Perhaps not our best spokesman

Questions about New South Wales gun and ammunition laws. NSW Firearms Act 1996.

Perhaps not our best spokesman

Post by Gaznazdiak » 16 Apr 2018, 8:27 am

Most of what this gun dealer has to say is fine and dandy, then he puts both feet in his mouth up to the hips when asked about suppressors:

"Mr Cairns said he had made many changes over the years to tighten up gun safety in accordance with the laws, and supported proposed changes, such as silencers.

He said they would be welcome in built-up areas because "we don't want to disturb people"."

The panties will climb all over that, claiming we want to be able to shoot in 'built up' areas.
I just want to slap some people.


Tasmanian gun dealers 'ostracised' over proposed law changes
http://www.abc.net.au/news/2018-04-15/t ... es/9660572
fideles usque ad mortem
User avatar
Gaznazdiak
Warrant Officer C1
Warrant Officer C1
 
Posts: 1379
New South Wales

Re: Perhaps not our best spokesman

Post by bigfellascott » 16 Apr 2018, 9:59 am

What did he do wrong that makes him evil in your eyes?
User avatar
bigfellascott
Lieutenant General
Lieutenant General
 
Posts: 5289
-

Re: Perhaps not our best spokesman

Post by Gaznazdiak » 16 Apr 2018, 10:44 am

Not evil, just a bit silly.
His claim that shooters would welcome suppressors so we didn't disturb people in built up areas would no doubt suggest to the antis who pounce on any excuse, that shooters intend to silently fire guns around in built up areas.
Joe public is informed by Hollywood fantasy that snipers can fire .30 rifles at innocent people without more than a "pew" noise.

We need to point out that "silencers" don't silence, merely reduce the report to a level safe for the user. A level less likely to disturb stock and scare off potential feral target animals and allows for better situational awareness of the person operating the firearm.
Nobody hunts in built up areas with firearms, so bringing the idea up is counter productive.
fideles usque ad mortem
User avatar
Gaznazdiak
Warrant Officer C1
Warrant Officer C1
 
Posts: 1379
New South Wales

Re: Perhaps not our best spokesman

Post by YoungBuck » 16 Apr 2018, 11:12 am

Gaznazdiak wrote:We need to point out that "silencers" don't silence, merely reduce the report to a level safe for the user. A level less likely to disturb stock and scare off potential feral target animals and allows for better situational awareness of the person operating the firearm.
Nobody hunts in built up areas with firearms, so bringing the idea up is counter productive.

A good start might be to stop calling them 'silencers' as they do not silence the shot...
Suppressors or moderators should be the terminology.
It'll shoot the fleas off a dog's back at five hundred yards, Tannen, and it's pointed straight at your head!
User avatar
YoungBuck
Corporal
Corporal
 
Posts: 436
Victoria

Re: Perhaps not our best spokesman

Post by bigfellascott » 16 Apr 2018, 11:16 am

Or it could be that it would be a blessing for those who live close to ranges or in the outskirts of country towns whom don't wish to be hearing gunshots at night as roo culls or fox culls happen. But as usual simple people will just do what they always do and overreact. Tell me the last time you can recall law abidding licensed firearm owners shooting up the "suburbs" - it doesn't happen, it does however if you are a drug dealing outlaw motorcycle gang member who of course don't have firearms legally and I'm sure if they wanted silences which aren't silent anyway they'd be able to get their hands on them as they are piss easy to make out of just about anything you can imagine, even a farking orange! :unknown:
User avatar
bigfellascott
Lieutenant General
Lieutenant General
 
