Licence applications still in limbo more than a year later

[jwai86]

From an outsider and what little you have posted, your depression is very evident.

Of course it's evident when I've more or less said so

One question how did you get the P650? as you should have been ineligible?

I don't have anything that meets the legal definition of 'mental illness' or 'mentally disordered person' in the Mental Health Act 2007, and I don't believe my condition has prevented me from safely using a firearm in practice. In any case, it's none of your damn business.

[Fionn]

I don't have anything that meets the legal definition of 'mental illness' or 'mentally disordered person' in the Mental Health Act 2007, and I don't believe my condition has prevented me from safely using a firearm in practice. In any case, it's none of your damn business.

Your own psychiatrist has confirmed that you meet the definition of 'mental illness’, and you are not suitable to hold a firearms licence.

In my experience the reason the police have not acted thus far on the matter is because it is under investigation. The prudent thing to do would be to inform them that due to the refusal you are surrendering the P650 and your firearm and hope/pray that puts the matter to bed.

But frankly I do not care what you do, as it is not my problem. As the saying goes, you can lead a horse to water, but you cannot make it drink.

[Florey55]

After reading through all these comments, I agree with some of the other posters - if your Cat A & B application was refused, you have absolutely zero chance of obtaining Cat H. Sorry to repeat bad news, but this is the reality of the situation.

I also think that buying a CZ75B with this cloud hanging over your head was premature.

Also agree with this comment from a previous post "From an outsider and what little you have posted, your depression is very evident.

One question how did you get the P650? as you should have been ineligible?"

But its not all bad news, if I wasn't shooting I would do Field Archery. It's really a lot of fun ! Have a look at this website - https://archery.org.au/a-guide-to-field-archery/

All the best !

[jwai86]

After reading through all these comments, I agree with some of the other posters - if your Cat A & B application was refused, you have absolutely zero chance of obtaining Cat H. Sorry to repeat bad news, but this is the reality of the situation.

I also think that buying a CZ75B with this cloud hanging over your head was premature.

I can't dispute what you've said here, but what is causing more stress is some random online know-it-all implying that there's a police tactical response group waiting for me even though the Registry had my psychiatrist's documentation for almost a year now yet didn't indicate if there was a problem with my application because they kept burying it.

[bladeracer]

After reading through all these comments, I agree with some of the other posters - if your Cat A & B application was refused, you have absolutely zero chance of obtaining Cat H. Sorry to repeat bad news, but this is the reality of the situation.

I also think that buying a CZ75B with this cloud hanging over your head was premature.

I can't dispute what you've said here, but what is causing more stress is some random online know-it-all implying that there's a police tactical response group waiting for me even though the Registry had my psychiatrist's documentation for almost a year now yet didn't indicate if there was a problem with my application because they kept burying it.

I agree, Police have known about the issue since you made your application, if they were concerned they had every opportunity to let you know it was an issue.

I have no idea what the P650 requires but if it asks about something that does not apply to you then you correctly denied it. I don't believe Fionn's term "mental illness" automatically means you are not suitable to hold a firearms licence as he claims.

I just downloaded the P650.
https://www.sport.nsw.gov.au/sites/default/files/2021-04/p650_declaration_application_form.pdf

It asks if "f) In the past 12 months been treated or referred for treatment for alcoholism, drug dependence or
a mental illness within the meaning of the Mental Health Act 2007 or as a mentally disordered
person within the meaning of that Act?"

Under the Act this means "In NSW, the Mental Health Act 2007 defines mental illness as a “condition that seriously impairs, either temporarily or permanently, the mental functioning of a person and is characterised by the presence in the person of any one or more of the following symptoms: (a) delusions (b) hallucinations (c) serious disorder of thought form (d) a severe disturbance of mood (e) sustained or repeated irrational behaviour indicating the presence of any one or more of the symptoms referred to above”."

If your illness does not fit the criteria then you have done nothing wrong.

[jwai86]

If the Registry wants absolute assurance, they should have every person wanting to take part in a Try Shooting session undergo mandatory psychiatrist assessment instead of expecting someone who they think might be is a risk who is unlikely to be a mental health professional or a lawyer to self-assess their mental health before they enter the range.

[Fionn]

I can't dispute what you've said here, but what is causing more stress is some random online know-it-all implying that there's a police tactical response group waiting for me even though the Registry had my psychiatrist's documentation for almost a year now yet didn't indicate if there was a problem with my application because they kept burying it.

