WA Firearm Law Reforms - Monday 16 October announcement

[animalpest]

Reloading is covered in the new Act. It's allowed

[bladeracer]

Reloading is covered in the new Act. It's allowed

Thanks for that. I know they certainly want to ban reloading in WA, but I didn't think they'd done it as yet.

[Barbarian]

At the pistol club yesterday some guys were saying WA just banned handloading last week. I haven't seen anything in that regard yet, is this true?

Wasn't there talk about banning owning manuals or books on repairing or manufacturing guns? Maybe they were referring to that and they were misinformed? As having load data and such could be seen as manufacturing thus making reloading ilegal?

It is hard to keep track of what is happening in WA. So much conjecture and nothing appears to be law yet.

A coupe of things

They've not banned reloading, no. And WAPOL have pages on their website that seem to indicate that they don't have any intention to.

But the firearms amendment act of 2022 introduced new controls around who can own firearms (prohibition orders) and introduced a very vague definition of Firearms Technology. And many materials such as reloading manuals, schematics, etc could all be considered firearms technology

The act's wording doesn't appear to make it lawful for anyone not Manufacturer or Repairer to have firearms technology. Even if they can possess the firearm to which it relates.

The Firearms Bill 2024 does clarify it somewhat, but it will most likely be found in the regulations which we are yet to see in any detail.

[Barbarian]

Why aren't the useless SSAA launching a class action on the behalf of WA shooters so they can be correctly compensated ?

Receiving $500 for something you paid $10K + for is damn unfair..

I agree, I wouldn't take the $500. Wait and see. I'd bet they will pay a fairer amount if you wait.

I thought the amnesty ended when the buyback ended? Now when the legislation goes through if you still own the firearms they simply come and take them for destruction.

Am I crazy to think that it was a scare to make people hand in guns before it even becomes law because IT WONT BECOME LAW. There will be some kind of grandfather clause for the ones who held the line. Everyone who handed in their guns did it voluntary before it was even a law. In my mind only a limp wrist does something like that.

Is that a to out there theory?

As it stands, the Nationals have the WAFCA and by extension the SSAAWA's backing and have maintained that they intend to halt the new bill in some form or another and renew consultation/go back to the drawing board.

Could it all be lip service or a votes grab? 100% but I'll take all I can get.

WAFCA have got a bad wrap for not accepting outside help, but when the Police Minister starts frothing at the mouth and accusing the opposition to the bill/reforms of being an Eastern States Gun Lobby advocating for US style Gun Culture, making sure WAFCA is from WA stakeholders only is important.

There is some argument for WAPOL licensing enforcing the new limits now, If in 6-9months the approval for your firearms over limit was no longer valid then there is a valid argument that they should not have issued it in the first place.

However, on the other hand, approvals are already for individual firearms and require a new genuine reason and genuine need for each firearm. So even if you have to reduce your firearms holdings to the new limits in say, March 2025, what harm is there in approving firearms that someone has a Genuine Need and Genuine Reason to own.

I would not hold my breath for a grandfather clause on existing firearms though, would it be good? yeah. But more than likely they will be seized at the end f whatever transition period individuals are given to meet the new requirements upon their license renewal. Anyone who has an Heirloom licensed should start a thematic collection, as a collection of one is no less valid, if you want to sell something, get it into a dealer's inventory. Good luck though, as they're probably at capacity.

Now, hot take:

Anyone who loses a gun for reasons other than exceeding the numerical limits, didn't really want or need that gun to begin with.

If you want or need it, there are ways. The limits suck and shouldn't be even considered - hell the Law Reform Commission Report didn't recomend them.

[animalpest]

"Anyone who loses a gun for reasons other than exceeding the numerical limits, didn't really want or need that gun to begin with.

If you want or need it, there are ways. The limits suck and shouldn't be even considered - hell the Law Reform Commission Report didn't recomend them."

How on earth do you come that conclusion? And I am intrigued with the "ways". Can you please explain?