Posts: 5289
-

Re: Perhaps not our best spokesman

Post by Southpaw » 16 Apr 2018, 11:37 am

Actually the only reason we’re pushing for suppressors down here is for the shooters OH&S. Obviously the fact that we wouldn’t be keeping people awake at night is a big plus. And there are a quite a few suburbs that back right onto farm land where shooting takes place.
So he is actually right.
And while we’ve got a government down here willing to actually listen to shooting groups we need to be pushing back against the anti’s. They say “you want to use suppressors so you can shoot in built up areas!” We say “no, we already legally shoot NEAR these built up areas, we just want to use suppressors so we don’t keep hard working Mum’s and Dad’s awake with all the noise”.
No matter what we do, the anti-gunners want our guns.
So we need to be honest about what shooters do, and why we need regulations changed.
Right now in Tassie, both political parties support shooters, with greens support at a historic low.
Strike while the irons hot.
Just like Howard did.
Southpaw
Recruit
Recruit
 
Posts: 34
Tasmania

Re: Perhaps not our best spokesman

Post by bigfellascott » 16 Apr 2018, 11:56 am

Southpaw wrote:Actually the only reason we’re pushing for suppressors down here is for the shooters OH&S. Obviously the fact that we wouldn’t be keeping people awake at night is a big plus. And there are a quite a few suburbs that back right onto farm land where shooting takes place.
So he is actually right.
And while we’ve got a government down here willing to actually listen to shooting groups we need to be pushing back against the anti’s. They say “you want to use suppressors so you can shoot in built up areas!” We say “no, we already legally shoot NEAR these built up areas, we just want to use suppressors so we don’t keep hard working Mum’s and Dad’s awake with all the noise”.
No matter what we do, the anti-gunners want our guns.
So we need to be honest about what shooters do, and why we need regulations changed.
Right now in Tassie, both political parties support shooters, with greens support at a historic low.
Strike while the irons hot.
Just like Howard did.


:clap: well said.
User avatar
bigfellascott
Lieutenant General
Lieutenant General
 
Posts: 5289
-

Re: Perhaps not our best spokesman

Post by bigrich » 16 Apr 2018, 12:06 pm

bigfellascott wrote: :clap: well said.

+1. :thumbsup:
User avatar
bigrich
Brigadier
Brigadier
 
Posts: 4483
Queensland

Re: Perhaps not our best spokesman

Post by bigrich » 16 Apr 2018, 12:18 pm

here's a story for ya's. had a mate who while in england was shooting rabbits on crown land legally. or so he thought. was sighting up and heard "ahem" from behind him. was the local coppers. he was warned about a breach of the law. for not using a "sound suppressor" ! in england they WANT you to use a silencer so you don't disturb anyone. as has been said before, silencers are easy enough to make. have read somewhere special forces are issued with a adaptor that screws on the end of the muzzle to adapt a OIL FILTER ! with a perforated metal inner sleeve, a outer metal case and filter medium in between they apparently make a very good sound suppressor. i would put the hole in the end of the filter first though otherwise a nasty explosion may result. just what i read :unknown:
User avatar
bigrich
Brigadier
Brigadier
 
Posts: 4483
Queensland

Re: Perhaps not our best spokesman

Post by Gaznazdiak » 16 Apr 2018, 12:45 pm

bigfellascott wrote:Or it could be that it would be a blessing for those who live close to ranges or in the outskirts of country towns whom don't wish to be hearing gunshots at night as roo culls or fox culls happen. But as usual simple people will just do what they always do and overreact. Tell me the last time you can recall law abidding licensed firearm owners shooting up the "suburbs" - it doesn't happen, it does however if you are a drug dealing outlaw motorcycle gang member who of course don't have firearms legally and I'm sure if they wanted silences which aren't silent anyway they'd be able to get their hands on them as they are piss easy to make out of just about anything you can imagine, even a farking orange! :unknown:


I can't tell if you are jesting or just had trouble understanding my comment.
I didn't and don't call them silencers, I was qutoting someone who should know better.
I did not suggest that people would be shooting up the suburbs, if you actually read my comment you'll see that I said people DON'T.
My inference, which obviously went straight over your head, was that the ANTIs would.
And I'm the one overreacting?
Pays to actually read the comment before deciding to attack the author from a mistaken inference YOU put on it.
You just look like a nong otherwise.
fideles usque ad mortem
User avatar
Gaznazdiak
Warrant Officer C1
Warrant Officer C1
 
Posts: 1379
New South Wales

Re: Perhaps not our best spokesman

Post by bigfellascott » 16 Apr 2018, 1:53 pm

Your heading to the thread says it all for all to read!

