gunnnie wrote:After reading through various posts over the past several months, it struck me that the topic of just how many can one own on a standard license, is akin to how long is a piece of string!
So, does anyone know, for example, is there a legislated max number on Cat A, B or H in QLD? How about the other states? Is there a stated number in the fine print or as set by the AGD.
Just one of those 'I wonder but can't find anything in print to quantify' questions.
trekin wrote:Although there is no legislated set maximum number, a number that when you reach it, the AO says "Sorry, no more for you.", there is however a legislated number where you will have to upgrade your storage and security;
Part 21, Section 94 (3) (a), (b)
(3) However, the person must, when the weapon is not in the
person’s physical possession, store it in the same way that a
weapon to which part 20 applies must be stored under that
part, if at the premises where the weapon is, there are more
than—
(a) for category A, B, C or D weapons—a total of 30 of any
of those weapons; or
(b) 30 category H weapons.
Part 20 refers to Storage measures for collectors
Rod_outbak wrote:I was surprised that electronic surveillance wasnt considered important; even at that stage.
Again; this was around 10 years back, it's on a remote(ish) rural property in outback QLD, and we were discussing the requirements for 30+ weapons.
bigrich wrote:...personally , i subscribe to the belief the fewer the better as you are more proficiant with rifles you use more . JMHO
bladeracer wrote:gunnnie wrote:After reading through various posts over the past several months, it struck me that the topic of just how many can one own on a standard license, is akin to how long is a piece of string!
So, does anyone know, for example, is there a legislated max number on Cat A, B or H in QLD? How about the other states? Is there a stated number in the fine print or as set by the AGD.
Just one of those 'I wonder but can't find anything in print to quantify' questions.
I'm not aware of any limit on Cat A/B or H.
In Victoria they will hold your sixteenth CatB PtA and require a letter of explanation, although such is not written in the laws.
There are security restrictions based on the number of firearms you own though.
ponkychonk wrote:I don't understand, here in WA we have to provide a thorough and complete justification for every single firearm we buy, regardless of whether we own 1 or 50 guns already. Is that not the case elsewhere?
Rod_outbak wrote:I had a lengthy discussion with the WL gents when I was audited roughly 10 years ago.
30 was the upper limit; beyond that, and the safes(bolted to the building) I currently had in a locked wooden room werent going to be considered sufficient.
In exploring what WOULD be sufficient, it seemed that a shipping container on it's own, wasnt considered enough.
The thought was (and I havent explored this any further) a shipping container would need to have a door substantially improved for security/access, and the container itself would need to be permanently affixed to the ground.
The thought was likely steel posts concreted into the ground, and the Shipping Container then welded to the uprights.
I then pointed out the absurdity of this; our main shed packed with a collection of angle grinders, a plasma cutter, oxy set, and sitting nearby, a 15-ton 4WD loader & backhoe.
Even if I met all of the WL requirements, I could see how a determined soul could get inside the storage unit within minutes.
The WL gents indicated they didnt care; as long as the storage met the requirements, the fact it could all be bypassed was irrelevant.
I was surprised that electronic surveillance wasnt considered important; even at that stage.
Again; this was around 10 years back, it's on a remote(ish) rural property in outback QLD, and we were discussing the requirements for 30+ weapons.
No1_49er wrote:Rod_outbak wrote:I was surprised that electronic surveillance wasnt considered important; even at that stage.
Again; this was around 10 years back, it's on a remote(ish) rural property in outback QLD, and we were discussing the requirements for 30+ weapons.
A further absurdity would be the need for "electronic surveillance", and more importantly, to whom it would signal/report. I'm damned sure that the police wouldn't be monitoring your alarm system, leaving the next available option as a "security" business. If they were aware that in the event of an alarm there was going to be the distinct possibility that firearms would be involved, do you think they would turn up? And how far away would they be, anyway?
Yep, it all seems so logical.
ponkychonk wrote:
I don't understand, here in WA we have to provide a thorough and complete justification for every single firearm we buy, regardless of whether we own 1 or 50 guns already. Is that not the case elsewhere?
bladeracer wrote:ponkychonk wrote:I don't understand, here in WA we have to provide a thorough and complete justification for every single firearm we buy, regardless of whether we own 1 or 50 guns already. Is that not the case elsewhere?
Not here in Victoria. Just put Hunting/Target on the PtA.
CatA they don't care at all, we can own as many shotguns and rimfires as we can fit in the house.
I'm picking up another CatA early next year but I'm not expecting to have to give additional information on future CatB purchases.
bladeracer wrote:No1_49er wrote:Rod_outbak wrote:I was surprised that electronic surveillance wasnt considered important; even at that stage.
Again; this was around 10 years back, it's on a remote(ish) rural property in outback QLD, and we were discussing the requirements for 30+ weapons.
A further absurdity would be the need for "electronic surveillance", and more importantly, to whom it would signal/report. I'm damned sure that the police wouldn't be monitoring your alarm system, leaving the next available option as a "security" business. If they were aware that in the event of an alarm there was going to be the distinct possibility that firearms would be involved, do you think they would turn up? And how far away would they be, anyway?
Yep, it all seems so logical.
We have a potentially slight advantage if we decided to go monitored. We have a quarry just up the road that have a security vehicle visit several times during the night, and across the weekend. If we went with them it's possible they might be reasonably close if there was an incident. But, I can't see them hanging around for an hour or more to prevent the thieves from returning after security leaves the property. I also can't see an individual being able to do anything more threatening than standing and watching the thieves taking my stuff anyway. Thieves in OZ are well aware that we are not allowed to use force to prevent them stealing our stuff, we can only use force if they attack us physically. It might be useful to have a security guard on site though to assist the thieves so they don't injure themselves and sue me.
ponkychonk wrote:Holy s**t I didn't realise how absolutely f***ed WA is