lukeh wrote:Hi all,
I currently have a cat A & B license in NSW and am looking to pick up a pump-action rifle for target shooting.
I was leaning towards the venerable Remington 7615 when I came across the Wedgetail Industries MPR308 rifle and thought it looked well put together.
https://wedgetailindustries.com/product ... ion-rifle/
I'd like to ask if anyone here knows whether this rifle would be legal in NSW? The calibre and action should not be an issue, but I'm aware that since it looks like an AR it might be at risk of being reclassified under the appearance laws?
I've contacted the manufacturer and they asked me to try to get a PTA. To be honest, I don't totally understand what they meant by this. I have a PTA which came in the mail for that class of rifle (non self-loading centrefire), but they made it seem like I should have submitted a PTA for that rifle (Make and model) specifically?
Sorry If this is a novice question, but this will be my first time buying a firearm in Australia. I've also reached out to the police firearms service for classification.
Thanks in advance for any help you can offer.
Medb wrote:The waiting list for those Wedgetail rifles is years long and moves extremely slowly, if you aren't already on it and don't have any industry connections you'll probably be waiting a long time. They always talk about ramping up production and getting a big batch out the door and shipped to people but I'm not sure how true that is.
I was on the list for over a year, and they basically just stopped replying to any emails. I did actually manage to finally obtain one on the second hand market (only one I've ever seen advertised for sale and I check all the sites daily.) It's serial # is less than #20 and it is a second gen model with the MLOK handguard. The fellow I bought it from was only able to get it through industry connections since one of his family members runs a dealership.
AussieCapitalist wrote:Does NSW distinguish between straight pull and bolt?
Archie wrote:No. From memory the distinction is between semiautomatic and not, rather than different types of not. Again from memory, semiautomatic is defined as being able to fire again without another user manipulation other than pulling the trigger, which is why the Vernon-Carrey speedlines are ok because they are a spring loaded straight pull action where you need to flick a lever to actuate mechanism. Don’t quote me on that though.
The issue here, if there is one, will be appearance laws.
AussieCapitalist wrote:I dont understand appearance laws but I really dont understand folding stock bans. I can stand on the QLD side of the border with my folding stock no dramas but the second I cross the border instant jail because a non fixed stock is the end of the world. .
TassieTiger wrote:Prohibited firearms are described in Schedule 1 of the Firearms Act 1996, as follows:
Any machine gun, submachine gun or other firearm capable of propelling projectiles in rapid succession during one pressure of the trigger.
Any self-loading rim-fire rifle.
Any self-loading centre-fire rifle.
Any self-loading shotgun.
Any pump action shotgun.
Any firearm that substantially duplicates in appearance a firearm referred to in item 1.
Any firearm to which there is attached any article or device capable of muffling, reducing or stopping the noise created by firing the firearm.
A pistol that is of a reduced or an abridged size.
Any firearm or part of a firearm which has a dimension less than the prescribed minimum dimension.
A prohibited pistol.
Any ex-military firearm that is a firearm in relation to which a firearm licence may not be issued.
Any ordnance.
A person may not possess or use a firearm of the kind described in Schedule 1, unless its possession or use is otherwise expressly provided for within Firearms Act 1996.
So appearance laws in this case (Tas) means that any firearm that looks like a fire arms that could propel projectiles in rapid succession - is prohibited based on interpretation of its looks...
It’s so stupid it’s laughable.
Now add in the fact that I called registry in this state before I bought a MDT LSS chassis and was told that - the purchase of a rifle chassis is not illegal nor are they prohibited.
Again - they would not commit...
AussieCapitalist wrote:TassieTiger wrote:Prohibited firearms are described in Schedule 1 of the Firearms Act 1996, as follows:
Any machine gun, submachine gun or other firearm capable of propelling projectiles in rapid succession during one pressure of the trigger.
Any self-loading rim-fire rifle.
Any self-loading centre-fire rifle.
Any self-loading shotgun.
Any pump action shotgun.
Any firearm that substantially duplicates in appearance a firearm referred to in item 1.
Any firearm to which there is attached any article or device capable of muffling, reducing or stopping the noise created by firing the firearm.
A pistol that is of a reduced or an abridged size.
Any firearm or part of a firearm which has a dimension less than the prescribed minimum dimension.
A prohibited pistol.
Any ex-military firearm that is a firearm in relation to which a firearm licence may not be issued.
Any ordnance.
A person may not possess or use a firearm of the kind described in Schedule 1, unless its possession or use is otherwise expressly provided for within Firearms Act 1996.
So appearance laws in this case (Tas) means that any firearm that looks like a fire arms that could propel projectiles in rapid succession - is prohibited based on interpretation of its looks...
It’s so stupid it’s laughable.
Now add in the fact that I called registry in this state before I bought a MDT LSS chassis and was told that - the purchase of a rifle chassis is not illegal nor are they prohibited.
Again - they would not commit...
So is there a a so called loophole to be had here. What if two pressures of the trigger are needed? The first one does nothing and the second fires.