Peeping Tom's. Beware!

[Oldbloke]

Beware peeping tom's.

Personally I never advertise I'm a shooter so, blind would be closed. Even load rifle in the ute out of sight. But just the same not necessary IMO.

https://nationalshooting.org.au/nswpol- ... nspection/

[Barbarian]

Thats it.

I think we can all agree that its best practice to keep firearms out of sight and not advertise to potential thieves or stick beaks that we shoot. I've got 25 Acres of scrub between myself and any onlookers so I'm rarely shy about cleaning my firearms in the middle of my patio, even had the Shire ranger and Coppers rock up while I'm doing it (reasons unrelated) Never had a problem, touch wood.

However at the end of the day, if an officer - off duty or otherwise genuinely believed there to be a public safety issue. It should have been called and either they or other officers should have made contact with the resident.

However threats of failing safe storage requirements for not going above the requirements of the law is utter bulls**t.

[Lazarus]

The thought I had when getting this email, WTF was this off duty storm trooper doing trespassing on oldmates property?

There's no way someone walking past on the footpath could have seen anything untoward, so he/she must have actually gone in to window-licking distance.
Just one more example of the rozzas over-reaching their authority. @#$%&$#

It would be interesting and informative to know if there's a history between them, I know where my money would be going.

[on_one_wheel]

Storm trooper

He was probably sniffing panties on the cloths line 2 houses down.

[Lazarus]

Storm trooper

He was probably sniffing panties on the cloths line 2 houses down.

[Die Judicii]

In most if not all Law Abiding Firearm Owners books this would equate to,,,,,,, a matching set of Noia's

ie: Paranoia ( Pair-a-noia )

[Hunter257]

I'm not sure what the exact law is in NSW but back in Britain "unwanted attention via visual trespass" constitutes assault under common law. I'm pretty sure the law in Australia is similar. If they have no good reason then a police officer cant enter your property to find good reason. And if it is assault then the officer must be suspended immediately pending investigation.

[Lazarus]

I'm not sure what the exact law is in NSW but back in Britain "unwanted attention via visual trespass" constitutes assault under common law. I'm pretty sure the law in Australia is similar. If they have no good reason then a police officer cant enter your property to find good reason. And if it is assault then the officer must be suspended immediately pending investigation.

I'm fairly certain you're right Hunter, when it's a lowly member of the public.
Unfortunately the police here are a law unto themselves, and investigate themselves when there's a complaint.
I'm sure you see the inevitable outcome of most of those investigations.

For example:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_South ... ch_scandal

[Oldbloke]

I'm not sure what the exact law is in NSW but back in Britain "unwanted attention via visual trespass" constitutes assault under common law. I'm pretty sure the law in Australia is similar. If they have no good reason then a police officer cant enter your property to find good reason. And if it is assault then the officer must be suspended immediately pending investigation.

No lawyer here, but doubt that would apply in this case. Looks like the cop saw him from the street.

"The story starts in Sydney’s inner west when, as we understand it, an off-duty cop was passing a house when he or she saw a gun being cleaned inside the owner’s home.."

He saw him from a public place. That's how journalists get away with taking photos with long lenses.

However if he was looking over the back fence could be different

[Lazarus]

Did you see the view from the street OB, no way he could have seen inside those windows from outside the property.

Gun-Safe-window3.jpg (34.43 KiB) Viewed 1241 times

I'd bet both plums there's a history between them and some payback going on.

[on_one_wheel]

I'd bet both plumbs the police officer had a strange deep quivering breathing technique going on as he watched closely standing on his tippy toes, nose against the glass while fondling the panties he'd just stolen from the neighbouring houses clothes line moments earlier.

[Lazarus]

I'd bet both plumbs the police officer had a strange deep quivering breathing technique going on as he watched closely standing on his tippy toes, nose against the glass while fondling the panties he'd just stolen from the neighbouring houses clothes line moments earlier.

[Oldbloke]

Did you see the view from the street OB, no way he could have seen inside those windows from outside the property.

Gun-Safe-window3.jpg

I'd bet both plums there's a history between them and some payback going on.

Is that the photo the cop based his case on?
If yes, How did you get that?

[Lazarus]

Did you see the view from the street OB, no way he could have seen inside those windows from outside the property.

Gun-Safe-window3.jpg

I'd bet both plums there's a history between them and some payback going on.

Is that the photo the cop based his case on?
If yes, How did you get that?