Your infering that the firearms shop owner some how made an error in judgement that somehow will cast a bad light on shooters, he did nothing of the sort, just pointed out the truth but apparently that's too much for you to handle - oh well. :drinks:

P.S. they've always been known as silencers, just lately people have started to change the name to make it more palitable. :drinks:
User avatar
bigfellascott
Lieutenant General
Lieutenant General
 
Posts: 5289
-

Re: Perhaps not our best spokesman

Post by Gaznazdiak » 16 Apr 2018, 3:57 pm

YoungBuck wrote:
Gaznazdiak wrote:We need to point out that "silencers" don't silence, merely reduce the report to a level safe for the user. A level less likely to disturb stock and scare off potential feral target animals and allows for better situational awareness of the person operating the firearm.
Nobody hunts in built up areas with firearms, so bringing the idea up is counter productive.

A good start might be to stop calling them 'silencers' as they do not silence the shot...
Suppressors or moderators should be the terminology.


Is that not my first sentence?
fideles usque ad mortem
User avatar
Gaznazdiak
Warrant Officer C1
Warrant Officer C1
 
Posts: 1379
New South Wales

Re: Perhaps not our best spokesman

Post by Gaznazdiak » 16 Apr 2018, 4:08 pm

bigfellascott wrote:
Gaznazdiak wrote:
bigfellascott wrote:Or it could be that it would be a blessing for those who live close to ranges or in the outskirts of country towns whom don't wish to be hearing gunshots at night as roo culls or fox culls happen. But as usual simple people will just do what they always do and overreact. Tell me the last time you can recall law abidding licensed firearm owners shooting up the "suburbs" - it doesn't happen, it does however if you are a drug dealing outlaw motorcycle gang member who of course don't have firearms legally and I'm sure if they wanted silences which aren't silent anyway they'd be able to get their hands on them as they are piss easy to make out of just about anything you can imagine, even a farking orange! :unknown:


I can't tell if you are jesting or just had trouble understanding my comment.
I didn't and don't call them silencers, I was qutoting someone who should know better.
I did not suggest that people would be shooting up the suburbs, if you actually read my comment you'll see that I said people DON'T.
My inference, which obviously went straight over your head, was that the ANTIs would.
And I'm the one overreacting?
Pays to actually read the comment before deciding to attack the author from a mistaken inference YOU put on it.
You just look like a nong otherwise.


Your heading to the thread says it all for all to read!

Your infering that the firearms shop owner some how made an error in judgement that somehow will cast a bad light on shooters, he did nothing of the sort, just pointed out the truth but apparently that's too much for you to handle - oh well. :drinks:

P.S. they've always been known as silencers, just lately people have started to change the name to make it more palitable. :drinks:


I tried to make my message as simple as I could for you but as this forum doesn't have the facility to draw pictures in crayon I can't help you.

You carry on like a 5yo, after 2 tries, still couldn't understand that all I was trying to say was we don't need to mention shooting near built up areas to people who would stop us shooting on our own farms if they could.
You can't get your head around a concept as simple as that?
Just who's the slow one?

