Petition to remove appearance laws

[darklazor]

What do you think about a petition to remove appearance laws in NSW? Would it be possible?

[stihl88]

Great

[No1_49er]

Of course it's possible.
But even if you managed to get every one of the NSW firearms licence holders to sign the petition, I'd say you will be pushing the proverbial uphill with a sharp stick because NSW Police and the numptie politicians would have palpitations at the mere thought of ditching "appearance" law/regulation. Never mind that appearance has jack sh1t to do with functionality.
But it's a good thought.
Good luck.

[alexjones]

Do you ever do risk assessments in your workplace? Possibility and likelihood are not the same thing.

I believe NSW has made amendments to appearance laws for cat D which has allowed a lot more cat D firearms for sale. So that is a step in the right direction but was pushed by farmers/occupational shooters so hard bipartisan support.

I do believe that of all the laws with the highest likelihood of a successful change appearance laws are up there.

Remember in the lockdowns when they told us to "trust the science"? Why does that not apply to everything?

[darklazor]

We can only try and find out. I did find this so there's a possibility of it changing in the future if they get into office.
https://sportingshooter.com.au/news/nsw-nationals-vote-to-approve-suppressors-drop-appearance-laws/

[alexjones]

We can only try and find out. I did find this so there's a possibility of it changing in the future if they get into office.
https://sportingshooter.com.au/news/nsw-nationals-vote-to-approve-suppressors-drop-appearance-laws/

Do you believe them? They were in office and did not do it. They only mentioned this when they lost power.

[No1_49er]

Remember in the lockdowns when they told us to "trust the science"? Why does that not apply to everything?

It was worse than "trust the science". Some of the "woke" brigade wanted us to believe that "they owned the science". Yeh, right.
Else it doesn't fit the narrative, and that would never do, would it!

[alexjones]

Science is forever growing as evidence is constantly changing because science requires constant questioning and evaluation.

Only 2 people have been murdered with a 50bmg in the USA in the last 30 years yet in some states in Australia they are banned. The science shows they are the safest calibre.

[No1_49er]

Do you ever do risk assessments in your workplace? Possibility and likelihood are not the same thing.

Oh, yes. Very well versed with risk assessments, HAZOP studies etc. Worked all my life in MHIs - Chemical, hydrocarbon, aviation.
Risk / hazard mitigation was a part of daily life.
This study is well worth a read - it has been posted before but a refresher is often helpful https://ro.ecu.edu.au/ecuworks2011/858/
It's dated from 2011, and still so little of the sensibilities of the use of sound moderators is either understood or been acted on.
We live in hope. Take a look at other jurisdictions where you might be considered to be a social pariah if you don't use one.
Good luck for 2024.

[darklazor]

We can only try and find out. I did find this so there's a possibility of it changing in the future if they get into office.
https://sportingshooter.com.au/news/nsw-nationals-vote-to-approve-suppressors-drop-appearance-laws/

Do you believe them? They were in office and did not do it. They only mentioned this when they lost power.

We won't know we can only hope that when they end up in power again it happens. either way, if a petition has the possidlity to remove appearances laws, why not sign it and or support it and get it out there? anyway, it was just food for thought.

[Lazarus]

It's not just appearance that's the problem.
It took NSWFAR 6 months to decide that the XLR chassis on my Howa was legal, simply because it has adjustable length of pull.

The decision:
Because I need an Allen key to adjust LOP, it's legal, if it was a cam lock or other quick release, ie convenient, form of unlocking, then it would be illegal in Nanny South Wales.
They weren't fussed by the appearance or the scary black colour of the anodising, strangely enough.

[darklazor]

It's not just appearance that's the problem.
It took NSWFAR 6 months to decide that the XLR chassis on my Howa was legal, simply because it has adjustable length of pull.

The decision:
Because I need an Allen key to adjust LOP, it's legal, if it was a cam lock or other quick release, ie convenient, form of unlocking, then it would be illegal in Nanny South Wales.
They weren't fussed by the appearance or the scary black colour of the anodising, strangely enough.

Lazarus- If you don't mind me asking how did it come about? via a safe inspection?

I found this picture floating around-


interesting how one is NSW legal and the rest aren't. However, purely based on appearances there are a few resembling characteristics that seem to be a common recurring theme amongst these Firearms that are banned under appearance laws, Resembling characteristics that are present in the legal Tipan.

