Another Petition

[Sherwin93]

Starting to compose a petition for the senate to make some changes to the National firearms Agreement. I know what I want, but I want to hear what other people want. so leave a reply or PM me with any thoughts about what you would want added, removed, or altered.

Here's the NFA to refresh your memory.
https://www.ag.gov.au/LegalSystem/Firearms/Documents/2017-national-firearms-agreement.pdf

[Gun-nut]

Removal of the registry is key.

As long as it stands the pollies have the ground set for further gun confiscations.

I also want mag capacities removed as well as suppressors legalised. Merging of all the categories would be good also. Baby steps first, I suppose.

[Heckler303]

Removal of the registry is key.

As long as it stands the pollies have the ground set for further gun confiscations.

I also want mag capacities removed as well as suppressors legalized. Merging of all the categories would be good also. Baby steps first, I suppose.

I'll fully support you all the way. The most damaging groups to our progress after the Firearm-Fearing politicians however, are the fudds among the community. We need to have unity. We need to have shooters properly rallying together and realizing that simply because they do not see any use in what firearms we wish to obtain as average citizens, or restrictions we wish to lift, we are all in the fight to save one of our last freedoms.

[Sherwin93]

Yeah I think baby steps are very important, trying to make too much of a change could get a petition thrown out.

We need to have unity. We need to have shooters properly rallying together

agreed, hopefully with social media we can get to enough people. I was even thinking about buying ad space on the forum.

[bladeracer]

Starting to compose a petition for the senate to make some changes to the National firearms Agreement. I know what I want, but I want to hear what other people want. so leave a reply or PM me with any thoughts about what you would want added, removed, or altered.

Here's the NFA to refresh your memory.
https://www.ag.gov.au/LegalSystem/Firearms/Documents/2017-national-firearms-agreement.pdf

I want to be able to bring my children and friends into the sport without having to traipse along to an open range. If I'm shooting on my property I want to let others enjoy it with me, not make them stand in the corner and watch hands-off.

[WatchyShooter]

I think the LDP have the most straight forward policies

Liberal Democrats Toggle navigation
Firearms
Home / Policies / Firearms
firearms_policy_strip

The LDP regards the right to own firearms for sport, hunting, collecting and self-defence as fundamental to a free society.


Policy
The Liberal Democratic Party (LDP) believes:

Sport, hunting and self-defence are all legitimate reasons for firearm ownership.
Firearm ownership should be subject to possession of a licence. However, all adults over 18 years of age have a right to a licence unless it has been removed because of a history or genuine prospect of coercion.
Those who wish to carry a concealed firearm for self-defence are entitled to be issued with a permit to do so unless they have a history or genuine prospect of coercion.
All genuine sporting uses of firearms are legitimate.
There should be no registration of long-arms.
There should be no prohibitions or special limits on semi-automatic firearms.
Individuals and organisations are entitled to establish facilities that involve the use of firearms. This includes shooting ranges and hunting reserves.
Impediments to children participating in safe shooting activities should be removed.
Airsoft and paintball should be deregulated apart from measures to protect innocent bystanders.
Discussion

The LDP regards the right to own firearms for sport, hunting, collecting and self-defence as fundamental to a free society, irrespective of how many choose to do so. It does not believe governments have a general right to limit the ownership of firearms.

Gun ownership, by itself, harms no other person. It says nothing about what might be done with a gun and cannot justify criminal sanctions. However, as with any right, there are associated responsibilities. Failure to meet these may be criminal.

The right to self defence, including with firearms, precedes the authority of governments. Consequently, while it may be restricted in the case of particular individuals, within limits, it should not be removed on a collective basis. In particular, it is not a privilege to be granted or denied by governments.

In terms of genuine crime control, most gun laws are ineffective. Making gun ownership illegal does not stop gun ownership; it merely affects those gun owners who are law-abiding and least likely to use their guns in crime.
Disarming the law-abiding is irrational when the lawless cannot be disarmed.

Australians have a right to decide how best to protect themselves, their families and property. Many have relied on guns in their homes to sleep more comfortably for over two hundred years. Indeed, firearms may be the only means by which people such as women, the elderly and infirm can hope to defend themselves against rapists, robbers and murderers.