[mchughcb]

"Anyone who loses a gun for reasons other than exceeding the numerical limits, didn't really want or need that gun to begin with.

If you want or need it, there are ways. The limits suck and shouldn't be even considered - hell the Law Reform Commission Report didn't recomend them."

How on earth do you come that conclusion? And I am intrigued with the "ways". Can you please explain?

Buy as many as you can afford. Just put an alarm system in. What makes Victoria different? Mentality of who runs this state.

[Barbarian]

"Anyone who loses a gun for reasons other than exceeding the numerical limits, didn't really want or need that gun to begin with.

If you want or need it, there are ways. The limits suck and shouldn't be even considered - hell the Law Reform Commission Report didn't recomend them."

How on earth do you come that conclusion? And I am intrigued with the "ways". Can you please explain?

People who already shoot at clubs, shoot legally on an open license, have occupational licenses, have primary producer licenses, collectors. These people will retain their guns if they are motivated

As stated, numerical limits aside. Plenty of people will lose them who have larger numbers of firearms

People who bought property letters to own safe princesses and build “collections” like that, should have already got a collectors license well before this.

Any heirloom could be the start of a thematic collection if it’s not a legitimate historical piece.

If you actually go shooting somewhere you’ll talk to the property owner about it and sort out permission.

I should add, by numerical limits, I mean that for all numerical limits, including the number of pest shooters on your property. Target shooting is still valid on a hunting license.

I guess I wasn’t also considering people that lose them over new background or medical issue and the physical age limits on handguns though.

[Wapiti]

People should be able to own what they want, without having to play games trying to sidestep into collectors categories. Unless circumstances of free citizens change, for example they commit serious enough violence to change their fit and proper status, sporting goods/tools legally purchased in the past should not matter, or legal ownership change.
People buying property letters for safe queens? So what. Although it sounds like a novel idea to me, IT WAS permitted and accepted by the very people wanting to shut the party down now before all this rubbish blew up. None of it is acceptable.

[Barbarian]

People should be able to own what they want, without having to play games trying to sidestep into collectors categories. Unless circumstances of free citizens change, for example they commit serious enough violence to change their fit and proper status, sporting goods/tools legally purchased in the past should not matter, or legal ownership change.
People buying property letters for safe queens? So what. Although it sounds like a novel idea to me, IT WAS permitted and accepted by the very people wanting to shut the party down now before all this rubbish blew up. None of it is acceptable.

Them problem with people buying safe queens on an open license then not using them is under the existing system, they should have just got a collectors license instead. It’s the purpose of that license. If they’ve not done so since the bill passed and fail to do so when their renewal comes up, then they are part of the problem that saw the system come under fire.

I don’t have an issue with the purchase of letters, it was a needed way to get around WAPOL thousands of acres were required for hunting and recreation at in many cases takes place over distances no more than 3-400m

But I’ve always said, that if you purchased a letter, do it from a commercial property that you can visit by arrangement and -use- your firearm. Or find alternate properties to do so on.

The firearms regulations we have currently place no minimum on property size and require all shooters to carry out their licensed activities safely, responsible for every bullet sent down range. If the projectile doesn’t leave the property and you’ve not discharged it in a manner that is unlawful (near a road reserve for instance) you should have no problems beyond the odd noise complaint.

I don’t like the new laws either, I know people who will lose collectible handguns and others who are also uncertain if their mental health will render them ineligible. I know plenty who will have to reduce collections for numerical limits and those that might lose out on some hunting properties based on the numerical limits of shooters per property of it is too stringent.

One thing they all have in common is getting things into storage if they might lose it, selling it if they WILL lose it or perusing other ways to legally retain ownership of those guns.

We engage in a heavy restricted sport and for some (like animalpest) it’s an occupation and it’s on us to be in top of changes and make sure we protect our interests because precious few else will.

