ADLERGATE ---------------- >

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

ADLERGATE ---------------- >

Post by <<Genesis93>> » 19 Jan 2016, 9:23 pm

So on the Wish website they have posted an FOI from the AG;

(Women in Shooting and hunting)

<<here>>

Have a read, try and follow the email trails and try to comprehend the utter stupidity connivance and lack of firearm know-how..... even the Firearm experts on staff in the various departments...

What is most interesting, and serious is the response by NSW Police, Fed Police, Crime Commission, Attorney Generals dept ON THE SSAA posting a short little message back in July that the 5 shot Adler was to go Cat B and the 5+ shot to cat D:

"The News is Out..."

In other words, the deferred decision, that was to come from the November love-in in Canberra, that was deferred to April next year.... was released EARLY by the SSAA.

So the year or so of consultation and involving/engaging with interest groups etc will be proven a sham....big time.

What this will also mean is that the extended mag tube that are being screwed onto Addies, will make their manually operated shotties cat D!!! yup, just like a semi auto rifle!

You'll read how they were proposing to even control 'extended mag tubes'.....
<<Genesis93>>
Second Lieutenant
Second Lieutenant
 
Posts: 2191
-

Re: ADLERGATE ---------------- >

Post by Spudman75 » 19 Jan 2016, 10:20 pm

Interesting that they use a USA import restriction as the justification. Do they not know that the USA has a large number of manufacturers and would likely be a net EXPORTER. More likely to have the restriction to stop competition!
User avatar
Spudman75
Recruit
Recruit
 
Posts: 42
South Australia

Re: ADLERGATE ---------------- >

Post by adam » 20 Jan 2016, 7:10 am

Bandwidth limit exceeded on that link. Looks like there's a lot of people interested in that link!
adam
Corporal
Corporal
 
Posts: 319
Victoria

Re: ADLERGATE ---------------- >

Post by trekin » 20 Jan 2016, 7:13 am

Must be getting a lot of interest;
Bandwidth Limit Exceeded
The server is temporarily unable to service your request due to the site owner reaching his/her bandwidth limit. Please try again later.
Image Rifle stock and pistol grip reproduction.
"legally obligated to be a victim in this country"
I earned every grey hair I have.
User avatar
trekin
Staff Sergeant
Staff Sergeant
 
Posts: 803
Queensland

Re: ADLERGATE ---------------- >

Post by Title_II » 20 Jan 2016, 7:20 am

Start sending these people to me if they want to learn to use US gun laws to support Australian gun control. One at a time, perhaps one a week. I am more knowledgable than most about these matters and have lots of information they can use.

(and lots of land and a backhoe)
User avatar
Title_II
Warrant Officer C1
Warrant Officer C1
 
Posts: 1430
United States of America

Re: ADLERGATE ---------------- >

Post by David Brown » 20 Jan 2016, 8:19 am

I have a PDF copy, but nowhere to host it. I wonder if the photo hosting sights will take it??

Seems not, does anyone have a way to host it….happy to email it.
David Brown
Corporal
Corporal
 
Posts: 421
Queensland

Re: ADLERGATE ---------------- >

Post by <<Genesis93>> » 20 Jan 2016, 9:22 am

I have a local copy, I can't seem to upload it here, was about to email to our host here.... whats the best email??
<<Genesis93>>
Second Lieutenant
Second Lieutenant
 
Posts: 2191
-

Re: ADLERGATE ---------------- >

Post by <<Genesis93>> » 20 Jan 2016, 9:25 am

There was disagreement in the ranks apparently, with advice that there may not be such a new tech, and its nothing different to existing lever shotties..... that dissent was drowned out.
<<Genesis93>>
Second Lieutenant
Second Lieutenant
 
Posts: 2191
-

Re: ADLERGATE ---------------- >

Post by Rakk » 08 Feb 2016, 9:07 am

All that blacked out text is very informative :lol:
User avatar
Rakk
Lance Corporal
Lance Corporal
 
