NSC Funded SAT case lost

[animalpest]

If I recall correctly, it was the NSC that funded a WA Police rejection of an application to licence for a 300 WM. The matter was taken to the WA SAT.

Well today, this case's decision has been published. And the case was lost.

[deye243]

No doubt just a prelude as to what is coming for them as far as I know they are having a big review on firearms laws

[Faedy]

Oh dear
I'm just about to apply for an additional. 308 and .300winmag and my son is applying for his first. 300winmag.
Time will tell how this goes

[cz515]

I wonder if we hear about this via their press release machinery

[Oldbloke]

I wonder if we hear about this via their press release machinery

They won't be announcing it here. That's for sure.

Yes I found this.

https://nationalshooting.org.au/nsc-sup ... -marksman/

[Oldbloke]

NSC Web site.
Dated 11.3. 2021

The NSC is supporting a fight in WA over the use of .300 Win mags (.308 Winchester Magnums) against an officer who believes he knows more about pest eradication than those who do the work.

In fact he has made some startling statements that we are confident will expose WAPol’s lack of knowledge about firearms.

Adrian is a pest controller. He has a .270 rifle which he uses up to 200m and .338 that he uses for his work at longer distances, but has applied to the WA Police to use 300 Win mag with his Remington 700 for shoots out in the middle range to 500m.

The problem is WA Police believes that his .338 is suitable for distances less than 500m.

As Adrian argues, the 338 is not suitable for close range, and in any case is considerably more expensive at $18 a round, to shoot than the 300 calibre at $3 a round.

However, the WA Police do not see it this way.

Up against a confident expert
Adrian’s case is being fought on the police side by an officer who believes he knows what he is saying.

He has told Adrian that he knows what he is talking about, because he (the officer) is or was a military trained marksman. He also told Adrian that he doesn’t need a .338 because a .270 is deadly at 1,000m and is used in Afghanistan…

Less funny is the belief that a regulator charged with firearm safety would somehow think it is safe or prudent to use a large calibre at close range.

NSC brings in its legal team
Adrian’s case is at its early stages, however the NSC has brought in its barrister to advise Adrian and offer support.

Adrian has done his homework, including obtaining a statement on the use of the 300 Win Mag from Victorian armoury expert, Len Steele.

Len is someone well known in Victorian circles, having given evidence in Victorian and Tasmanian courts on firearm matters since 1983 and 2017 respectively.

On Monday 8 March, the parties were required to attend a mediation session, where a resolution with WAPol seemed unlikely.

They didn’t disappoint. There was no resolution, but this may turn out to be a good thing, because we are about to find out exactly what WAPol knows about ballistics. So far it would appear that the officer in charge of this case has no idea about long distance shooting.

It is our understanding that among the problems is that the officer thought there were places against which you could ‘rest’ a rifle when taking a shot when you are in the scrub, and an apparent lack of appreciation about what happens when a barrel gets hot. This is consistent with the idea that a .270 is deadly up to 1,000m, which we understand was repeated at the session.

That’s why we’re excited about this case. We’ll keep an eye on it and continue to help Adrian as much as possible

[deye243]

No different than Victorian coppers i have had many a conversation on the side of the road with them about my firearms and it just sounds like the same bulls**t rhetoric

[cz515]

I wonder if we hear about this via their press release machinery

They won't be announcing it here. That's for sure.

Yes I found this.

https://nationalshooting.org.au/nsc-sup ... -marksman/

Mate as usual you are replying to a question no one asked.

But thanks for the post atleast it gives me the original story about the event

[Lazarus]

G'day OB,
Thanks for that.

As usual, popo who probably know less about firearms than your average Hollywood producer, pontificating to someone who actually bloody knows firearms.

Sure, a .270 is "deadly" at 1K, so's a .223 but deadly to what, that is the question this knob smoker doesn't get.

I piss and moan about Nanny South Wales restrictive regulations, but the fascists have infested Westralia.

I read the Greens gun policy last week, christ help us if the latte manbuns get any real power.

[Oldbloke]

I wonder if we hear about this via their press release machinery

They won't be announcing it here. That's for sure.

Yes I found this.

https://nationalshooting.org.au/nsc-sup ... -marksman/

Mate as usual you are replying to a question no one asked.

But thanks for the post at least it gives me the original story about the event

Perhaps next time I won't bother. I recall being criticised some time back for not sharing info.

[Larry]

That is really bad news for WA. Having lost the case is not just bad for that person but is sets a precedent and the cops now know they can knock back this calibre and or be tough on multiple similar calibres.

[animalpest]

G'day OB,
Thanks for that.

As usual, popo who probably know less about firearms than your average Hollywood producer, pontificating to someone who actually bloody knows firearms.

Sure, a .270 is "deadly" at 1K, so's a .223 but deadly to what, that is the question this knob smoker doesn't get.

I piss and moan about Nanny South Wales restrictive regulations, but the fascists have infested Westralia.

I read the Greens gun policy last week, christ help us if the latte manbuns get any real power.

You shouldn't assume these things.

[Lazarus]

You shouldn't assume these things.

That's a fairly broad statement, which things should I refrain from assuming?

[Oldbloke]

I think we need to wait until there is more info made available

[on_one_wheel]

If I recall correctly, it was the NSC that funded a WA Police rejection of an application to licence for a 300 WM. The matter was taken to the WA SAT.

Well today, this case's decision has been published. And the case was lost.

Can you link an information source?
I can't seem to find anything about the case being finalised.