[bladeracer]

If you actually go shooting somewhere you’ll talk to the property owner about it and sort out permission.

Aren't the new laws aimed at stopping people from sorting out permission with landowners? Police expect the landowner to submit your details to them, and Police will decide whether they want to allow you to shoot on that person's property, and they want to decide how many people are allowed to shoot on your property. And it begins with revoking all existing property permissions and starting from scratch. How does it help people that only hunt or shoot interstate? I think all states require that you be permitted to hunt in your home state to be allowed to hunt interstate.

And for the thousands of shooters that have to now join clubs to retain their firearms, how many new clubs are starting up to accommodate them?

[Bugman]

This origional post has obviously ended up being very contentious. Different scenarios, etc. NSW has had some erroneous ideas put forward in days gone past. An example was, that each time you used a cat H pistol at your club or at a visited club/range, that pistol's serial number had to be recorded at the place of shooting (match or practice) and (I think) at the end of each quarter, this information was to be supplied to FAR so that they could see that you were using each firearm in it's intended category. If you, for example, two 38's,
say a model 10 S&W and ( in my mates case, a Manhurin in 38) then the powers that be could track your "legitimate" usage, for want of a better phrase.
Thank christ it didn't eventuate as the feeling was, by club secreatary's and members, that the powers that be could go stick their heads in a deads bears bum!
Seeing what is unfolding in WA concerns me a lot as some of this ludicrous legislation (proposed or passed in law), could worm it's way to other states.

[alexjones]

This origional post has obviously ended up being very contentious. Different scenarios, etc. NSW has had some erroneous ideas put forward in days gone past. An example was, that each time you used a cat H pistol at your club or at a visited club/range, that pistol's serial number had to be recorded at the place of shooting (match or practice) and (I think) at the end of each quarter, this information was to be supplied to FAR so that they could see that you were using each firearm in it's intended category. If you, for example, two 38's,
say a model 10 S&W and ( in my mates case, a Manhurin in 38) then the powers that be could track your "legitimate" usage, for want of a better phrase.
Thank christ it didn't eventuate as the feeling was, by club secreatary's and members, that the powers that be could go stick their heads in a deads bears bum!
Seeing what is unfolding in WA concerns me a lot as some of this ludicrous legislation (proposed or passed in law), could worm it's way to other states.

In QLD if you have a firearms licence you can buy any calibre of ammo so long as it is under 1 inch in calibre. The police were talking about changing that a few years ago to calibres that you only own. Then they said it would be to hard to implement and manage so they put it on the backburner.

[Bugman]

This origional post has obviously ended up being very contentious. Different scenarios, etc. NSW has had some erroneous ideas put forward in days gone past. An example was, that each time you used a cat H pistol at your club or at a visited club/range, that pistol's serial number had to be recorded at the place of shooting (match or practice) and (I think) at the end of each quarter, this information was to be supplied to FAR so that they could see that you were using each firearm in it's intended category. If you, for example, two 38's,
say a model 10 S&W and ( in my mates case, a Manhurin in 38) then the powers that be could track your "legitimate" usage, for want of a better phrase.
Thank christ it didn't eventuate as the feeling was, by club secreatary's and members, that the powers that be could go stick their heads in a deads bears bum!
Seeing what is unfolding in WA concerns me a lot as some of this ludicrous legislation (proposed or passed in law), could worm it's way to other states.

Exactly

In QLD if you have a firearms licence you can buy any calibre of ammo so long as it is under 1 inch in calibre. The police were talking about changing that a few years ago to calibres that you only own. Then they said it would be to hard to implement and manage so they put it on the backburner.

[bladeracer]

In QLD if you have a firearms licence you can buy any calibre of ammo so long as it is under 1 inch in calibre. The police were talking about changing that a few years ago to calibres that you only own. Then they said it would be to hard to implement and manage so they put it on the backburner.

All states except WA as far as I'm aware. Any state that allows us to borrow firearms (all except WA) has to allow us to buy and possess ammunition for these borrowed firearms.

