rumor has it

[pyrosimo]

I heard a rumor the other day, like all probably too good to be true. But supposedly you do to need a reason to own a 22 cal rifle?

[bigfellascott]

Sorry I don't understand pigeon english!

[TheDude]

In Queensland, you don't need to specify a justification in the PTA for any Cat A from memory.

[Dwayne]

Yep, that is correct for qld at least. i didn't know this either untill a month or so ago when i was looking into something on qld police web site. It deffinitly says you don't need to give a reason on a pta for any catagory A firearm.

[1290]

You do too need a reason!
Can only have a licence for a 22 if you need it for hunting, or target shooting.

c/- QLD pol website:

​​​​​​Anyone 18 years of age or over may apply for a Queensland Weapons Licence provided they satisfy the following criteria:

Are a resident of Queensland (proof of address required on application)
Are a fit and proper person
Have not, within the past five years, been convicted of a disqualifying offence including misuse of drugs, misuse of weapons, the use or threatened use of violence, or been the subject of a domestic violence protection order
Have a genuine reason for a licence
Can demonstrate appropriate training in the safe use of firearms; and
Have access to secure storage.

you mightnt need to specify another or repeat your reason on the PTA though....you certainly cant have a 22 just 'because'.
Remember too, the Licence reason and PTA genuine need / reason remains in force while you own the firearm, the SA / SSSA 'confiscations' were explained by the PTA not be valid / no longer valid or being misrepresented (Socialist state of South Aus)....

[trekin]

You do too need a reason!
Can only have a licence for a 22 if you need it for hunting, or target shooting.

c/- QLD pol website:

​​​​​​Anyone 18 years of age or over may apply for a Queensland Weapons Licence provided they satisfy the following criteria:

Are a resident of Queensland (proof of address required on application)
Are a fit and proper person
Have not, within the past five years, been convicted of a disqualifying offence including misuse of drugs, misuse of weapons, the use or threatened use of violence, or been the subject of a domestic violence protection order
Have a genuine reason for a licence
Can demonstrate appropriate training in the safe use of firearms; and
Have access to secure storage.

you mightnt need to specify another or repeat your reason on the PTA though....you certainly cant have a 22 just 'because'.
Remember too, the Licence reason and PTA genuine need / reason remains in force while you own the firearm, the SA / SSSA 'confiscations' were explained by the PTA not be valid / no longer valid or being misrepresented (Socialist state of South Aus)....

Two different things, 12, genuine reason for a licence and genuine reason for the acquisition Cat A firearm. In QLD, with our funny laws, you give a genuine reason when applying for your licence, but you don't have to give ANY reasons when applying for a Cat A firearm be it first or any subsequent Cat A. Also Cat A and Cat B licences are issued as one, and to my knowledge no one ever applies for Cat A only licence.

[1290]

No, theyre not different.
Eg, in Vic, where you need a PTA for a Cat B, (not a cat A) - you first obviously need a licence, which you need to demonstrate a 'genuine reason' for which could be, say, hunting.

You then need a rifle; so you apply for a PTA where you need to demonstrate a genuine need/Reason. Which must be hunting, it cant be sport! then go on to demonstrate why a cat A is not sufficient...

[pyrosimo]

Cheers for the info guys really helpful. And sorry about the grammar, just finished work when I posted it

[trekin]

No, theyre not different.
Eg, in Vic, where you need a PTA for a Cat B, (not a cat A) - you first obviously need a licence, which you need to demonstrate a 'genuine reason' for which could be, say, hunting.

You then need a rifle; so you apply for a PTA where you need to demonstrate a genuine need/Reason. Which must be hunting, it cant be sport! then go on to demonstrate why a cat A is not sufficient...

As you Say "Eg, in Vic, where you need a PTA for a Cat B, (not a cat A)". Not the case in QLD, for Cat A, which is what the OP was commenting on. In QLD, on the application for a PTA, when applying for Cat A, under the section that asks for "genuine reason or how this can not be met with your exciting firearm" you only need to put "Cat A N/A", nothing else.

[1290]

No, theyre not different.
Eg, in Vic, where you need a PTA (REASON)for a Cat B, (not a cat A) - you first obviously need a licence, which you need to demonstrate a 'genuine reason' for which could be, say, hunting.

You then need a rifle; so you apply for a PTA where you need to demonstrate a genuine need/Reason. Which must be hunting, it cant be sport! then go on to demonstrate why a cat A is not sufficient...

Sorry, meant to say you need a reason for a Cat B PTA....

otherwise I think you missed the point so forget it....

[Aussier]

I never really thought of it before like this.

Not 'reason' required for a Cat A in Victoria, QLD and which ever other states. So it's implied in your license you will have a Cat A and you have to justify a Cat B. Is that their logic?

[PaWNTANK]

Yeah didn't have to put a reason down on the PTA for my Marlin or Taylor's.

[melanie]

How is getting rid of the whole permit thing that everyone is pushing for going?

[anthillinside]

How is getting rid of the whole permit thing that everyone is pushing for going?

Slowly ...
It's going to take a long long time if ever to get enough support from people in high places or to get our own people into high places to reverse legislation.

[Pom]

The problem with the registries is everything is OUR fault when something goes wrong according to the antis, and the answer isn't to disband the registries, it's to disband US!

Some time back there was a long period where the NSW firearms reg database was open to various non-authorised non-police personnel until a cop (or ex-cop at the time?) came forward and exposed it.

Greens didn't see it as the registries lack security being an issue, they said it was all our gun ownership that was the issue

Fact is they have no rational reasons for their POV, it's all about their own phobias and agendas.

Whatever happens.... where, when, why, by who their answer will always be stopping private gun ownership.

[1290]

I never really thought of it before like this.

Not 'reason' required for a Cat A in Victoria, QLD and which ever other states. So it's implied in your license you will have a Cat A and you have to justify a Cat B. Is that their logic?

Not about being implied....it says, OK; you can have a rimfire or shotty, but anything more you'll have to justify....

[Spooner]

Based on effective range it seems, minimal given by the shotty and rimfire.

Almost like you have to justify reaching further.