The police do not provide security in the home, business or street. They arrive after the crime to take reports and do detective work. The poorer the area, the riskier it is for peaceful residents.

Only armed, law-abiding citizens can be present in sufficient numbers to prevent or deter violent crime before it starts, or to reduce its spread. A criminal is more likely to be driven off from a particular crime by an armed victim than to be convicted and imprisoned for it. Thus, widespread gun ownership will make the community safer.

Ownership of firearms is also the only practical means by which the people can retain any semblance of ensuring that governments remain their servants and not vice versa. Although the ballot box and peaceful protest will always be the preferred means of removing unsatisfactory governments, history is full of examples where those options were denied.

As Thomas Jefferson put it, “What country can preserve its liberties if its rulers are not warned from time to time that their people preserve the spirit of resistance?” Or as another US President, Woodrow Wilson, put it, “Liberty has never come from government. Liberty has always come from the subjects of government. The history of liberty is the history of resistance.”

Firearms are also legitimate sporting tools, used in a wide range of regional, national and international competitions including the Olympic and Commonwealth Games. Indeed, shooting is one of the original sports of the modern Olympic Games, commencing in 1896. Semi-automatic pistols are required for certain Olympic events.

It is not legitimate to curtail the sporting activities of one group of Australians while encouraging others, simply on the grounds that their implements have the potential to be used for harmful purposes. Many sporting implements have similar potential, as do a vast array of everyday items.

Firearms can contribute to positive environmental outcomes in the hands of hunters. Hunters can be remarkably effective at reducing populations of pest animals such as foxes, pigs, goats, wild dogs and feral cats. These animals have been responsible for enormous destruction of Australian native fauna, with some small marsupial species probably extinct as a result, and pose a threat to agriculture in some areas.

Similarly, hunters contribute to positive environmental outcomes by helping to develop and preserve wetlands which concurrently accommodate species that may be hunted such as ducks, while also providing a haven for protected species.

The responsibility of those who own firearms is to only use them for non-coercive purposes or to protect themselves or others from coercion.

Those who use firearms for coercive purposes, whether actual or threatened, may have their right to own them restricted or removed.

Further reading

Submission on proposed amendments to Regulation 4F and Schedule 6 of the Customs (Prohibited Imports) Regulations 1956 (Firearms Importation Regime)

The Australian Firearms Buyback and Its Effect on Gun Deaths (Lee and Suardi)

Prohibition and gun control (Leyonhjelm)

Just Facts: Gun Control

Coalition of Law Abiding Sporting Shooters (CLASS)

Self defence – a human right

Seriously go and rego for the LDP on there site, you can support and signup and add your name to the growing number of people not only shooters going to the LDP for no nonsense policies

[Sherwin93]

I support the LDP too but getting them in would be a very hard fight I would have thought. I don't know much about politics though and some of the policy isn't very clear to me.

"All genuine sporting uses of firearms are legitimate."
"There should be no prohibitions or special limits on semi-automatic firearms."

I tried to find more info about their firearms policy without much luck.

[WatchyShooter]

I'd say that the current senator for the LDP has done a lot in regards to common sense and also firearms, they've also recently made some noise by helping get a video game that had been banned due to PC reasons unbanned, that bought a lot of young attention their way.

As far for further reading, https://ldp.org.au/wp-content/uploads/p ... rearms.pdf is mostly what I posted, wish their submission link for the suggested changes would work, would be nice to read how they argued some of the points of that

[Sherwin93]

I'm going to write the petition up after work and then post so I can get some help in case I don't words good

[brouta]

Removal of the registry is key.

As long as it stands the pollies have the ground set for further gun confiscations.

Not to mention leak after leak of information giving 'shopping lists' of gun owners to who knows what criminal element.

[Sherwin93]

Ok here's what I have

To the Honourable President and members of the Senate in Parliament assembled

The petition of the undersigned shows that the people of Australia find the current legislation to be unjust and prohibitive to law abiding people.

