Customs attempt to seize Riverman OAFs retrospectively

Questions about South Australian gun and ammunition laws. S.A. Firearms Act 2015.

Customs attempt to seize Riverman OAFs retrospectively

Post by Download » 15 Mar 2018, 3:23 pm

http://www.guns.com/2018/03/14/bolt-act ... lty-video/

Apparently Customs are sending out letters to people who bought the Riverman OAF and telling them they have to surrender them because Customs have changed their minds and the guns are now a prohibited import.

I'm somewhat doubtful Customs have a power to retrospectively ban the import of a gun. The fact they use the language "we seek the return of your rifle" makes me think they know they have no power and know they can't put a demand in writing but are trying to sound threatening and convince people to turn them in.

I hope the people that own these tell Customs to f*** off.
Download
Private
Private
 
Posts: 88
South Australia

Re: Customs attempt to seize Riverman OAFs retrospectively

Post by Daddybang » 15 Mar 2018, 3:40 pm

Saw this on the news yesterday and from what was said (mainstream media so take with a grain of salt) anyone who does not hand them in will be prosecuted. :thumbsdown: :drinks:
This hard living ain't as easy as it used to be!!!
Daddybang
Second Lieutenant
Second Lieutenant
 
Posts: 2012
Queensland

Re: Customs attempt to seize Riverman OAFs retrospectively

Post by Oldbloke » 15 Mar 2018, 4:08 pm

Soooo, I guess that means I can't buy a rubber sword from a party shop because it looks like a sword and I'm not a member of a sword collector's club.

These look alike laws are;.


Stupid, stupid, stupid, stupid
Stupid, stupid, stupid, stupid
Stupid, stupid, stupid, stupid
Stupid, stupid, stupid, stupid
Stupid, stupid, stupid, stupid
The greatest invention in the history of man is beer.
https://youtu.be/2v3QrUvYj-Y
Member. SFFP, Shooters Union.
SSAA, the powerful gun lobby. :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:
Hunt safe.
User avatar
Oldbloke
Field Marshal
Field Marshal
 
Posts: 11192
Victoria

Re: Customs attempt to seize Riverman OAFs retrospectively

Post by JimmyS » 15 Mar 2018, 5:22 pm

I find it amazing that they can ban a rifle on how it looks, as opposed to it's function.

It's a bolt action centre fire, therefor, CAT B?
We really do take it up the arse.
Were we always like this? Surely not.
User avatar
JimmyS
Private
Private
 
Posts: 87
Victoria

Re: Customs attempt to seize Riverman OAFs retrospectively

Post by Member-Deleted » 15 Mar 2018, 5:49 pm

Download wrote:http://www.guns.com/2018/03/14/bolt-action-rifle-ordered-turned-in-by-australian-officials-as-its-too-assaulty-video/

I'm somewhat doubtful Customs have a power to retrospectively ban the import of a gun. The fact they use the language "we seek the return of your rifle" makes me think they know they have no power and know they can't put a demand in writing but are trying to sound threatening and convince people to turn them in.

I hope the people that own these tell Customs to f*** off.


Yep, this letter fails the "smell test". The Australian Border Force has the power to reclassify an item, but you would think this will only restrict future importation of that same type of item. Where their letter says "the reclassification of the Riverman OAF...means that your rifle is a prohibited import", I'm not certain that is true. Wouldn't it only be a prohibited import if you were trying to import it now? The existing Riverman OAF rifles already in Australia were lawfully imported at the time they crossed the border into this country.
If they thought they had the power they'd be giving you a seizure notice, not a letter, or at the very least using their powers to direct you to surrender it at the nearest police station. Instead they "seek the return of your rifle to the ABF and offer you compensation", and will give you a seizure notice after you've "organised the return of your rifle". They also tell you not to deal with or dispose of it in the meantime but I'd be surprised if the ABF had any power to restrict trade or commerce within the States or territories for something that was lawfully imported. This situation reminds me of when importing pitbulls became prohibited. They didn't then go around seizing existing pitbulls which had been lawfully imported up to that point. Any lawyers on this forum want to chime in?
Member-Deleted
 

Re: Customs attempt to seize Riverman OAFs retrospectively

Post by Daddybang » 15 Mar 2018, 6:09 pm

JimmyS wrote:I find it amazing that they can ban a rifle on how it looks, as opposed to it's function.

It's a bolt action centre fire, therefor, CAT B?
We really do take it up the arse.
Were we always like this? Surely not.


