A question..from a Canadian

[tony m]

We just elected a new government, nationally.These new people are talking about implementing Australian gun laws.So how does this work?Now we have restricted and non restricted classifications..I have the latter.I can use a sidearm, any sporting rifle , any action-except full auto in the field ,any caliber are length limitations.Once again we elected city guys.How do you like your system?

[sandgroperbill]

You should start walking south or west.

[sandgroperbill]

seriously, start walking now.

[Title_II]

What "Sidearm" are you hunting with? My understanding is you can't hunt with a handgun in Canada and you can only take one directly to and from a range with a transport permit. Unless you have the impossible to get carry license.

[sandgroperbill]

I also agree with the vetting process for initial applicants. Before you can be licensed, the police run checks and decide if you are a fit and proper person. You than have to install a safe meeting pretty stringent guidelines. This, too, is good. But anything beyond this becomes pretty restrictive. For example, I'm in Western Australia. If I want to purchase ammunition, I have to show an A4 paper license that lists my firearms, their serial numbers and calibers, AND I have to show my firearms license identification card (a plastic credit sized license card). If I can't show both, then no ammunition can be sold to me. This means I can't just pop in and pick up a box of .223, I have to decide that I'm going to get a box of ammo before heading into town so that I take my paper license with me.
Now, let's imagine that while I'm in there, I spot a really nice sako .222 and decide I want to buy it. This is where things get really silly. Before I can apply to have it added to my license, I have to buy itk , or, depending on the lgs, put a sizeable deposit on it. I then need to get a serviceability certificate made up saying it is in a safe condition (even if its brand spanking new). I then need to get justification to own it (a letter from a farmer with a suitable amount of land - however the police decide what is suitable. Off the top of my head, for a .222, you'll have trouble unless you have 1000 acres. Used to be 500, but I heard a rumor that they,very now decided its 2000acres, but may accept 1000).
Right, so I've gathered all that, so I fill out the application online, print it out, take it to the post office with my ID and pay $180 (no, not a typo) and then wait.
After a while, I get a letter advising me that my license has been declined. So I phone police licensing, and get told that I already have a .223, so I don't need a .222.
So, now I'm the proud owner of a firearm I'm not allowed to bring home or use. I have to on sell it, see if the legs will give me a refund or credit, etc. The other option is that I sell my .223, have it removed from my license, and reapply for the .222.
Now, this has not happened to me personally, but WAPOL have a reputation for doing this sort of thing. They have also been known to phone applicants and say, look, you don't need x caliber as we think y caliber will be fine, y caliber sometimes being .22lr. I have always tried avoiding applying for calibers that may be too close to each other performance wise, as it can be a very expensive exercise to have an application declined. They have set it up this way to make it as expensive as possible and to attach a financial risk to applications. They do refund you part of your fees, but there is still a lot of money to be lost along the way.

Now, to some of the finer points to our legislation.
We can't share safes.nope. nuh-uh. no way. If you live on a farm with three other firearms license holders, each with a .22lr, you each need your own safe.
You can only purchase ammunition for calibers on your license. If you have a .22lr and the farmer next door has a .22mag, you can't pick up ammunition for each other while in town.
We don't recognise interstate licenses. WAPOL also have a reputation for declining permits to people visiting if they think their gun is scary.
They can decline your application simply because your gun looks scary (jump on YouTube and search nioa wapol and then click on the opinions of WAPOL, you know it must be bad when they drive one of our largest firearms importers to make this sort of video out of frustration)
WAPOL have been taken to the SAT and lost several times, but they keep rejecting certain applications out of hand simply as a lot of people give up because of the costs of going to the SAT.

Now, I know someone who went and bought a rifle and got his license in WA. He had permission from a nearby farmer to hunt on his land, and the farmer had 2000 acres. He was in the army, and got based in qld for a couple of years. He took his rifle with him, QLD recognised his license and he had no issyes. He then went to east Timor, and upon returning, wasn't in qld long before getting transferred to NT. NT recognised his license, he took his rifle with him, no issues. A few years later, he got his discharge and returned home to WA. WA refused to recognise his license and are making him go through the entire application process again (treating it as an original license with increased costs, even though the rifle was originally licensed in WA). The farmer that he originally had permission from is no longer there, and he's having trouble as the other farmers that allow him to hunt all have less than the 2000 acres that WAPOL wants to justify the rifle. So while he's getting it sorted, he has to pay a lgs to store his rifle for him because he's not allowed to have it.