The petitioners ask that the Senate:
1. Abolish the registration of longarms
2. Reclassify semi-automatic rimfire rifles to category B
3. Reclassify semi-automatic centrefire rifles to category B
4. All restrictions on the purchase and use of silencers be removed
5. Remove restrictions on firearms magazine capacity
6. legalize the sale, purchase, and use of anti-personnel spray and electric shock devices for self defence

[SomeoneElse]

Since politics is a battle of words/ideas, and "silencers" don't silence as well as Holywood would have us believe, I'd refer to them as "moderators". (A good neutral label IMO. It doesn't sound extreme in any way, and almost sounds boring and sensible.) I'd also avoid "suppressors" since it is phonetically similar to "oppressor", and may lead to unwanted subconscious bias.

Regardless of how they may be labeled in existing legislation, it's one area where I think we could take charge of the language. Plenty of other political causes are highly selective of the vocab they use to drive home their point/agenda. I'm no psychologist - just my opinion.

Someone Else.

[burek]

Each of those points is legit and logical but that doesn't matter. It is simply asking too much at once. Don't forget who you're dealing with here

The only point that may get serious consideration is the registration but will get ignored because of the other points. It really is the time to pile on the pressure now after the recent mishaps.

Get one win and then focus on another. The only way you'll get sweeping changes is with a favourable party in power but what are the chances of that...

[WatchyShooter]

Each of those points is legit and logical but that doesn't matter. It is simply asking too much at once. Don't forget who you're dealing with here

The only point that may get serious consideration is the registration but will get ignored because of the other points. It really is the time to pile on the pressure now after the recent mishaps.

Get one win and then focus on another. The only way you'll get sweeping changes is with a favourable party in power but what are the chances of that...

This is exactly what we need to do, get one thing done at a time.

GCA claim that the firearms act has been eroded over the years, last time I checked they'd added more restrictions since then hadn't they?

[bladeracer]

The only way you'll get sweeping changes is with a favourable party in power but what are the chances of that...

Another option is to educate the unfavourable parties and show them how stupid their policies are, and how much they can gain by getting firearms owners on their side...

[Sherwin93]

Since politics is a battle of words/ideas, and "silencers" don't silence as well as Holywood would have us believe, I'd refer to them as "moderators". (A good neutral label IMO. It doesn't sound extreme in any way, and almost sounds boring and sensible.)

I was going to refer to them as sound moderators at first but the prohibited weapons list called them silencers so i went with that.I'll change it to sound moderators.

[WatchyShooter]

Remember if you want to include case study's or other regions where we have see laws like the ones suggested implemented effectively and efficiently allowing police resources to be focused on the real issue of illegal firearms and organised crime that NZ would be the best to use, I know Sweden and other EU countries also would work, but from a political standpoint the NZ comparison is easier translated to AU

[Sherwin93]

how this https://www.change.org/p/sporting-shoot ... on=minibar

[WatchyShooter]

Looks good, I'll find the link of the place to also post the petition to actually get in it in front of politicians, Someone let me know about that last time I posted one here

[Member-Deleted]

The National Firearms Agreement and resulting various Australian states and territories firearms legislations, are based on a lie, these sanctions are more for the purpose of political posturing and expediency, than for any real positive benefit to public safety, these laws have been adopted to align with the personal and political position of politicians from the major Australian political parties.

Statistical and historical evidence clearly shows that preventing licensed shooters from owing firearms, will have NO effect on reducing gun crime, nor will it cause any tangible decrease in the threat to public health and safety, especially given the multitude of other threats that rate much higher than firearms, the bottom line here is, even if all licensed shooters no longer had access to a firearm, criminals would still have the same access as they did previously.

This campaign of excessive regulation of licensed shooters is a failure, there is no evidence to show that the NFA has achieved any reduction in gun crime, the rate of such crime was falling at a steady rate well before the NFA, it has continued to fall at the same rate since, if governments and anti gun lobby were truly serious about enhancing the standards of public health and safety, they would target the multitude of causes of death and injury that rate far higher than firearms.

[WatchyShooter]

http://www.aph.gov.au/petitions Here we go,

Also should share this around and message the SSAA Fb pages, Email, the LDP & any other parties and pages to share TF out of it.


GCA have less then 1.5k likes on facebook

SSAA Main page 40k

State and branch SSAA pages = 5k

SFFP Facebook - 90k

Shooters union - 12k

LDP - 80k

and add anyone else you can think of and that's what we need to be doing.

There's a reason GCA get so many signatures from so little likes and people actually following them, they use shock and awe tactics and go for media outlets and other sources that get them exposure.

We can do the same