No it wasn't always like this but pam gave the poliscum the excuse they needed and it's just gotten worse since :drinks:

Bbss I'm not a lawyer but border farce are saying they were incorrectly classified. I don't know if that gives them the ability to do what they are. ???? :unknown: :drinks:
This hard living ain't as easy as it used to be!!!
Daddybang
Second Lieutenant
Second Lieutenant
 
Posts: 2012
Queensland

Re: Customs attempt to seize Riverman OAFs retrospectively

Post by andreweden » 15 Mar 2018, 8:09 pm

Where does this leave the new Warwick WFA1?
andreweden
Lance Corporal
Lance Corporal
 
Posts: 168
Queensland

Re: Customs attempt to seize Riverman OAFs retrospectively

Post by SHANAKATAK » 15 Mar 2018, 8:15 pm

Not a lawyer by any means. But as far as I'm aware restricted and banned imports are not the same as banned items.
Can't import pitbulls, can still buy them.
Single handed opening knives were until recently a prohibited import. You could still go to Aussie disposals and buy a leather-man with a thumb notch.
Last edited by SHANAKATAK on 15 Mar 2018, 8:16 pm, edited 1 time in total.
SHANAKATAK
Recruit
Recruit
 
Posts: 23
Victoria

Re: Customs attempt to seize Riverman OAFs retrospectively

Post by Spudman75 » 15 Mar 2018, 8:15 pm

Never heard them confiscate any 7 shot lever actions, so tell them to sod off. If it is registered legally then Boarder Force has no jurisdiction.
User avatar
Spudman75
Recruit
Recruit
 
Posts: 42
South Australia

Re: Customs attempt to seize Riverman OAFs retrospectively

Post by juststarting » 15 Mar 2018, 9:49 pm

Heh, funny. We f'ed up, I mean, we dodn't really, but our leadership told us that we did, later, so like, can you un-f*ck this for us, please?

Working for a long time in professional services, all words have a 'special' legal meaning. Seek, could, must, should, examine, audit, etc. Assuming someone with a brain and legal knowledge reviewed the letters (most likely), if there were letters, before they were sent to people, 'seek' sounds very soft. Unless you hear from LRD or the cops, NO DEAL! Or just call LRD and confirm in writing... :crazy:
---
https://reloadingstudio.com
User avatar
juststarting
Captain
Captain
 
Posts: 2738
Victoria

Re: Customs attempt to seize Riverman OAFs retrospectively

Post by TheDude » 16 Mar 2018, 6:38 am

andreweden wrote:Where does this leave the new Warwick WFA1?


Made local so border force have no say. It’s up to the states if they allow them
User avatar
TheDude
Corporal
Corporal
 
Posts: 313
Queensland

Re: Customs attempt to seize Riverman OAFs retrospectively

Post by Mr.Seacucumber » 16 Mar 2018, 6:41 am

andreweden wrote:Where does this leave the new Warwick WFA1?



Financially? Well they just re-monopolised the market so pretty dam good.

This entire issue is a federal issue, according to the sane states it is still a bolt action rifle. The states are the ones who decide what can and can’t be registered.

The AFP though are saying that those rifles could never have been imported because they were “always” item 12 and it was a mistake that they let them in.
Mr.Seacucumber
Corporal
Corporal
 
Posts: 290
Victoria

Re: Customs attempt to seize Riverman OAFs retrospectively

Post by Daddybang » 16 Mar 2018, 7:50 am

Oldbloke wrote:Soooo, I guess that means I can't buy a rubber sword from a party shop because it looks like a sword and I'm not a member of a sword collector's club.

These look alike laws are;.


Stupid, stupid, stupid, stupid
Stupid, stupid, stupid, stupid
Stupid, stupid, stupid, stupid
Stupid, stupid, stupid, stupid
Stupid, stupid, stupid, stupid


There was a bloke in cairns recently that was charged for carrying a plastic sword in public!! Apparently someone got scared by it!! :lol: :lol:
I really don't know how they can say this rifle looks military. ..its bright f@#kin orange !!! (Partly anyway) :crazy: :drinks:
This hard living ain't as easy as it used to be!!!
Daddybang
Second Lieutenant
Second Lieutenant
 
Posts: 2012
Queensland

Re: Customs attempt to seize Riverman OAFs retrospectively

Post by Rod_outbak » 16 Mar 2018, 12:05 pm

I dont see how they (Border Farce) differentiate between a straight-pull Cat B rifle, and a Lever-action like a BLR?
Both have detachable mags, and both are about as quick to reload.

[I would have thought a BLR was more of concern to the PC crowd, as it seems easier to keep a LA on track while cycling the action.]

And what about the Remington 7600 series rifles? Dont they all raise the same red flags?

Weird.
[Mind you; still trying to come to grips with the farce that is the WA idea of loaded ammo. How the PHUK do you endanger the public with a handful of spent .22 cases??]