[alexjones]

In QLD if you have a firearms licence you can buy any calibre of ammo so long as it is under 1 inch in calibre. The police were talking about changing that a few years ago to calibres that you only own. Then they said it would be to hard to implement and manage so they put it on the backburner.

All states except WA as far as I'm aware. Any state that allows us to borrow firearms (all except WA) has to allow us to buy and possess ammunition for these borrowed firearms.

Yes thatmakes sense now you mention it.

I thought NSW needs a pistol licence or rego papers that show they own a pistol calibre rifle in order to buy pistol ammo?

[Barbarian]

If you actually go shooting somewhere you’ll talk to the property owner about it and sort out permission.

Aren't the new laws aimed at stopping people from sorting out permission with landowners? Police expect the landowner to submit your details to them, and Police will decide whether they want to allow you to shoot on that person's property, and they want to decide how many people are allowed to shoot on your property. And it begins with revoking all existing property permissions and starting from scratch. How does it help people that only hunt or shoot interstate? I think all states require that you be permitted to hunt in your home state to be allowed to hunt interstate.

And for the thousands of shooters that have to now join clubs to retain their firearms, how many new clubs are starting up to accommodate them?

We don't know what the numerical limits on the Digital Authority will be, I've heard everything from Just don't go issuing 1000's to a few 100's or 10-20 thrown around by people. The act does state that you are given a provisional permission till it is reviewed - I assume so you don't have to wait for review to actually shoot, police might then decide to deny it or such. The issue has already been raised that the pest report that they claim to be referencing doesn't exist.

Till we see the regulations we can't do a whole lot.

The new regulations make no concession at all about hunting interstate - I'm pretty sure they also don't allow TO's to hunt either, its just one of many things that show how out of touch WAPOL was when writing the laws, if they had done even basic actual consultation then these issues would have been addressed.

All existing property letters are being cancelled, but if you already shoot on private property and you haven't been talking to your landowner about permission under the new system, your a f***ing moron and I re-iterate, clearly are not that motivated to keep your guns.

The people rushing to join gun clubs are largely doing so because they've purchased guns with a letter and don't have some other means to retain their guns.

If you were already shooting at a club, you're covered, I'm not aware of any clubs kicking people out at the moment en masse.

If the only shooting you've ever done with your gun is at the range on open days and you pay each time.... shouldn't you have joined a club already?

I'd be all for more clubs starting up, clubs have been at capacity for ages.

As stated, no sympathy if you lose your safe queens purchased on a property letter and never fired, could have got a collectors license instead but you chose to abuse the system.

I do care if you are losing your firearms because the police decide your 500acres is too small to shoot a certain caliber on, even though you've been doing so legally for years safely and shooting at 100-300yds. These kinds of numerical limits have and always will be bulls**t.

[Barbarian]

In QLD if you have a firearms licence you can buy any calibre of ammo so long as it is under 1 inch in calibre. The police were talking about changing that a few years ago to calibres that you only own. Then they said it would be to hard to implement and manage so they put it on the backburner.

All states except WA as far as I'm aware. Any state that allows us to borrow firearms (all except WA) has to allow us to buy and possess ammunition for these borrowed firearms.

To be fair, you can get a temp permit if you are planning to loan a firearm under the current system and that includes ammo. Its just a PITA to get because you need to submit it in advance, no guarantee of it, and nominate the dates you will possess it.

Not ideal by any means though. I know people on here complain about in WA not being able to buy ammo you don't own a firearm chambered in. I've never once heard anyone in WA complain about it being a problem. Everyone just buys their own ammo, if someone is coming shooting with me and can't afford their own I'll just payID them and they'll hit their local gun store. I stockpile and just buy ammo and components regularly, its never a problem. Gives me an excuse to head into the gun store and browse.