I never implied there was a police tactical response group waiting for you, if you think I did, you should speak to your psychiatrist about your thoughts.

I said that the matter may be under investigation, which would explain the delay and why it appears they have kept burying it. As you would not be informed that the matter was under investigation and would be given excuses like you have for the delay.

It is also not a straightforward offence to investigate as there are a number of aspects that need consideration.

[Larry]

I dont think anyone here should comment on your health status. We are not qualified and even if we were do not know of your personal circumstances.
So JW just ignore any comment like those and dont take them to heart.
Sorry to hear about your outcome you did all the right things. The cops have to cover their asses they dont want to make the nightly news again for incompetence claims.

[bladeracer]

You made the statement that he is "not suitable to hold a firearms licence", his doctor did not make that determination and neither did the Police according to the information we've been given. The information we have does not even declare him to be a prohibited person and thus is not restricted from continued shooting under a P650 if he wishes to - from the information we have.

The Police have had his CatA/B/H application for a year, including his acknowledgement of a potential issue with his mental health history. If they considered it to be an issue they could have notified him at any point that they do not want him to have legal access to firearms until they complete their investigation. Until the Police actually make that declaration he is not prohibited from accessing firearms legally. The information we have so far also does not prohibit him from continuing to use firearms legally if he wishes to.

The P650 is irrelevant.

I don't believe Fionn's term "mental illness" automatically means you are not suitable to hold a firearms licence as he claims.

You area blatant liar, I have never claim such a thing.

I agree, Police have known about the issue since you made your application, if they were concerned they had every opportunity to let you know it was an issue.

The forms are not sent to the police, but held by the clubs. So the Police may not know about the P650.

[Fionn]

You made the statement that he is "not suitable to hold a firearms licence",

I did not make any such statement. Just more lies from you.

his doctor did not make that determination and neither did the Police according to the information we've been given.

That is incorrect, his psychiatrist made that determination, see the below quote

The Registry stated in the email that the risk assessment report received from my psychiatrist mentioned that it is a possibility that if I get significantly depressed, I may relapse and be unable to form rational judgement.

The police are legally bound not to issue a licence if they have reasonable cause to believe that the applicant may not personally exercise continuous and responsible control over firearms.

The psychiatrist has said they believe he can not personally exercise continuous and responsible control over firearms.

The police have no choice but to refuse the licence application.

The information we have does not even declare him to be a prohibited person and thus is not restricted from continued shooting under a P650 if he wishes to - from the information we have.

Prohibited person has nothing to do with the matter.

The P650 has another section that may makes him ineligible, which conveniently left out. But as I said the matter may be under investigation.

The Police have had his CatA/B/H application for a year, including his acknowledgement of a potential issue with his mental health history. If they considered it to be an issue they could have notified him at any point that they do not want him to have legal access to firearms until they complete their investigation. Until the Police actually make that declaration he is not prohibited from accessing firearms legally. The information we have so far also does not prohibit him from continuing to use firearms legally if he wishes to.

If he was following the law, he shouldn't have legal access to a firearm.

So you are saying that the police should have contacted him to tell him not to break the law?

The P650 is irrelevant.

How?

[bladeracer]

That is _exactly_ the statement you made. His doctor said no such thing. His doctor put forward an opinion that might lead Police to decide against issuing a licence, but he did not say that his patient was unsuitable to hold a firearms licence, that was you, again, words from you, nobody else.

Again, the psychiatrist made no such statement as you claim he did - "The psychiatrist has said they believe he can not personally exercise continuous and responsible control over firearms." These are your words that you are putting into the doctor's mouth. The patient stated that his doctor said exactly as you quoted "...my psychiatrist mentioned that it is a possibility that if I get significantly depressed, I may relapse and be unable to form rational judgement.", nothing about being unsuited to holding a firearms licence, owning firearms, or using firearms.

I agree that Police are required to investigate the issue, I can't agree that denying the application is their only option - based on what we have been told the doctor said. If the doctor did say what you are claiming he did via your telepathic powers then Police would have no option. I prefer to keep the discussion to within the framework of the information we have been given, not make up my own.

I assume you are referring to section i "i) Currently suffering from any mental illness or other disorder that may prevent you from using a firearm safely?"? Again, you would require extrasensory powers to determine whether the applicant has such an issue. Based on the information we actually have to work with, it clearly does not apply.