As to suppressors "always" being known as silencers, maybe to the ill informed old sweet, but since their invention they were called suppressors.
fideles usque ad mortem
User avatar
Gaznazdiak
Warrant Officer C1
Warrant Officer C1
 
Posts: 1379
New South Wales

Re: Perhaps not our best spokesman

Post by bigrich » 16 Apr 2018, 4:57 pm

fellas, gazza, BFS. c'mon guys it's a forum with views/opinions and sometimes critisism that shouldn't be taken too seriously. it's a interesting topic, and i think if their wasn't so much scare mongering , proffessional roo and vermin shooters, shooters with a genuine need (in england i think it is determined by the size of the property ) should be able to access silencers/supressors . beers all round fellas :drinks: :thumbsup: :drinks: :lol: :drinks:
User avatar
bigrich
Brigadier
Brigadier
 
Posts: 4483
Queensland

Re: Perhaps not our best spokesman

Post by Bent Arrow » 16 Apr 2018, 5:14 pm

bigrich wrote:fellas, gazza, BFS. c'mon..... beers all round fellas :drinks: :thumbsup: :drinks: :lol: :drinks:


Most sensible thing I've read all day
Bent Arrow
Staff Sergeant
Staff Sergeant
 
Posts: 753
South Australia

Re: Perhaps not our best spokesman

Post by Gaznazdiak » 16 Apr 2018, 5:17 pm

bigrich wrote:fellas, gazza, BFS. c'mon guys it's a forum with views/opinions and sometimes critisism that shouldn't be taken too seriously. it's a interesting topic, and i think if their wasn't so much scare mongering , proffessional roo and vermin shooters, shooters with a genuine need (in england i think it is determined by the size of the property ) should be able to access silencers/supressors . beers all round fellas :drinks: :thumbsup: :drinks: :lol: :drinks:


Thanks for a reasoned response bigrich, that is all I was trying to say.
In an atmosphere of scare mongering and media beatup of said scaremongery, as irksome as it is, we have to be circumspect in what we say and how we say it to avoid giving the scaremongering beatup artists any more sticks to beat us with.
My task of feral control on this property would be far easier if my first shot didn't scare underground every varmint within cooee.
However as the owner of an aquired brain injury, I will poke a stick up ignorant types who resort to insult because they lack the intellect to debate like an adult.
Cheers back at you, I'll make mine a "shine", beer makes me bloat up like road kill. :drinks:
fideles usque ad mortem
User avatar
Gaznazdiak
Warrant Officer C1
Warrant Officer C1
 
Posts: 1379
New South Wales

Re: Perhaps not our best spokesman

Post by bigrich » 16 Apr 2018, 7:00 pm

no worries bloke. cheers from QLD ! :thumbsup: :drinks:
User avatar
bigrich
Brigadier
Brigadier
 
Posts: 4483
Queensland

Re: Perhaps not our best spokesman

Post by Wombat » 16 Apr 2018, 7:01 pm

bigrich wrote:here's a story for ya's. had a mate who while in england was shooting rabbits on crown land legally. or so he thought. was sighting up and heard "ahem" from behind him. was the local coppers. he was warned about a breach of the law. for not using a "sound suppressor" ! in england they WANT you to use a silencer so you don't disturb anyone. as has been said before, silencers are easy enough to make. have read somewhere special forces are issued with a adaptor that screws on the end of the muzzle to adapt a OIL FILTER ! with a perforated metal inner sleeve, a outer metal case and filter medium in between they apparently make a very good sound suppressor. i would put the hole in the end of the filter first though otherwise a nasty explosion may result. just what i read :unknown:

Actually one of the very few instances of bad people using suppressors in Australia was with such a device. A Man murdered three people in Melbourne and months later tried to commit an armed robbery in St Kilda rd with a sawn off Ruger 10/22 with an oil filter suppressor.
http://www.heraldsun.com.au/news/law-or ... d47e7025f5
Wombat
Sergeant
Sergeant
 
Posts: 564
Victoria

Re: Perhaps not our best spokesman

Post by Daddybang » 16 Apr 2018, 7:59 pm

Southpaw wrote:Actually the only reason we’re pushing for suppressors down here is for the shooters OH&S. Obviously the fact that we wouldn’t be keeping people awake at night is a big plus. And there are a quite a few suburbs that back right onto farm land where shooting takes place.
So he is actually right.
And while we’ve got a government down here willing to actually listen to shooting groups we need to be pushing back against the anti’s. They say “you want to use suppressors so you can shoot in built up areas!” We say “no, we already legally shoot NEAR these built up areas, we just want to use suppressors so we don’t keep hard working Mum’s and Dad’s awake with all the noise”.
No matter what we do, the anti-gunners want our guns.
So we need to be honest about what shooters do, and why we need regulations changed.
Right now in Tassie, both political parties support shooters, with greens support at a historic low.
Strike while the irons hot.
Just like Howard did.