[bladeracer]

There is no system to loan firearms in WA as I understand. To borrow somebody else's firearm you have to be co-licenced to it, which requires the same property letter and genuine reason as buying the firearm yourself. Is that not how it works there currently?

If you pay for the ammo and they collect it from the gunshop aren't they in illegal possession of that ammunition if they don't own a firearm for it?

I keep plenty of stock as well, picking up another 10,000rds of .22LR in the morning.

To be fair, you can get a temp permit if you are planning to loan a firearm under the current system and that includes ammo. Its just a PITA to get because you need to submit it in advance, no guarantee of it, and nominate the dates you will possess it.

Not ideal by any means though. I know people on here complain about in WA not being able to buy ammo you don't own a firearm chambered in. I've never once heard anyone in WA complain about it being a problem. Everyone just buys their own ammo, if someone is coming shooting with me and can't afford their own I'll just payID them and they'll hit their local gun store. I stockpile and just buy ammo and components regularly, its never a problem. Gives me an excuse to head into the gun store and browse.

[bladeracer]

You guys need to toss the government out and replace it with one that won't allow the Police to make up their own ridiculous legislation. There is no reason I can fathom for the ludicrous licencing system that is unique to WA, and no reason for them to ignore interstate firearm registrations, or require temporary permits for visitors with firearms. There is no reason a person should not be allowed to merely be licenced to use firearms even if they don't want to own any themselves at the moment. All other states simply licence you as a shooter. If you want to own one firearm, a hundred firearms, or no firearms, you are licenced to use them and buy them whenever you want to. They keep spouting "public safety" and yet all the other states don't have their archaic and draconian laws and don't seem to exhibit a public safety issue resulting from the public owning firearms. What is the metric they're using to make these public safety claims?

A state that has no public land open to hunting should have some concept that people might wish to go and hunt in states that are more open to hunting.

And what is with the serviceability certification? Was that something dreamed up by the dealers to take more money out of the pockets of shooters? No other state has this rubbish. Here in Victoria a permit to acquire another firearm costs $9.20 ($54.90 for handguns). You see something you like on your dealer's rack, you buy it, pay your $9.20, wait a few days for the permit, and go shooting.

Agreed about shooting clubs, should be one on the corner of every block.

Police should have no say in whether a property is big enough to shoot on, it should be between the shooter, the property owner, and any neighbour's directly impacted by shooting there. If it's safe to do so then it should be the prerogative of the property owner whether shooting is allowed.

We don't know what the numerical limits on the Digital Authority will be, I've heard everything from Just don't go issuing 1000's to a few 100's or 10-20 thrown around by people. The act does state that you are given a provisional permission till it is reviewed - I assume so you don't have to wait for review to actually shoot, police might then decide to deny it or such. The issue has already been raised that the pest report that they claim to be referencing doesn't exist.

Till we see the regulations we can't do a whole lot.

The new regulations make no concession at all about hunting interstate - I'm pretty sure they also don't allow TO's to hunt either, its just one of many things that show how out of touch WAPOL was when writing the laws, if they had done even basic actual consultation then these issues would have been addressed.

All existing property letters are being cancelled, but if you already shoot on private property and you haven't been talking to your landowner about permission under the new system, your a f***ing moron and I re-iterate, clearly are not that motivated to keep your guns.

The people rushing to join gun clubs are largely doing so because they've purchased guns with a letter and don't have some other means to retain their guns.

If you were already shooting at a club, you're covered, I'm not aware of any clubs kicking people out at the moment en masse.

If the only shooting you've ever done with your gun is at the range on open days and you pay each time.... shouldn't you have joined a club already?

I'd be all for more clubs starting up, clubs have been at capacity for ages.

As stated, no sympathy if you lose your safe queens purchased on a property letter and never fired, could have got a collectors license instead but you chose to abuse the system.

I do care if you are losing your firearms because the police decide your 500acres is too small to shoot a certain caliber on, even though you've been doing so legally for years safely and shooting at 100-300yds. These kinds of numerical limits have and always will be bulls**t.