Yes it is.
I got it from the link in your original post on this thread.

[Oldbloke]

"The officer then said an off-duty police officer saw a gun through K’s window and that it was pointed towards the window."

"Is that the photo the cop based his case on?"

I don't think so.

No firearms to can be seen.

[Lazarus]

"The officer then said an off-duty police officer saw a gun through K’s window and that it was pointed towards the window."

"Is that the photo the cop based his case on?"

I don't think so.

No firearms to can be seen.

Come on OB, jeez, you posted this thread, did you not follow the link you posted and read the article?

The cop did not base his persecution on a bloody photo of the window, he claimed he could SEE in the window FROM THE STREET.

The photo is obviously just to illustrate how tiny the windows are, how far they are from the street and how it would be IMPOSSIBLE for him to see anything without going in to window licking distance.

You're the one who call the thread "Peeping Tom" are you not?

[Oldbloke]

Ok, I didn't read all of it. Thought it would be of interest and posted.
Seems its cops word against the shooter.

"it would be IMPOSSIBLE for him to see anything without going in to window licking distance."

I can't agree with "impossible". It would depend on the light, how close the shooter was to window, was his light on? There are a few variables. In any case it's a bit of a pricks act on the cops part.

Shooter is probably entitled to do what he did anyway, not that I would do it.

[Lazarus]

Ok, I didn't read all of it. Thought it would be of interest and posted.
Seems its cops word against the shooter.

"it would be IMPOSSIBLE for him to see anything without going in to window licking distance."

I can't agree with "impossible". It would depend on the light, how close the shooter was to window, was his light on? There are a few variables. In any case it's a bit of a pricks act on the cops part.

Shooter is probably entitled to do what he did anyway, not that I would do it.

I'm unable to find any regulations in any state saying that it's an offence for a licensed firearm, inside a private residence, on private property to be accidentally visible to anyone passing that property when being handled by the registered owner.

This is clearly more police state mentality at work, or, as is my first guess, a history between the two and a cop using his "authority" for payback.

Mind you, I've stepped on my dick once today, perhaps it's getting underfoot again

[Oldbloke]

"I'm unable to find any regulations in any state saying that it's an offence for a licensed firearm, inside a private residence, on private property to be accidentally visible to anyone passing that property when being handled by the registered owner".

I believe you. But the dodgy act of one or two individuals doesn't make it a "police state".

There have been a few cases over the years where a peeping tom neighbour has seen LAFO in back yard with a rifle and called 000. Then SHTF.

Always pays to be careful.

[Hunter257]

I'm fairly certain you're right Hunter, when it's a lowly member of the public.
Unfortunately the police here are a law unto themselves, and investigate themselves when there's a complaint.
I'm sure you see the inevitable outcome of most of those investigations.

For example:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_South ... ch_scandal

Yes fair point, the good old NSW Police force - definitely a force unto themselves

[Lazarus]

I'm fairly certain you're right Hunter, when it's a lowly member of the public.
Unfortunately the police here are a law unto themselves, and investigate themselves when there's a complaint.
I'm sure you see the inevitable outcome of most of those investigations.

For example:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_South ... ch_scandal

Yes fair point, the good old NSW Police force - definitely a force unto themselves

In my younger days they were known as "the best police force money could buy".
They were also considered to be honest, because once you bought one, he stayed bought

[straightshooter]

I hadn't bothered to look at this thread until now.
I read the NSC article and noticed a resemblance to a case described to me by the solicitor who successfully represented Mr. K.
He has taken over much of the firearms work from Simon Munslow who is trying to retire.
There are some discrepancies between the narrative in the NSC article and what was related to me particularly in the area of "off duty" and what could be seen from the street.
These are cases of the licencing Police exceeding their authority and one wonders as to what might be their true motivation.

[Lazarus]

These are cases of the licencing Police exceeding their authority and one wonders as to what might be their true motivation.

Without any defamatory details, do you know if the officer involved and the firearm owner were previously known to each other?

If so, I'd say prior history and payback were at play.

[straightshooter]

Lazarus
Your suspicions have no basis in what I understand are the facts of the matter.
You are correct in respect of there not being much more that should be said on this specific matter in an open public forum.

[Lazarus]

Lazarus
Your suspicions have no basis in what I understand are the facts of the matter.
You are correct in respect of there not being much more that should be said on this specific matter in an open public forum.

Fair enough, thanks mate