+1 :thumbsup: :drinks:
This hard living ain't as easy as it used to be!!!
Daddybang
Second Lieutenant
Second Lieutenant
 
Posts: 2012
Queensland

Re: Perhaps not our best spokesman

Post by Daddybang » 16 Apr 2018, 8:04 pm

Bent Arrow wrote:
bigrich wrote:fellas, gazza, BFS. c'mon..... beers all round fellas :drinks: :thumbsup: :drinks: :lol: :drinks:


Most sensible thing I've read all day


Yep :drinks: :drinks: :drinks:
This hard living ain't as easy as it used to be!!!
Daddybang
Second Lieutenant
Second Lieutenant
 
Posts: 2012
Queensland

Re: Perhaps not our best spokesman

Post by bigrich » 16 Apr 2018, 8:48 pm

Wombat wrote:
bigrich wrote:here's a story for ya's. had a mate who while in england was shooting rabbits on crown land legally. or so he thought. was sighting up and heard "ahem" from behind him. was the local coppers. he was warned about a breach of the law. for not using a "sound suppressor" ! in england they WANT you to use a silencer so you don't disturb anyone. as has been said before, silencers are easy enough to make. have read somewhere special forces are issued with a adaptor that screws on the end of the muzzle to adapt a OIL FILTER ! with a perforated metal inner sleeve, a outer metal case and filter medium in between they apparently make a very good sound suppressor. i would put the hole in the end of the filter first though otherwise a nasty explosion may result. just what i read :unknown:

Actually one of the very few instances of bad people using suppressors in Australia was with such a device. A Man murdered three people in Melbourne and months later tried to commit an armed robbery in St Kilda rd with a sawn off Ruger 10/22 with an oil filter suppressor.
http://www.heraldsun.com.au/news/law-or ... d47e7025f5


Yeah wombat. anyone who really wants one could do it easily . tell ya what though, i've heard your in it deep if ya got caught with one. wouldn't be worth losing your liscence over that's for sure. which comes back to a common denominator , the vast majority of gun crime ( if not all ), is commited by crims and dumbass wanna be gangsters who are unliscenced with illegal/unliscenced weapons. the anti's seem to avoid that fact altogether it would seem. :unknown:
User avatar
bigrich
Brigadier
Brigadier
 
Posts: 4483
Queensland

Re: Perhaps not our best spokesman

Post by bigrich » 16 Apr 2018, 9:09 pm

your both wrong BFS ! their called "Quiet-ners " :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:
User avatar
bigrich
Brigadier
Brigadier
 
Posts: 4483
Queensland

Re: Perhaps not our best spokesman

Post by bigfellascott » 16 Apr 2018, 9:15 pm

bigrich wrote:your both wrong BFS ! their called "Quiet-ners " :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:


Hush puppies :D
User avatar
bigfellascott
Lieutenant General
Lieutenant General
 
Posts: 5289
-

Re: Perhaps not our best spokesman

Post by Gaznazdiak » 16 Apr 2018, 9:19 pm

Right-o bigfella, I can see that it's important for you to have that last say.

What I don't understand is why you're getting so frothy over a simple expression of opinion.
What's this guy to you anyway?