[alexjones]

As far as I am aware WA was the first place in Australia to have gun licence system back in the 1970s. So it has always been terrible.

You said you lived in WA Blade before 1996. What were the laws like then? Were they always different? Did they always have 1 year licences and having to licence each gun individually?

[bladeracer]

As far as I am aware WA was the first place in Australia to have gun licence system back in the 1970s. So it has always been terrible.

You said you lived in WA Blade before 1996. What were the laws like then? Were they always different? Did they always have 1 year licences and having to licence each gun individually?

Not sure when the first licence was introduced but I think the first firearms act was 1958.
Yes, I got my first firearm licence in 1980 when I was thirteen for club shooting in Perth. Then I moved to SA and quickly acquired eleven rifles and shotguns but when I moved back to WA in '85 it was too hard to keep the longarms so I sold them all. When I finished studying I got into pistols in 1990 and shot IPSC for 13 years. When I moved to Victoria I got back into longarms in a big way and have only just had a hankering to get back into pistols this year.

Can't recall what the licence period was, and I don't recall but I do think it was individual licences for each firearm. They had a high-power/low-power system pre-'96. Low-power was rimfires, blackpowder cartridges, shotguns, old stuff like .25-20 and .32-20, up to .22 Hornet or .222Rem (and possibly .45-70?). High-power was pretty much .223Rem upwards. When I was up in the Kimberley I had permission to hunt on some very large properties so I applied for a .223, but Firearms advised me to pull the application as I had five outstanding warrants in my name I sold my car to my ex's friend the day I left Perth and made the mistake of letting her lodge the transfer. She parked it wherever she felt like it in the CBD running up dozens of parking tickets in my name. Got onto my local member back in Perth and he sorted it for me pretty quickly as it was easy to prove I hadn't been in Perth at the time. When I got back to the city it was again too difficult to get into longarms (unless you're happy to shoot at paper of course) so I never pursued it. Several of the tradies that came to work on those jobs up north joined clubs in Perth to buy rifles and guns and brought them up to hunt, despite it not being legal as they were held on competition licences.

[alexjones]

Thanks for reply. So basically it has always been somewhat painful to have guns in WA compared to the other states and territories of this commonwealth.

[Wapiti]

I'm really appalled at some of the comments on here. Things like "shooters" (really?) suggesting that others are "f'ing morons") if they haven't negotiated with landowners about access changes and new permissions... from landowners who are also reeling from changes and still need to be assessed by some pen pushing city germ in a high-rise somewhere with an agenda to restrict hunting solely for political reasons.
People that are stupid because they have been solely hunters and haven't joined clubs yet to prepare to be treated as 4th class citizens... because all the property permissions are supposed to be revoked, and some public servant sipping dairy free lattes will decide if the property is worthy of hunting on for some bullsh*t reasons?
People who have bought guns because of the pleasure they give them, who are stupid for not realising that they should have them on a collectors license because they don't suit hunting, were in some BS police category, or the total number of guns is over their hunting limit?
Why is there a limit?
Why would fellow shooters even think ANY of this is remotely acceptable?

Although some just don't get it, they are the enemy amongst us, most hunters are highly intelligent conservatives who by nature just want to be left alone to enjoy their persuits which do not affect anyone else, they are strong people who collect their own health food or compete amongst themselves to be better and enjoy being self-sufficient. This makes them unlikely to protest like the weak trash blaming everyone else, force their activism and uneducated views on everybody else, and therefore makes them targets for both the self-righteous and their own backstabbing peers.
All of this crap is despicable, and none of it can be justified by anyone who isn't a tyrant.

[bladeracer]

Agreed, this is _all_ down to the Police. They instituted the property letter scam, outside of the law, allowed it to prosper for decades, and are now punishing shooters for being part of it.