Police receive an application for a firearms licence for CatA/B/H. Surely they must do at least a cursory scan of it to ensure everything is filled in before passing it up the chain? Seeing a tick in the box indicating a past history of mental illness should've rung alarm bells at that point - if it were an issue. If the Police Licencing service has no issue with somebody having a mental illness showing a genuine interest in owning firearms by applying to own them why should the rest of us be concerned? They had all the information they needed right there to make an investigation - they didn't bother, thus it's a non-issue. While they have denied his application, they have not declared him to be a Prohibited Person, merely that they do not wish to issue a licence, which can be appealed if he wishes to. Simply having a history of mental illness does not automatically disqualify anybody from a firearms licence, it must be a mental illness fitting the criteria listed in the Act.

Now that he has had a refusal on his CatA/B licence he will have to tick that box when filling out future P650's, but that alone does not prohibit him for legally using firearms under the P650.

The P650 is irrelevant because the questions on it were answered truthfully.

You made the statement that he is "not suitable to hold a firearms licence",

I did not make any such statement. Just more lies from you.

his doctor did not make that determination and neither did the Police according to the information we've been given.

That is incorrect, his psychiatrist made that determination, see the below quote

The Registry stated in the email that the risk assessment report received from my psychiatrist mentioned that it is a possibility that if I get significantly depressed, I may relapse and be unable to form rational judgement.

The police are legally bound not to issue a licence if they have reasonable cause to believe that the applicant may not personally exercise continuous and responsible control over firearms.

The psychiatrist has said they believe he can not personally exercise continuous and responsible control over firearms.

The police have no choice but to refuse the licence application.

The information we have does not even declare him to be a prohibited person and thus is not restricted from continued shooting under a P650 if he wishes to - from the information we have.

Prohibited person has nothing to do with the matter.

The P650 has another section that may makes him ineligible, which conveniently left out. But as I said the matter may be under investigation.

The Police have had his CatA/B/H application for a year, including his acknowledgement of a potential issue with his mental health history. If they considered it to be an issue they could have notified him at any point that they do not want him to have legal access to firearms until they complete their investigation. Until the Police actually make that declaration he is not prohibited from accessing firearms legally. The information we have so far also does not prohibit him from continuing to use firearms legally if he wishes to.

If he was following the law, he shouldn't have legal access to a firearm.

So you are saying that the police should have contacted him to tell him not to break the law?

The P650 is irrelevant.

How?

[on_one_wheel]

If he was following the law, he shouldn't have legal access to a firearm.

So you are saying that the police should have contacted him to tell him not to break the law?

What the f*** is this guy smoking?

[bladeracer]

If he was following the law, he shouldn't have legal access to a firearm.

So you are saying that the police should have contacted him to tell him not to break the law?

What the f*** is this guy smoking?

No idea, but I bet he buys it in bulk.

[jwai86]

As a note, while I asked my psychiatrist to complete the risk assessment report as requested by the Registry, I never had the opportunity to read what he wrote before he submitted it to the Registry. The only content from the report that I know about is what was quoted in the notice of refusal. I have no idea if there was anything else not quoted from the report that might have been significant.

[jwai86]

I went to this week's club meeting this evening, and showed a couple of club officers the notice of refusal I received from the Registry. They told me that the rejected application means they can no longer allow me to participate in shooting activities. The remaining limbo with my PPL application doesn't change their decision. They are well within their rights to do that, so I didn't raise any objections.

I showed the notice and explained my situation to a few other club members who had asked why I was looking downcast this evening. I am still registered as a club member until the next membership renewal date, but there is now very little incentive for me to turn up to club meets. There is little point in going to a shooting range to simply lounge around and watch other people do something you can't.

I was introduced to a club member who is a lawyer. When I Googled his name and credentials, I saw that he is a partner in a boutique law firm in the Sydney CBD. He said that I should engage a barrister if I want to appeal through the NSW Civil and Administrative Tribunal, but their services are prohibitively expensive. He has offered me half an hour of his time free of charge later this week to have a look at previous appeals and my prospects of successfully appealing. However, I think I know what the likely answer will be.

I received a couple of expressions of interest from members about purchasing my CZ 75B, which the club will aim to sell because they are not interested in holding onto it. Fortunately, the new sights I ordered from the Czech Republic a few weeks ago arrived in the mail today, so those can now be sold with the pistol instead of me being left with something that I can't use.