[Lazarus]

""He has told Adrian that he knows what he is talking about, because he (the officer) is or was a military trained marksman. He also told Adrian that he doesn’t need a .338 because a .270 is deadly at 1,000m and is used in Afghanistan…""

I've been looking for any references to .270s being used in Afghanistan, by anyone, nothing.

Everything from Martinis, SMLEs and shotguns through to AKs, no .270s.

Just because I can't find anything doesn’t mean there wasn't somebody in the country with one but......

[mchughcb]

Arguments with WAPOL on firearms is like arguing with a Victorian Health Bureaucrat about covid policy. It has nothing to do about safety and all to do about control of the masses.

Nobody gives a poop in Victoria if I want to use my 7x57R or 416 Rem Mag on deer. Seriously Nobody cares and I certainly don't want or need to listen to some twat telling me otherwise.

[animalpest]

You shouldn't assume these things.

That's a fairly broad statement, which things should I refrain from assuming?

Your first sentence, which in itself is a "broad statement".

[Lazarus]

You shouldn't assume these things.

That's a fairly broad statement, which things should I refrain from assuming?

Your first sentence, which in itself is a "broad statement".

You're right, I was generalising, but it was generalisation based on experience with popo over the years.

Some, without question, do have a high degree of knowledge and experience, however based on the the alledged assertion by the unnamed officer above he doesn't exactly sound like one of them.

Additionally, if "Adrian" shoots for a living (admittedly another assumption) then he would be likely to know a little more about the subject than someone who thinks a .270 would be a humane option at 1000m in every case.

[animalpest]

That is also an assumption that Adrian "shoots for a living" based on the NSC calling him a "pest controller". If a person shoots the occasional rabbit or whatever is a "pest controller" then it is correct.

The NSC on this forum attacked the credibility of this forums members. Perhaps, just perhaps, they have done the same here. With people who may not be able to publicly defend themselves on forums such as this one.

Karma

[Lazarus]

That is also an assumption that Adrian "shoots for a living" based on the NSC calling him a "pest controller". If a person shoots the occasional rabbit or whatever is a "pest controller" then it is correct.

The NSC on this forum attacked the credibility of this forums members. Perhaps, just perhaps, they have done the same here. With people who may not be able to publicly defend themselves on forums such as this one.

Karma

Yes, I did note in my last comment that it was only an assumption that Adrian was a pro shooter.

I've only just rejoined this forum after several years away so I'm not aware of any rancour between NSC and members.

""If I recall correctly, it was the NSC that funded a WA Police rejection of an application to licence for a 300 WM""

I had not heard of the NSC until rejoining and thought it was for defending shooters when popo et al overstretched their authority, why would they fund wapol against a shooter?
I'm not disputing it, just wondering what the situation was.

Incidentally, do you think the cop was right in his opinion that a .270 is a humane choice to 1000m in every instance?

If Adrian wanted a 300WM, I doubt it was to "shoot the occasional rabbit".

[Oldbloke]

Gents.

Chill-Pills-.jpg (50.4 KiB) Viewed 15119 times

[Lazarus]

Gents.

Chill-Pills-.jpg

[animalpest]

NSC didn't fund the Police, they funded the appeal.

As far as the issue of a .270 and Afghanistan, you only
have NSC saying so that this was actually said. Bear in mind that mediation are not to be used as evidence and that NSC where not actually there, one would not only question the accuracy but the the reason why this was raised by the NSC. Look at the other statements as shown by OB. Adrian argues that a .338 is not safe at ranges less than 500m. OFFS.

Bottom line. Fight the ball, not the man.

[Oldbloke]

I thought he said:

"As Adrian argues, the 338 is not suitable for close range".

No mention of target species though.

But there is this too.

"Less funny is the belief that a regulator charged with firearm safety would somehow think it is safe or prudent to use a large calibre at close range"

Bit confusing to me. But in any case each situation in the field would be different.

[cz515]

NSC didn't fund the Police, they funded the appeal.

As far as the issue of a .270 and Afghanistan, you only
have NSC saying so that this was actually said. Bear in mind that mediation are not to be used as evidence and that NSC where not actually there, one would not only question the accuracy but the the reason why this was raised by the NSC. Look at the other statements as shown by OB. Adrian argues that a .338 is not safe at ranges less than 500m. OFFS.

Bottom line. Fight the ball, not the man.

I was thinking the same.... why is 338 not sutiable to be used under 500m?

[Boundry Rider]

I have it on good authority that the .338 in this case is a .338 Lap. Not sure why this hasn’t been mentioned in this thread so far. I find it quite extraordinary that WAPOL want someone to use a .338 Lap over a 300WM.

Remember this is only SAT and therefore not a legal precedent as such, as the next course of action should be a proper legal application in a court representing the interests of people as opposed to SAT arbitrating government statutory process.

[animalpest]

Yes CZ515, it was a weird argument. That and that the cost of 338 ammo was too expensive to justify using on anything less than camels.

His argument was that the .270 was ok out to 200m and the 338 was ok past 500m so he needed something in between. Plus the cost of the 338 (ammo and barrel replacement).

He is an amateur shooter and wanted the .300wm on camels, donkeys, horses, dogs

[Boundry Rider]

If I recall correctly, it was the NSC that funded a WA Police rejection of an application to licence for a 300 WM. The matter was taken to the WA SAT.

Well today, this case's decision has been published. And the case was lost.

Can you link an information source?
I can't seem to find anything about the case being finalised.

Also waiting for a link to where it is published

[Oldbloke]

"I was thinking the same.... why is 338 not sutiable to be used under 500m?"

Agree, that's weird.