"Help us change Australia's self-defence laws!"

News and events in the media and political arena relating to firearms.

Re: "Help us change Australia's self-defence laws!"

Post by Gamerancher » 25 Aug 2016, 12:55 pm

Bottom line is the government of the day sees fit to do as it likes regardless of "constitution" or "bill of rights" . They just find ways around the statutes, think 1996 , 1983, (Franklin dam).......
User avatar
Gamerancher
Sergeant Major
Sergeant Major
 
Posts: 1596
New South Wales

Re: "Help us change Australia's self-defence laws!"

Post by Gwion » 26 Aug 2016, 5:54 am

Legislation is law in effect for so long as it is upheld by courts and unchallenged. Once challenged directly, any legislation found to be in contradiction of the constitution or the document on which common law is based, must be repealed.

This was the entire point and premise of 'the Castle'.

It would take a class action and a willing QC to test Gen93's theories.
User avatar
Gwion
Colonel
Colonel
 
Posts: 3978
-

Re: "Help us change Australia's self-defence laws!"

Post by Archie » 26 Aug 2016, 6:46 am

It's not going to happen.

The bill of rights was basically a "screw you" to James II after William of Orange invaded England and James II did a runner. The point of the bill is basically to lock in the idea that Parliament has a bunch of rights that the King can't take away. That's why it contains parliamentary privilege etc. The point is, it's about the rights of Parliament, not the populace, which is what makes it different from the US bill of rights which came much later.

Anyway, the guts of the issue is that, as the bill specifies, that specific right is only insofar "as allowed by law". And the whole point of the bill of rights in its entirety is that the Parliament can pass laws and the King can't repeal them. So what it means is, the King cannot stop Protestants from bearing arms if the Parliament allows it. The Parliament on the other hand, can do what it wants to - so if the Parliament wants to pass a law stopping the bearing of arms, it can. You've got to read the thing in its total context.

Personally I'm fine with the current laws and I think they work well. But leaving that aside whether you like them or not, given its been 20 years, if there were actual constitutional grounds for challenging the laws it would have happened by now. Any changes will be through parliament, not through a court challenge.
Archie
Corporal
Corporal
 
Posts: 366
New South Wales

Re: "Help us change Australia's self-defence laws!"

Post by Gamerancher » 26 Aug 2016, 7:41 am

As I said in a previous post, "deep pockets".

So, all we have to do is get every one of the "million plus" gun owners in Australia to agree on something and donate about $50 each and we'll be in the fight! Too easy. :sarcasm:
User avatar
Gamerancher
Sergeant Major
Sergeant Major
 
Posts: 1596
New South Wales

Re: "Help us change Australia's self-defence laws!"

Post by Gwion » 26 Aug 2016, 8:30 am

Still need to convince a QC (who actually knows constitutional law) to take the case.......

The definition of a 'right to arms' in the original bill of rights is so specific as to be easily dismissed in a modern context. Only Protestants are mentioned specifically. There is a historical context behind this in that a Catholic King had previously outlawed the Protestants from owning arms and so the clause was added to counter this royal decree.

However, it does go on to end the clause with "as allowed them by law". I'm no lawyer but there's the kicker, I'd say!
User avatar
Gwion
Colonel
Colonel
 
Posts: 3978
-

Re: "Help us change Australia's self-defence laws!"

Post by Gamerancher » 26 Aug 2016, 9:05 am

I did know one who may have taken it on , unfortunately I attended his funeral a couple of months ago. :cry: R.I.P Andrew.
User avatar
Gamerancher
Sergeant Major
Sergeant Major
 
Posts: 1596
New South Wales

Re: "Help us change Australia's self-defence laws!"

Post by <<Genesis93>> » 26 Aug 2016, 10:46 am

Jandamurra wrote:@Genesis
Bravo!
Someone had to bring up the Bill of Rights from the Glorious Revolution of 1688.
Trouble is, if people don't know something they tend to dismiss or ignore it.
But yes, the Bill of Rights is still in force.


It is indeed still in force, in fact we witnessed the AFP searching Labor party offices, even their Parliamentary chambers!! for the NBN co (stolen?) documents....

What was the Labor party response? they invoked PARLIAMENTARY PRIVILEGE OVER THE DOCUMENTS to absolve themselves of any legal repercussion...(a long bow pulling if ever I've seen one!)

YET we plebs/proles can not have arms for the defence of our families?

Those of you paying attention would realise they are both provisions of the 'fantasy of the Bill of Rights of 1688;

9. That the freedom of speech, and debates or proceedings in parliament, ought not to be impeached or questioned in any court or place out of parliament.

With the BoR directly legislated or additional laws such as the Commonwealth PP Act which reinforces to above;

16 Parliamentary privilege in court proceedings (1) For the avoidance of doubt, it is hereby declared and enacted that
the provisions of article 9 of the Bill of Rights, 1688 apply in relation to the Parliament of the Commonwealth and....


which only applies when it suits these trough feeders..... I'll bet a beer to anyone who questions their local MPs whether the BoR of 1688 applies.... that they'll scoff and laugh off the question - oh that an old irrelevant document....
<<Genesis93>>
Second Lieutenant
Second Lieutenant
 
Posts: 2191
-

Re: "Help us change Australia's self-defence laws!"

Post by <<Genesis93>> » 26 Aug 2016, 10:49 am

Wobble wrote:
<<Genesis93>> wrote:So yes, we have the right to arms for our defence and as allowed by law..... trouble is they have taken the 'by law' part and in 1996, fully legislated that 'right' away when they brought in the PAM laws and the excuse/reason crap specifically excluding self defence CONTRARY to the provisions of the Bill of rights....