I'm really appalled at some of the comments on here. Things like "shooters" (really?) suggesting that others are "f'ing morons") if they haven't negotiated with landowners about access changes and new permissions... from landowners who are also reeling from changes and still need to be assessed by some pen pushing city germ in a high-rise somewhere with an agenda to restrict hunting solely for political reasons.
People that are stupid because they have been solely hunters and haven't joined clubs yet to prepare to be treated as 4th class citizens... because all the property permissions are supposed to be revoked, and some public servant sipping dairy free lattes will decide if the property is worthy of hunting on for some bullsh*t reasons?
People who have bought guns because of the pleasure they give them, who are stupid for not realising that they should have them on a collectors license because they don't suit hunting, were in some BS police category, or the total number of guns is over their hunting limit?
Why is there a limit?
Why would fellow shooters even think ANY of this is remotely acceptable?

Although some just don't get it, they are the enemy amongst us, most hunters are highly intelligent conservatives who by nature just want to be left alone to enjoy their persuits which do not affect anyone else, they are strong people who collect their own health food or compete amongst themselves to be better and enjoy being self-sufficient. This makes them unlikely to protest like the weak trash blaming everyone else, force their activism and uneducated views on everybody else, and therefore makes them targets for both the self-righteous and their own backstabbing peers.
All of this crap is despicable, and none of it can be justified by anyone who isn't a tyrant.

[Wapiti]

Yes, but if all the shooters smashed their orgs and were out on the streets protesting every weekend (didn't 30,000 sign a useless E-Petition and think it would help? So there's 30,000 straight up), this would not have happened.
Unfortunately, bashing keyboards, phone screens and internet petitions, including emails to politicians, did nothing, will never do anything, and will never be given due weight. That's just been proven.

[Oldbloke]

I said it a long time ago. Shooters need to march on parliament.

[Wapiti]

I said it a long time ago. Shooters need to march on parliament.

Absolutely mate. But social media addiction has made most "niche groups" as cowardly and extremely less likely to actually stick up for themselves in a meaningful way.
Everyone's scared of being "cancelled", noticed, be anything other than running over the cliff like the rest.
Pitifully, the orgs and clubs seem more intent on keeping their monopolies and comfortable jobs than commitment to leadership.

[Barbarian]

There is no system to loan firearms in WA as I understand. To borrow somebody else's firearm you have to be co-licenced to it, which requires the same property letter and genuine reason as buying the firearm yourself. Is that not how it works there currently?

If you pay for the ammo and they collect it from the gunshop aren't they in illegal possession of that ammunition if they don't own a firearm for it?

I keep plenty of stock as well, picking up another 10,000rds of .22LR in the morning.

To be fair, you can get a temp permit if you are planning to loan a firearm under the current system and that includes ammo. Its just a PITA to get because you need to submit it in advance, no guarantee of it, and nominate the dates you will possess it.

Not ideal by any means though. I know people on here complain about in WA not being able to buy ammo you don't own a firearm chambered in. I've never once heard anyone in WA complain about it being a problem. Everyone just buys their own ammo, if someone is coming shooting with me and can't afford their own I'll just payID them and they'll hit their local gun store. I stockpile and just buy ammo and components regularly, its never a problem. Gives me an excuse to head into the gun store and browse.

Temporary permit https://www.wa.gov.au/media/43996/download?inline

The alternative is co-licensing, yes. But if only govt that trouble if you wanted to loan it on an ongoing basis.

Also I wasn’t referring to buying ammo for me. I’ve just sent them money to buy their own ammo.

[on_one_wheel]

Looks like they've successfully removed thousands of firearms from the hands of potential criminals.

Perhaps next they'll be offering cash for vehicles to those who have more than one to reduce the road toll.

Great job WAPOL

[Faedy]

I said it a long time ago. Shooters need to march on parliament.

Mate. Trust me we want to, but we also are smart.enouhh to pre empt this dodgy Govt to have stooges there in front of the cameras making us look like deranged nut jobs.
We can't risk this.