Now, WA is known for having the most draconian firearms laws in Australia, but they are still Australian laws. So, I would start fighting now, Tony. Again, I have no issues with safe storage requirements (except safes can't be shared) and the vetting process so that only safe and sane persons can be licensed, but the rest is a pita.

[Gwion]

E'gads! WA is weird!

Thta brings up a good point for Canadia, though (sorry, can't help myself). Saying they want to introduce "Australian style gun Laws" is one thing, but are they going to also have the "Australian Style" set up where that Act of legislation is open to interpretation by state/territory police who then implement what ever restrictive regulations they see necessary (or fun, 'cause it's fun watching people tear their hair out!)......

Food for thought for Canada.

Also, seeing you guys abolished a registry system because it was useless and financially draining, it doesn't make much sense that such a registry be reinstated???

[GLS_1956]

Hillary Clinton, as well as the whole of the Democratic political party are singing the praise of Australian "gun law", wishing to inflict said oppression on the American Citizenry. Needless to say we are resisting such anti-constitutional activity. I am unsure if Canada or Australia have a Constitution, but if so I'm guessing that if they said Constitutions do not anything like our Second Amendment. And I also wonder if the constitution were to say the rights are held by the people, or the government.

[Baronvonrort]

Hillary Clinton, as well as the whole of the Democratic political party are singing the praise of Australian "gun law", wishing to inflict said oppression on the American Citizenry. Needless to say we are resisting such anti-constitutional activity.

We had 1 death from semi auto rifles in 1995, the year before they were banned for recreational shooters.
Aussie gun laws have also banned BB and airsoft guns despite no mass shootings with those type of firearm.

If anyone praises our laws put them dead last on every ballot paper.

[Spudman75]

So they are looking to reinstate a set of laws that were proven to have no effect on crime and cost $2bn? Wow... it was a big risk to vote in a Lefty government then... oh wait... we basically have that too... crap...

[Spudman75]

This is why we can't change the laws here, we don't have any rights.

The Constitution has no Bill of Rights, such as that found in the United States Constitution, which prevents a legislature
from passing laws that infringe basic human rights, such as freedom of speech. Some express protections, however, are
given by the Constitution against legislative or executive action by the Commonwealth, but not by the States. Examples
are section 51(xxxi) (acquisition of property must be ‘on just terms’), section 80 (trial by jury is required in relation to
some criminal offences), and section 116 (a right exists to exercise any religion).

From the constitution: http://www.aph.gov.au/About_Parliament/ ... nstitution

[coloradoboy]

say goodbye to your semi autos and registration is gonna get implemented again.

you can try to immigrate here to the US; I know that Canadians get visas far easier than any other nationality and vice versa. I have a Canadian green card / pr which was an absolute piece of cake to get.

Get moving Canadian !

[Title_II]

This is why we can't change the laws here, we don't have any rights.

The Constitution has no Bill of Rights, such as that found in the United States Constitution, which prevents a legislature
from passing laws that infringe basic human rights, such as freedom of speech. Some express protections, however, are
given by the Constitution against legislative or executive action by the Commonwealth, but not by the States. Examples
are section 51(xxxi) (acquisition of property must be ‘on just terms’), section 80 (trial by jury is required in relation to
some criminal offences), and section 116 (a right exists to exercise any religion).

From the constitution: http://www.aph.gov.au/About_Parliament/ ... nstitution

What dumb ass in your country passed a law that gave roos the right to kick you with their claws? Or snakes to envenomate you, or crocs and sharks the right to use their teeth on you?

The US Bill of Rights does not grant any rights to Americans.

[Spudman75]

The US Bill of Rights does not grant any rights to Americans.

That is the problem, the law is against you in Australia. If you do manage to protect yourself and injure the criminal trying to attack you, there is a good chance you will face jail time. If you do it with a gun, you will forfeit your licence all you guns and do jail time. Even if you are being attacked by a drug fuelled nutter in your own house, don't pass go... go to jail.