So what's the bottom line then, if something is legal in one part and illegal in another what determines which takes precedent or is enforced?


Not really legal in one part illegal in another, the BoR say you can have arms sujbect to laws....so make laws in other words to regulate those arms for defence, NOT TAKE AWAY the right provided for by the BoR .... thats what they did in 96 across the land while we were not paying attention....
<<Genesis93>>
Second Lieutenant
Second Lieutenant
 
Posts: 2191
-

Re: "Help us change Australia's self-defence laws!"

Post by <<Genesis93>> » 26 Aug 2016, 11:01 am

Gwion wrote:Legislation is law in effect for so long as it is upheld by courts and unchallenged. Once challenged directly, any legislation found to be in contradiction of the constitution or the document on which common law is based, must be repealed.

This was the entire point and premise of 'the Castle'.

It would take a class action and a willing QC to test Gen93's theories.


Unfortunately the court system is bound to the government generally and is no doubt well bought and well paid for... and biased - the government (governing class) DOES NOT want the common people well armed. Which is exactly what what happen if the high court suddenly determined all 96 era gun laws invalid.

I couldnt see a class action doing much.... but if everyone chipped in a buck, that $2million which would well and truly pay for a bench of QC/SCs, although I note reading about Rebecca Peters (the one that was sent out here in the 80's and well sponsored by the Open Society foundation to 'fix' our gun laws) and how she was allowed the privilege of speaking to the BAR Association an 'obtained' an agreement whereby NO LAWYER QC etc would ACT against the 1996 gun laws!! no matter the offer$$.....
<<Genesis93>>
Second Lieutenant
Second Lieutenant
 
Posts: 2191
-

Re: "Help us change Australia's self-defence laws!"

Post by Gwion » 26 Aug 2016, 11:02 am

<<Genesis93>> wrote:
9. That the freedom of speech, and debates or proceedings in parliament, ought not to be impeached or questioned in any court or place out of parliament.

With the BoR directly legislated or additional laws such as the Commonwealth PP Act which reinforces to above;

16 Parliamentary privilege in court proceedings (1) For the avoidance of doubt, it is hereby declared and enacted that
the provisions of article 9 of the Bill of Rights, 1688 apply in relation to the Parliament of the Commonwealth and....




Just to be clear, this actually only protects Parliamentarians, as the Australian legislation ratifies.
User avatar
Gwion
Colonel
Colonel
 
Posts: 3978
-

Re: "Help us change Australia's self-defence laws!"

Post by bluerob » 26 Aug 2016, 11:23 am

The Bill of Rights still exists, however, each state has put into place various pieces of legislation and regulations that waters the BoR down into "that old irrelevant document."

Yep, we need an expert in Constitutional Law to take this on. Only way forward. Maybe a retired person who still shoots. Surely there's someone available.

I'd happily donate $50 to a fighting fund, but, whose going to administer this? The SSAA will put their hand up, I bet. Also claim it was their idea....

I'd have thought that the green jacket wearers would've run into a QC or two over the years whilst attending seminars, conferences etc and golf trips....who could've been of assistance? How many years has the SSAA been around now?

In 1987, Barrie Unsworth took on the NSW Shooters and lost. So, it can happen.
bluerob
Corporal
Corporal
 
Posts: 342
New South Wales

Re: "Help us change Australia's self-defence laws!"

Post by <<Genesis93>> » 26 Aug 2016, 12:03 pm

Gwion wrote:Just to be clear, this actually only protects Parliamentarians, as the Australian legislation ratifies.


I'm no lawyer, but my understanding is that PP is afforded to anyone speaking in parliament or committees,hearings etc. For example during the bs greens senate inquiry into gun violence - those members of the public speaking, including Roland Brownstain, could have admitted to murdering their neighbour without fear of the law....

and the BoR IS Australian legislation. Either entirely on its own in full, or combined with other imperial laws.... .....
<<Genesis93>>
Second Lieutenant
Second Lieutenant
 
Posts: 2191
-

Re: "Help us change Australia's self-defence laws!"

Post by Gwion » 26 Aug 2016, 1:47 pm

My understanding was/is that it (parliamentary privilege) applies only within a parliamentary sitting... but again, i am not a lawyer, either.
User avatar
Gwion
Colonel
Colonel
 
Posts: 3978
-

Re: "Help us change Australia's self-defence laws!"

Post by Jandamurra » 31 Aug 2016, 4:22 pm

Parliament in the BOR refers to the people as a whole or at least the electors If that were not the case, then no right would apply to anyone but elected MP's. Not only would be not have self-defence laws, but we'd also not have free speech, freedom of movement, freedom of association, freedom from arbitrary search and seizure, etc.
Of course the BOR was written at a specific time with a specific set of circumstances in mind. The people were mainly Protestants and had been oppressed by a Catholic king.
However, the Magna Carta and other laws also affirm the right of self-defence so it is wrong to think of the BOR in isolation.
It also makes sense to remember the complete LACK of restrictions of weapons in the past. Anti's have got a lot of mileage out of the image of a dumb gum-chewing loudmouth yank. An Oxford Don from 1900 would be appalled to be lumped in with that cliché (which certainly doesn't apply to most pro-gun Americans).
Of course if a right is not asserted it is lost.
However, I do find Archie's efforts in this thread a bit redundant.
If a reaffirmation of the BOR will never happen and he likes our current gun laws, then he doesn't have anything to worry about, does he?
Jandamurra
Private
Private
 
Posts: 93
South Australia

Re: "Help us change Australia's self-defence laws!"

Post by Gwion » 31 Aug 2016, 6:39 pm

User avatar
Gwion
Colonel
Colonel
 
Posts: 3978
-

Previous

Back to top
 
Return to Firearms related media and politics