Just freaking stupid.
---------------------
Sharing the extreme love with cats in Outback QLD
Rod_outbak
Corporal
Corporal
 
Posts: 494
Queensland

Re: Customs attempt to seize Riverman OAFs retrospectively

Post by Download » 16 Mar 2018, 12:35 pm

Rod_outbak wrote:I dont see how they (Border Farce) differentiate between a straight-pull Cat B rifle, and a Lever-action like a BLR?
Both have detachable mags, and both are about as quick to reload.

[I would have thought a BLR was more of concern to the PC crowd, as it seems easier to keep a LA on track while cycling the action.]

And what about the Remington 7600 series rifles? Dont they all raise the same red flags?

Weird.
[Mind you; still trying to come to grips with the farce that is the WA idea of loaded ammo. How the PHUK do you endanger the public with a handful of spent .22 cases??]

Just freaking stupid.

It's because the Customs Act includes a line that allows them to ban an import if the gun looks "substantially" like a Cat D rifle or a machine gun. That's why they're banning it.
Download
Private
Private
 
Posts: 88
South Australia

Re: Customs attempt to seize Riverman OAFs retrospectively

Post by Archie » 16 Mar 2018, 12:41 pm

Rod_outbak wrote:I dont see how they (Border Farce) differentiate between a straight-pull Cat B rifle, and a Lever-action like a BLR?
Both have detachable mags, and both are about as quick to reload.

[I would have thought a BLR was more of concern to the PC crowd, as it seems easier to keep a LA on track while cycling the action.]

And what about the Remington 7600 series rifles? Dont they all raise the same red flags?

Weird.
[Mind you; still trying to come to grips with the farce that is the WA idea of loaded ammo. How the PHUK do you endanger the public with a handful of spent .22 cases??]

Just freaking stupid.


They aren't going for it on the basis of the action. They're going for it on appearance - i.e. it looks like a military carbine.

Thats the really odd bit about appearance laws. So for example, in NSW you can't buy a Warwick WFA1 because it sorta kinda looks like an M4, despite the fact that its a straight pull bolt action that is exactly like a bunch of legal hunting rifles (and probably, in practice, slower to cycle than a 7600 pump).

Meanwhile, you can get a Verney-Carron speedline on a cat B, which is about as close as its possible to get to being a semi-automatic without actually being one. But, the Verney Carron looks like it was put together by a guy who has a sideline in making fake antique furniture. So, even though the only thing you need to do to get it to reload after it fires is flick a catch with your thumb, it's covered in wood, so that's fine.
Archie
Corporal
Corporal
 
Posts: 366
New South Wales

Re: Customs attempt to seize Riverman OAFs retrospectively

Post by Member-Deleted » 16 Mar 2018, 12:49 pm

The AFP though are saying that those rifles could never have been imported because they were “always” item 12 and it was a mistake that they let them in.[/quote]

Then the AFP need to take a long hard look at themselves, especially if they are "the Australian Government's forensic firearms experts". The Riverman rifles in Australia now were not “always” item 12. According to the Border Farce's own letter, they originally classified it Item 2 and allowed importation. That was not a mistake or a typo. They then later made a decision to reclassify it to Item 12, not because they made a mistake. The only reason given in their letter for reclassification is that it looks substantially the same in appearance as a full auto, specifically the Stoner CQB Mod 2. Someone at AFP or Border Farce is playing a little too much Call of Duty.

Frankly, I think the people working in those organisations do know better than this but they're forced to make dumb pronouncements like this because several floors (and paygrades) above them is someone being leaned on by a politician, who in turn is probably being swayed by a lobbyist.
Member-Deleted
 

Re: Customs attempt to seize Riverman OAFs retrospectively

Post by holden4th » 18 Mar 2018, 5:16 pm

What we are seeing is a government body creating it's own laws and it is happening more and more.

The law can only be changed by an act of parliament and laws cannot be applied retrospectively. Unless you get a seizure notice or similar, just throw the letter away. I'll bet it was not a registered letter and therefore the onus of proof on you receiving it is up to the sender.
holden4th
Recruit
Recruit
 
Posts: 42
Queensland

Re: Customs attempt to seize Riverman OAFs retrospectively

Post by MontyShooter » 19 Mar 2018, 8:57 am

Rod_outbak wrote:I dont see how they (Border Farce) differentiate between a straight-pull Cat B rifle, and a Lever-action like a BLR?
Both have detachable mags, and both are about as quick to reload.

[I would have thought a BLR was more of concern to the PC crowd, as it seems easier to keep a LA on track while cycling the action.]...
Just freaking stupid.


My BLR is quite a bit faster to cycle than my Warwick WFA1...

Hopefully this is at least opening the door for some local manufacture. More protected than the car industry now.
MontyShooter
Corporal
Corporal
 
Posts: 339
Victoria


Back to top
 
Return to South Australian gun laws