When it comes to determining if I have done something illegal in the course of applying for a firearms licence, the Registry's opinion will be the only one that matters, not that of some self-righteous twat from who knows where, who for someone claiming to not care about what I do, seems awfully fixated on trying to prove that I'm guilty of some sort of wrongdoing.

[bladeracer]

I don't know where the useful parts of the thread have disappeared to this morning (including my own posts), but Fionn posted a document last night that sadly does indeed rule out you continuing to shoot based on your licence refusal. You can apply for an exemption to allow you to shoot a Firearms Safety Training Course only, not general attendance or competition. But it will be refused "...if the applicant would be otherwise refused a licence or permit." As they don't appear to have explained precisely why your CatA/B has been refused it's possible a different Category licence would be approved, thus an exemption might be an option, but I doubt it. It's a very odd and complex situation they allow for but I guess it applies to somebody that has applied for one of the more exotic categories, like CatC, CatD or CatE and been refused. They would likely still be okay applying for CatA/B or CatH though thus would not be excluded by ticking the Yes box of B.a).

I don't believe you have done anything illegal at all, you've done everything that has been required of you from the day you filled out your application. Get a new doctor (definitely!), yours has set back your recovery by throwing you under the bus like this in my opinion. Get well and reapply in a year or two.

[jwai86]

I'm led to believe that the content posted earlier crossed a line I'm not completely aware of that compelled the forum admins and/or moderators to intervene.

I don't believe my psychiatrist was out to stab me in the back in the course of meeting his obligations when responding to the Registry's request, but I haven't yet managed to secure my next appointment to discuss the outcome.

I have seen him for around six years now, and it would be quite hard to find another psychiatrist all of a sudden that I would have to brief on my nearly two decade long mental health history. Hell, I can't even remember the full list of medications that I have been prescribed without lasting success. All that stuff should be in my psychiatrist's records, but I have no idea how transferring patient information between psychiatrists works and how much he would be willing to hand over if he figures that I'm shopping for a certain opinion.

[bladeracer]

I'm led to believe that the content posted earlier crossed a line I'm not completely aware of that compelled the forum admins and/or moderators to intervene.

I don't believe my psychiatrist was out to stab me in the back in the course of meeting his obligations when responding to the Registry's request, but I haven't yet managed to secure my next appointment to discuss the outcome.

I have seen him for around six years now, and it would be quite hard to find another psychiatrist all of a sudden that I would have to brief on my nearly two decade long mental health history. Hell, I can't even remember the full list of medications that I have been prescribed without lasting success. All that stuff should be in my psychiatrist's records, but I have no idea how transferring patient information between psychiatrists works and how much he would be willing to hand over if he figures that I'm shopping for a certain opinion.

I only got a notification of a single comment at 0044 but I was already asleep so I didn't see it. Nothing up to that point crossed any lines that I saw.

So he was doing the report for the Police directly and not at your request? If you requested it it should have gone to you, not to the Police. That way you get to decide if it helps or hinders your situation.

Sounds like an anti-firearm doctor to me, doesn't want you to access firearms even if it improves your health because guns are bad. Find a doctor that approves of shooting as an adjunct to improving your mental and physical health. Your doctor is supposed to be working for you, not the authorities. If you have never tried to hurt yourself or others it was wrong of him to make that suggestion to the authorities and it goes against your best interests to put you through this.

[Larry]

The post making assumptions of JW's health status and the over the top arguments and name calling between BR and Fi were not in the best interests of the forum or anybody involved.

Glad to see that the mods stepped in and cleaned up the nonsense.

[jwai86]

So he was doing the report for the Police directly and not at your request? If you requested it it should have gone to you, not to the Police. That way you get to decide if it helps or hinders your situation.

When I received the request for information from the Registry, it included the documents to be filled out by my medical specialist. Those were in a sealed envelope, so I didn't open it up while it was in my possession.

I brought the documents to my psychiatrist, and he offered to send them to the Registry once he completed them instead of me having to book another appointment (with lack of vacant dates last year) to collect them to then send myself. I agreed to let him do that because I didn't think there was anything wrong with doing so, but I never got to see the completed documents before they were sent across.

[Fionn]

I only got a notification of a single comment at 0044 but I was already asleep so I didn't see it. Nothing up to that point crossed any lines that I saw.

