Aliqua wrote:The concept of slowing down gun sales and ammunition is one that I stand for and while my first firearm was purchased in full and PTA was approved if I wasnt allowed to collect I didnt mind - I understood the bigger picture around community safety - given the fact that everyone who already had a gun could keep it, but they were stopping potential illigitment purchases. I don't need to explain my experience or why I have knowledge in this area but their call was valid.
I too understand closing ranges (groups of people coming together) and when you look at what defines a sporting event in legislation, ranges are like football or golf (for example). They cant rewrite all the various legislations to simply allow a couple of industries exemptions (I bet the fishing and football and golf forums are having the same discussions).
After saying that, I didnt believe that a ban on fishing and hunting was appropriate especially as others have said it is something you might do on your own, or possibly with members of your house hold family - not to mention school holidays are on and some families like to do these activities together. The only issue was the fact that so many people were not working and/or working from home and children were home, so popular places would collect a variety of people - of which it would he hard to police/control and prevent the spread.
These drastic changes have seen us go from 100's of new infections a day to less than 10... I'd much rather be in this position than one such as Italy, Spain or the USA.
Aliqua wrote:The concept of slowing down gun sales and ammunition is one that I stand for and while my first firearm was purchased in full and PTA was approved if I wasnt allowed to collect I didnt mind - I understood the bigger picture around community safety - given the fact that everyone who already had a gun could keep it, but they were stopping potential illigitment purchases. I don't need to explain my experience or why I have knowledge in this area but their call was valid.
I too understand closing ranges (groups of people coming together) and when you look at what defines a sporting event in legislation, ranges are like football or golf (for example). They cant rewrite all the various legislations to simply allow a couple of industries exemptions (I bet the fishing and football and golf forums are having the same discussions).
After saying that, I didnt believe that a ban on fishing and hunting was appropriate especially as others have said it is something you might do on your own, or possibly with members of your house hold family - not to mention school holidays are on and some families like to do these activities together. The only issue was the fact that so many people were not working and/or working from home and children were home, so popular places would collect a variety of people - of which it would he hard to police/control and prevent the spread.
These drastic changes have seen us go from 100's of new infections a day to less than 10... I'd much rather be in this position than one such as Italy, Spain or the USA.
poid wrote:I like the action being taken, but I don't like the secrecy around who is running it.
1Fatman wrote:We write to Chief Medical Officer on gun bans
After all, what is the science around the risk of hunting?
Why are gun shops so risky?
Earlier this week, the NSC wrote to the face we all now know, Professor Brendan Murphy, with four questions.
Depending on what comes back, we're hoping that his advice will help convince our governments to back down on the stances they have made. At the very least, his response could prove that the responses have been political rather than based on science.
Here are the questions we put to him:
1. Police forces usually conduct inspections of gun safes when approving shooters’ licences. Is it appropriate for police forces to conduct both ‘routine’ inspections and random inspections at this time?
2. Hunting has been banned in Victoria to prevent the spread of the virus. Hunting, like fishing, running and cycling, is often a solo activity. Where it is a solo activity, is it appropriate to have banned it? Or necessary to?
3. Three states have suspended all transactions involving firearms and ammunition to recreational shooters. Are these suspensions appropriate or necessary? Specifically, some states point to a possible danger from increased family pressures: do you believe this is appropriate having regard to any available evidence?
4. Have you expressed any views relating to the possession or use of firearms during the pandemic that justifies any specific measures beyond the social distancing measures required of the broader community?
Click here to see our letter.
AussieCapitalist wrote:The National Shooting Council have filed court cases in QLD,WA and VIC. The one in WA is for licence rejections due to the China virus and the QLD and VIC ones are for the dealer restrictions. Other organisations are taking your money and laughing in your face as they do nothing but send a few letters and social media posts. The time for talk is over and the time for legal action is now. All that matters is lawful action. If we lose this case we can know we tried our best and we will just keep taking them to court at every opportunity. Being a lawful firearm owner in this country is hard and has gotten harder but please it is time for everybody to stop bending over and start doing the bending(lawfully speaking).
Here is their website and if you can afford it please join and help the fight for our sport.
https://nationalshooting.org.au/
Aliqua wrote:The concept of slowing down gun sales and ammunition is one that I stand for and while my first firearm was purchased in full and PTA was approved if I wasnt allowed to collect I didnt mind - I understood the bigger picture around community safety - given the fact that everyone who already had a gun could keep it, but they were stopping potential illigitment purchases. I don't need to explain my experience or why I have knowledge in this area but their call was valid.
I too understand closing ranges (groups of people coming together) and when you look at what defines a sporting event in legislation, ranges are like football or golf (for example). They cant rewrite all the various legislations to simply allow a couple of industries exemptions (I bet the fishing and football and golf forums are having the same discussions).
After saying that, I didnt believe that a ban on fishing and hunting was appropriate especially as others have said it is something you might do on your own, or possibly with members of your house hold family - not to mention school holidays are on and some families like to do these activities together. The only issue was the fact that so many people were not working and/or working from home and children were home, so popular places would collect a variety of people - of which it would he hard to police/control and prevent the spread.
These drastic changes have seen us go from 100's of new infections a day to less than 10... I'd much rather be in this position than one such as Italy, Spain or the USA.
Grandadbushy wrote:Trekin +1
Grandadbushy wrote:Thank you Aliqua for taking the time to explain a little further and you are right to try and have as much exact information and explain it fully because some one will definitely pick up on it and take you to task. So with all that said it still leaves the fact that what the gov has done in closing down gun shops and such does not ring true to the whole reason for doing so , yes they could be doing it for illegal dealings but that would infer that gun shop owners were doing something illegal . now you talk about issuing tickets to illegal activity by drivers and rightly so but a law abiding driver is not presumed a drink driver or a speeder yet with the gun laws gun owners are being treated as potential ( should I say murders) and our guns are slowly being taken from us yet with the illegal driving only the people that actually break the law are punished .
We can say that only the people that break the gun laws get punished but we all know it flows down to the law abiding as well. Governments don't listen to stats unless it is in their favour , they don't listen to common sense debate as their agenda as I see it is to remove all guns even from the law abiding owners , they don't want to work to develop a more acceptable outcome for sport shooters and hunters . A law abiding gun owner is no more a threat to people than a law abiding road user but both have rebels and they alone should be dealt with without reprisal to lawful people and on saying that I know for sure the law makers know this but it's not the target (excuse the pun) they're aiming for . I for one would like to see more transparency from the gov when they deal with gun owners and the laws on gun issues.
Aliqua wrote:Grandadbushy:
Like I mentioned before, sorry if my comments made anyone on these forums feel that I was including them personally in this statement, but this comment was not related to EVERYONE (especially the people on this forum - I do not mean to offend anyone!), or responsible gun owners, but the VERY SMALL percentage of people who may do the wrong thing. Secondly, in Victoria we saw an almost 200% increase in PTA's, and I guess, with the additional information that was presented to the national cabinet at the time of the increase, they decided that it was best practice to put the restrictions in place as a whole, and then work forwards in the future to make allowances and exemptions.
Aliqua wrote:Trekin, I've tried to explain my comments. 1. It's not "my organisation", and 2. I'm not privy to the information that was provided to national cabinet nor am I willing to make anymore assumptions or guess from here on in, especially with what may have been discussed between the state premiers and other members of the cabinet. Im not entering into the discussion anymore.
Secondly, thank-you oldbloke for your understanding.