You were correct about the original name for the suppressor and I was incorrect.
Congratulations.
That completely justifies your frothy tantrum.
Last edited by Gaznazdiak on 16 Apr 2018, 9:29 pm, edited 1 time in total.
fideles usque ad mortem
User avatar
Gaznazdiak
Warrant Officer C1
Warrant Officer C1
 
Posts: 1379
New South Wales

Re: Perhaps not our best spokesman

Post by bigfellascott » 16 Apr 2018, 9:21 pm

:lol: :lol: :lol: :drinks: I'm glad I was able to educate you mate. :drinks:
User avatar
bigfellascott
Lieutenant General
Lieutenant General
 
Posts: 5289
-

Re: Perhaps not our best spokesman

Post by Blackened » 17 Apr 2018, 11:40 am

I've had to edit a few posts here as the language was getting out of bounds.

You know the deal guys. No derogatory stuff, and don't get personal.
User avatar
Blackened
Moderator
 
New South Wales

Re: Perhaps not our best spokesman

Post by bigfellascott » 17 Apr 2018, 12:13 pm

Cheers Blackened, I apologise if I've upset or offended anyone, not my intention but sometimes it happens. :drinks:
User avatar
bigfellascott
Lieutenant General
Lieutenant General
 
Posts: 5289
-

Re: Perhaps not our best spokesman

Post by Gwion » 17 Apr 2018, 1:48 pm

bigfellascott wrote:Or it could be that it would be a blessing for those who live close to ranges or in the outskirts of country towns whom don't wish to be hearing gunshots at night as roo culls or fox culls happen.


Yep. Our range is very close to town. Not that we would use suppressors as i don't think the comp rules allow so why practice with something you can't use in comp. This could change and doesn't apply to all target shooting, thiugh.

The point about culling is very valid. We often hear gunshots from the neighbours. Doesn't worry me but it would for some people.

Still. People should think about how they phrase things in public and the media. It may suck arse but we all have to act as ambassadors for the sport if wecwant any traction to effect positive change.
User avatar
Gwion
Colonel
Colonel
 
Posts: 3978
-

Re: Perhaps not our best spokesman

Post by marksman » 17 Apr 2018, 3:27 pm

Gwion wrote:
bigfellascott wrote:Or it could be that it would be a blessing for those who live close to ranges or in the outskirts of country towns whom don't wish to be hearing gunshots at night as roo culls or fox culls happen.


Yep. Our range is very close to town. Not that we would use suppressors as i don't think the comp rules allow so why practice with something you can't use in comp. This could change and doesn't apply to all target shooting, thiugh.

The point about culling is very valid. We often hear gunshots from the neighbours. Doesn't worry me but it would for some people.

Still. People should think about how they phrase things in public and the media. It may suck arse but we all have to act as ambassadors for the sport if wecwant any traction to effect positive change.


exactly :thumbsup:
“If you do not read the newspapers you are uninformed. If you do read the newspapers you are misinformed”. Mark Twain
User avatar
marksman
Colonel
Colonel
 
Posts: 3660
Victoria

Re: Perhaps not our best spokesman

Post by RoginaJack » 18 Apr 2018, 11:37 am

Been away for awhile over the ditch and called into a local sporting store - Hunting and Fishing at Tauranga on the North Island. The conversation got around to these attachments and was advised that Silencers are illegal in N.Z. but suppressors are not and used by at least 60% of hunters and are starting to be taking up by the rifle target shooter too.

These attachments are all locally manufactured in N.Z. and employ a good few people. So, don't refer to them as silencers, because they ain't , just as Suppressors.
Many rifle barrels come already factory threaded and are available as package deals - rifle, scope and suppressor... (Drool) 8-) :clap:

If you are ever over there drop in, you'll be pleasantly surprised by the difference... 8-)

Cheers.
Boom, Boom! Tikka, Tikka, Boom! Shoot first, video later.
User avatar
RoginaJack
Warrant Officer C1
Warrant Officer C1
 
Posts: 1410
Queensland

Next

Back to top
 
Return to New South Wales gun laws