The best you can do is call the Police, but then they might not respond in time or at all if they don't believe the threat is bad enough for them to turn up, just ask Tara Brown... http://www.abc.net.au/news/2015-11-11/l ... al/6930950

[GLS_1956]

The US Bill of Rights does not grant any rights to Americans.

Spudman75 is correct in that GOD is the one who granted us our rights. The US Constitution recognizes that and puts limitations upon the Federal and State governments.

[Strikey]

I really like our current firearm laws and think everyone else should follow suit, Let's share the pain

[headspace]

NSW and Victoria aren't too bad, I've never been interested in a semi auto, but I think that people who do have use for them should be able have one. Handgun laws have always been tough here, so not much new there. I can still cram as many guns as I want in my safe as long as the paperwork is OK. Western Australia is weird, I would move east. In 2 years my storage has never been inspected by the way.
JD

[tony m]

What "Sidearm" are you hunting with? My understanding is you can't hunt with a handgun in Canada and you can only take one directly to and from a range with a transport permit. Unless you have the impossible to get carry license.

thanks for the feedback guys..you can carry a sidearm on the trapline or as a game guide in B.C. Canada.

[VICHunter]

We just elected a new government, nationally.These new people are talking about implementing Australian gun laws.So how does this work?Now we have restricted and non restricted classifications..I have the latter.I can use a sidearm, any sporting rifle , any action-except full auto in the field ,any caliber are length limitations.Once again we elected city guys.How do you like your system?

Very brief summary of things here is....

Bolt action / lever action rifles only.
No semi-automatics.
Pistol shooting at clubs only.
Some potential restrictions on calibres like .50BMG
No carry of anything outside a hunting/target shooting situation.

And any slip up (such as crossing the wrong line on a map) even a clearly innocent one with no harm intended or possible can potentially be a criminal offence.

[pomemax]

NSW gun laws are inconsistent in the way they were thought out.
Here my take on the laws :
Safe storage I cant see any problem with that makes sense to me. the same as a check to make sure I'm not a nut job or just out of prison /or any court ordered restrictions but once I'm licensed I don't think there should be restriction
I cant have a pump action shotgun even with 3 round mag but i can have a 3 barreled shotgun I can have a pump action rimfire/centerfire up to 10 shot (any caliber up to 50cal more is its BP).
I cant have a leaver action shotgun with more than 5 round mag but I can centerfire ..3557/38s and rimfire .
Semi auto rifles or shotguns forget to dangerous we might cut them up and conceal them .
But I can have semi auto Handguns up to and including 45cal
IN NSW to get a licence for a rifle you Join a club / have a genuine need for for a fire arm If your club is A-B- G- H rated you can get all the class,s on your licence but it will take some time .
A-B + Hunting and Target long arms only you need to do a 4 hour training course send paper work away wait 28-40 day get advice to go get yer photo taken wait another 14 days get your licence in mail now you can send away a PTA (permit to acquire) this will take for the first one 28 to 36 days total 90 day once you have a pta approved you can go by your first rifle. will finish this when home from work

[tony m]

It is much more leniant here in Canada than what I here you say in Aus.We carry rifles amd shotguns around all the time...most have a truck gun.Before 9/11 we could easily buy ammunition stateside and bring it home, now we are blocked buy the USA border people (we live 30 miles from montana ) Our government is fine with it though.That is a shame because the selection is amazing there.Yes, the failed long gun registry is back on the the table again, it is absolutely nuts imo, and we will fight it again.Our problem is the Urban mentality-city folks.I don't understand them, they don't us...and hell, they are easy to spot...no hat , no boots and some kind of shiney car.

[sandgroperbill]

versus a mounty hat and a horse?

[sandgroperbill]

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=sZa26_esLBE

[sandgroperbill]

sorry, couldn't help myself

[Xerox]

Here my take on the laws :

Pretty much agree with all that.

License required to filter out criminals (yes, they'll get guns elsewhere but no need to make it easy for them)

Training course to introduce new shooters to things.

Safe storage is a no brainer.

No registry, having a database of firearms each shooters has prevents nothing and just puts us at risk if/when it falls into the wrong hands.

Likewise no permits, if you're licensed for something just show your license, have the dealer put it into the computer or something to make sure license is still valid and if all is good you walk out with it there and then.

That would address all the key issues with 99% less waste, bulls**t and bureaucracy than we have now.