Posts: 156
Australian Capital Territory

Re: ADLERGATE ---------------- >

Post by <<Genesis93>> » 08 Feb 2016, 9:53 am

Rakk wrote:All that blacked out text is very informative :lol:


It is indeed.... it tells as what sort of a democracy we live in, where we vote our peers into a role, send 'one of us' to Canberra to 'speak for us' then they get there and tell us its all none of 'our' business what they discuss, and create a bureaucratic great wall of china between us and the behind the scenes everything.... :unknown:

Its not right, but its our fault because we accept it.

These are the corresponding codes commonly used in all FOI releases; reference to FOI Act (Cth)

S22 & S22-1
Access to edited copies with exempt or irrelevant matter deleted
This section applies if:
(a) an agency or Minister decides:
(i) to refuse to give access to an exempt document; or
(ii) that to give access to a document would disclose information that would reasonably be regarded as irrelevant to the request for access

[[So, if they decide its not relevant, they can delete it....the only part I consider reasonable deletions are names of staffers who are NOT elected apart from high office holders in the ministries and agencies ]]



s47C(1)

Public interest conditional exemptions—deliberative processes

General rule

(1) A document is conditionally exempt if its disclosure under this Act would disclose matter (deliberative matter) in the nature of, or relating to, opinion, advice or recommendation obtained, prepared or recorded, or consultation or deliberation that has taken place, in the course of, or for the purposes of, the deliberative processes involved in the functions of:
(a) an agency; or
(b) a Minister; or
(c) the Government of the Commonwealth; or
(d) the Government of Norfolk Island.

[[ so the reason for the foi request is obviously to get a handle on whats happening behind the scenes.... the opinions, recommendations - but thats all specifically off limits!]]

s47E(d)
Public interest conditional exemptions—certain operations of agencies A document is conditionally exempt if its disclosure under this Act would, or could reasonably be expected to, do any of the following:
.
.
(d) have a substantial adverse effect on the proper and efficient conduct of the operations of an agency.

[[sure... whatever you say]]
<<Genesis93>>
Second Lieutenant
Second Lieutenant
 
Posts: 2191
-

Re: ADLERGATE ---------------- >

Post by happyhunter » 08 Feb 2016, 3:28 pm

.
Last edited by happyhunter on 17 Feb 2017, 6:37 am, edited 1 time in total.
happyhunter
Warrant Officer C1
Warrant Officer C1
 
Posts: 1303
Other

Re: ADLERGATE ---------------- >

Post by <<Genesis93>> » 08 Feb 2016, 4:27 pm

The idea might be craptastic, and compounded further by the fact that the world is littered with semi auto shotties, and we struggled to get this lever into our borders... its a sad indictment of our system and proof that those we elect - just don't want us having guns.

I had an urge for an 87 some years ago.... until I witness a new example simply refuse to take any rounds into the mag....then eventually it was force-fed but would not cycle anything.... then move to current age and these hoplotards manage to convince the masses that the Adler (though a variation, not the same action as the old 87) is a new technology that is almost a semi auto and will cause the streets to run red with blood if they go on sale here!!!
<<Genesis93>>
Second Lieutenant
Second Lieutenant
 
Posts: 2191
-

Re: ADLERGATE ---------------- >

Post by happyhunter » 08 Feb 2016, 9:00 pm

.
Last edited by happyhunter on 17 Feb 2017, 6:38 am, edited 1 time in total.
happyhunter
Warrant Officer C1
Warrant Officer C1
 
Posts: 1303
Other

Re: ADLERGATE ---------------- >

Post by Wes » 15 Feb 2016, 10:42 am

Personal preference. A lot of people like levers 'just because'
User avatar
Wes
Corporal
Corporal
 
Posts: 367
Victoria


Back to top
 
Return to New South Wales gun laws