allow these two disciplines to be able to use up to 45 calibre.

Any world championships will now be covered under “ and for other accredited events “ as will a host of others.