[Lazarus]

It's not just appearance that's the problem.
It took NSWFAR 6 months to decide that the XLR chassis on my Howa was legal, simply because it has adjustable length of pull.

The decision:
Because I need an Allen key to adjust LOP, it's legal, if it was a cam lock or other quick release, ie convenient, form of unlocking, then it would be illegal in Nanny South Wales.
They weren't fussed by the appearance or the scary black colour of the anodising, strangely enough.

Lazarus- If you don't mind me asking how did it come about? via a safe inspection?

I found this picture floating around-


interesting how one is NSW legal and the rest aren't. However, purely based on appearances there are a few resembling characteristics that seem to be a common recurring theme amongst these Firearms that are banned under appearance laws, Resembling characteristics that are present in the legal Tipan.

Local gun shop owner said it was definitely illegal.
He's a known knob-end, so I went to the police station and asked to see the licensing honcho, that worthy was unavailable, but a senior constable had a look, shook his head and said he had no idea, and suggested I leave the action out of it until I could get a ruling from FAR.
That was enlightening in an unimpressive way.
Nobody knew. I was on the phone, the first time, for nearly 2hrs, most of that on hold.
I had to supply them with pictures, measurements, the manufacturer's website, and my proposed use, although nobody could tell me how that was relevant.

The petition, if any should be to bring evidence based, logical firearms laws made by people who know and use them.

Not by some vote whore whose opinion changes with the polls, or the weather, or the amount of cash in the shopping bag

[bigpete]

Yes, we definitely should do something about the appearance of some firearms.....

[darklazor]

yeah right, that's ridiculous. It's a wonder they weren't fussed by the appearance.

a petition would have to be backed by an organization like the shooters' union to get an industry response to make it possible I reckon, a petition backed by logical and valid reasons to support the removal of item 7. But by the sound, it should include a lot more, like Legalsie adjustable stocks and so on.

It's not just appearance that's the problem.
It took NSWFAR 6 months to decide that the XLR chassis on my Howa was legal, simply because it has adjustable length of pull.

The decision:
Because I need an Allen key to adjust LOP, it's legal, if it was a cam lock or other quick release, ie convenient, form of unlocking, then it would be illegal in Nanny South Wales.
They weren't fussed by the appearance or the scary black colour of the anodising, strangely enough.

Lazarus- If you don't mind me asking how did it come about? via a safe inspection?

I found this picture floating around-


interesting how one is NSW legal and the rest aren't. However, purely based on appearances there are a few resembling characteristics that seem to be a common recurring theme amongst these Firearms that are banned under appearance laws, Resembling characteristics that are present in the legal Tipan.

Local gun shop owner said it was definitely illegal.
He's a known knob-end, so I went to the police station and asked to see the licensing honcho, that worthy was unavailable, but a senior constable had a look, shook his head and said he had no idea, and suggested I leave the action out of it until I could get a ruling from FAR.
That was enlightening in an unimpressive way.
Nobody knew. I was on the phone, the first time, for nearly 2hrs, most of that on hold.
I had to supply them with pictures, measurements, the manufacturer's website, and my proposed use, although nobody could tell me how that was relevant.

The petition, if any should be to bring evidence based, logical firearms laws made by people who know and use them.

Not by some vote whore whose opinion changes with the polls, or the weather, or the amount of cash in the shopping bag

[Lazarus]

yeah right, that's ridiculous. It's a wonder they weren't fussed by the appearance.

a petition would have to be backed by an organization like the shooters' union to get an industry response to make it possible I reckon, a petition backed by logical and valid reasons to support the removal of item 7. But by the sound, it should include a lot more, like Legalsie adjustable stocks and so on.

This is purely my opinion, one coloured by my contempt for politicians I must admit, but I think the rat's nest of illogical, mad womans knitting we have now is the result of the FOMO of "also ran" politicians.

These second raters could see kudos going to little johnny and his mob for setting out the basics, most of which I agree with, so they came scuttling in with bullsh!t additions like appearance, suppressor bans, etc.

Our biggest problem is that the one thing politicians hate more than losing is admitting they were wrong about anything.
Getting rid of all the me too dross would require a lot of mea culpa from pond scum psychologically unequipped to supply it.