The last I posted was that document from NSW Police about the refusal meaning that you couldn't shoot at a range any more.

Don't know what happened after that and I agree with Bladeracer nothing crossed any lines up to then, that I saw either. It was mostly Bladeracer and myself discussing thigs and I don't have any issues with what he said and frankly a lot of useful information was coming out in the discussion.

[Fionn]

On a related note, what are peoples thoughts on the pistol club allowing someone to buy a pistol on a P650 status? I know the pistol is registered to the club and they can legally do it, but to me the optics (aka Pub Test) on it seem really bad.

I am just wondering why the club would do it? as the possible negatives seem to out way the positives.

[Larry]

The club has very little to loose really. By giving you that service they are locking you in on becoming a member.

[bladeracer]

On a related note, what are peoples thoughts on the pistol club allowing someone to buy a pistol on a P650 status? I know the pistol is registered to the club and they can legally do it, but to me the optics (aka Pub Test) on it seem really bad.

I am just wondering why the club would do it? as the possible negatives seem to out way the positives.

I don't see any problem with it. This is probably the model the authorities would prefer to see for us to have access to any firearms, kept at the club and only used under supervision. As he has no access to it no different to using a club gun. Saves the club having to invest in another pistol.

[bladeracer]

I am just wondering why the club would do it? as the possible negatives seem to out way the positives.

I can't see any negatives at all.
The shooter is now invested in attending the club to get the most out of buying the firearm.
The shooter is using his own firearm every time so gains familiarity and confidence with it, and if he feels he needs to modify it in some way can do so.
The shooter doesn't have the cost or concern of secure storage at home.

The club is not providing a club-owned firearm so has no cost involved, all they are providing is storage of the firearm and supervision which they are charging for anyway.
The shooter is not licenced thus can't bring their own ammo so must buy club ammo every time they attend or organise for another member to supply their ammo.

Main downside is if the shooter wants to attend other clubs he either has to organise with one of his club members to take his pistol to the other club or use a local club gun for away competitions.
A possible downside I guess is if the shooter only ever uses his own firearm he won't get other experience he might gain using a variety of club guns.

[bladeracer]

So he was doing the report for the Police directly and not at your request? If you requested it it should have gone to you, not to the Police. That way you get to decide if it helps or hinders your situation.

When I received the request for information from the Registry, it included the documents to be filled out by my medical specialist. Those were in a sealed envelope, so I didn't open it up while it was in my possession.

I brought the documents to my psychiatrist, and he offered to send them to the Registry once he completed them instead of me having to book another appointment (with lack of vacant dates last year) to collect them to then send myself. I agreed to let him do that because I didn't think there was anything wrong with doing so, but I never got to see the completed documents before they were sent across.

Sounds like Police want the report but to avoid paying for it got you to proffer it on their behalf. I wonder if that's ethical or even legal.

[jwai86]

Sounds like Police want the report but to avoid paying for it got you to proffer it on their behalf. I wonder if that's ethical or even legal.

I reckon that the Registry would argue that the onus is on me to come up with the documentation (on my own dime) to support my application.

[jwai86]

Meanwhile, so many people have suggested that I try archery, but every time that happens, I get reminded of the memes about the thing your mother says is already at home, or buying something from Wish. It's fast becoming a throwaway suggestion that people think will make me feel better, but completely misses the mark.

[bladeracer]

Meanwhile, so many people have suggested that I try archery, but every time that happens, I get reminded of the memes about the thing your mother says is already at home, or buying something from Wish. It's fast becoming a throwaway suggestion that people think will make me feel better, but completely misses the mark.

I enjoyed archery in school, but I think it was mostly just the novelty of not having to play team sports. I have a decent compound bow now and I get it out for a play occasionally. It's never really grabbed me as anything serious though. It's a bit like a muzzle loader I find, limited by accuracy, range and capacity, with a fair bit of extraneous crap to carry around. It's a challenge I'd love to master but the effort doesn't really have any reward to push toward for me, I'm never going to use it on live game when I have rifles available.

Also very hard on my damaged shoulders even wound down to minimum levels.

[on_one_wheel]

It sounds like you're left with 2 options.

Spend a whole bunch of money on lawyers at an average of $350 / hour or a barrister for around $5000 per session which at worst could be a complete waste of money

OR

Simply write the whole idea of firearms ownership off as a bad joke and find something else that chews your money and keeps you entertained.