Category Archives: Queensland Police

Sunrise idiots give Gun World more free advertising

And you thought the AFL break over summer would give you brief respite from Basil Zempilas:

Yes, who better to ask their ‘opinions’ on this non-issue, than some ‘progressive’ Melbourne NPC and an outraged boomer woman with a collective knowledge of firearms-related issues the size of a postage stamp.

Notice how the Melbourne NPC tries to turn the argument straight into a personal attack on the owner’s “ego” because he has nothing else to come back with?

As we said before, it’s a non-issue. It’s not the first billboard and won’t be the last, it’s Gun World’s money and Ian Stewart has no business trying to tell them how to advertise. The tears from Leanne Enoch, Jackie Trad and the rest of the saltiness from the Queensland Labor Party is still palpable in the air.

But it was a smart move – Sunrise and every other media outlet in Australia has just given Gun World a huge return on advertising investment.

The Australian mainstream news is now thoroughly dependent on a perpetual cycle of confected outrage like this to prop up their dead business model. They’re a corpse and they know it.

On the positive side of the equation, we’re all hotly anticipating the next Gun World Billboard.

The stakes have been raised, lads.

Ian Stewart needs to stop being a pussy over Gun World Billboard

Here we go again.

The ABC couldn’t help stirring up some faux outrage over the latest Gun World Billboard:

A handgun for Christmas? That is what one store is promoting along a busy Brisbane road in the lead up to the festive season.

A new billboard on Loganlea Road advertising a local gun store shows a pistol in Christmas wrapping with the heading: “What’s under your tree this year?”

Queensland Police Commissioner Ian Stewart said the ad was sending the wrong message to the community and should be removed.

“I would like to see the billboard taken down,” he told ABC Radio Brisbane’s Craig Zonca and Rebecca Levingston. “I don’t think it’s necessary. People who use firearms for their sport or work know where to go to purchase guns and I don’t think we need that type of advertising. “The message that sends to me and to most people in the community would be quite abhorrent and against everything what’s really good about Australia.”

Ridiculous comments from Stewart.

How is advertising a legal product to customers abhorrent? What about people who don’t know where to purchase firearms and are just getting into the sport?

If there’s anything that’s not necessary it’s politicised, public, uninformed comment from a Police Commissioner that is out of his depth. Queensland Police don’t exactly have the best record when it comes to handguns.

It’s been said before but needs to be said again, it’s a legal business selling legal products using their own money – a complete non-issue. When’s Stewart going to start lecturing the public on alcohol advertising?

This isn’t the first time Gun World have been under attack from the media and it won’t be the last. The “complaints” are likely from Queensland Labor associates other than the usual Helen Lovejoy’s that inhabit the ABC Facebook page.

Make no mistake, this is also the hand of Leanne Enoch and Jackie Trad and their infinite saltiness at the Flick’Em campaign at the last Queensland election. Enoch infamously tried to have the billboards taken down last year while she was Minister for Small Business, but failed and no longer has the portfolio.

Have another soy latte and a lie down, Ian. I’m sure you have better things to do, like practice for your annual requalification shoot.

I’m sure Gun World could give you a few pointers on that, or maybe even a new handgun.

Ex-NSW Police Commissioner tells public to run and hide during terrorist attacks

As the debate about Bourke Street rages, ex-NSW Police Assistant Commissioner Nick Kaldas has weighed in:

“While no two incidents are the same, and it is an extremely difficult call to make on the spot, the public needs to differentiate between incidents where the police are on the scene and taking action, and incidents where their lives and those of others are in immediate danger and police have not arrived. It is sound advice to step back in the former, and leave it to police, who are trained and equipped.

Members of the public must consider the possible consequences of taking action if it is not absolutely necessary. They may get hurt, somebody else may get hurt, they may incur liability for that injury or they may get in the way of the police and worsen the situation through inadequate knowledge or understanding of these types of incidents and police methodology.

Victorian Police commissioner Graham Ashton acknowledged these dangers yesterday speaking on Melbourne radio when discussing the actions of Michael Rogers, who has become known as “trolley man”. “If a trolley had hit a police member and knocked him over and then this offender got on top of him, we could have had a tragic consequence,” the commissioner said.

Further, and this is an important point now that smart phones are so ubiquitous, remaining close to the incident simply to film it on a phone can be a recipe for disaster, as would have happened had the gas cylinders in Bourke Street blown up.

In the second category, where authorities are not on the scene and danger is imminent, it may be advisable to act if no other option exists. What to do is the question. Many examples have arisen of brave civilians who have saved lives by taking action, most prominently the actions of courageous passengers during September 11 who brought down the fourth plane, apparently intended for either the White House or Congress. The heroic passengers on that plane had no other option. This should be a last resort.

Exhaustive research from numerous governments has led to the advice that members of the public should, if possible, run from the danger,or, if not possible, hide, and inform (raise the alarm) in that order. Trying to tackle a crazed, armed individual with no training and no equipment, if there are other options, is not ideal.”

David Leyonhjelm summed this article up as he so eloquently does:

Spot on.

Now to be fair to Mr Kaldas, he does make some valid points on the intervention side of things. In a situation like Friday’s, it’s a risk you weigh up as to intervene or not. As for Trolleyman’s actions, there are plenty of valid criticisms for and against his involvement and Graham Ashton also does have a point in terms of the danger to Police members.

For example:

However, that’s not the main point here. As we pointed out previously, the fact that Trolleyman was forced to do what he did is because the law prevented him and every other member of the public from protecting himself adequately, is what is up for discussion here.

Not even allowed so much as a pepper spray or a baton to protect himself with, he was forced to use what he had – in other words, forced to improvise against an assailant who had come prepared for violence and already at a massive disadvantage. The laws certainly didn’t keep Sisto and the other victims safe, but they can gather solace in the fact that they’re unnecessarily dead and will get a posthumous candlelit vigil until the next incident happens.

There is absolutely no reason that a law-abiding citizen that does not wish to become a Police member, but can meet the same training standards, should not be able to carry a concealed firearm should they wish to. There is plenty of scope in the private sector for the training capacity. Even the Czech Republic has a concealed carry program for its citizens and their view on terrorism is a polar opposite.

Let’s be realistic, Police training standards are woefully inadequate in terms of firearms and they aren’t supported by Commissioners. A couple of weeks at the academy and then one or two requalification shoots a year (depending on jurisdiction) is nowhere near enough, particularly when you are holding Category H licence holders to far higher standards. Sure, more Police training would always be supported by us but the law-abiding public don’t have that option at all.

It’s also the active lobbying from Police Commissioners and Police Unions to keep the public defenceless, while at the same time making constant demands to up their arsenals because of public safety, which also gets our goat up.

For all their criticisms, for the most part Police in the United States will support the public protecting themselves against threats like this. Even the FBI tells citizens to fight back. It appears to be the exact opposite in Australia and this nanny state attitude needs to go. Look at what Queensland Police tells you to do in a self-defence incident.

The simple laws of physics dictate that Police can’t be everywhere and anywhere to stop things like this, it’s time they accepted that reality on the self-defence front. Dean Webber found this out a few weeks ago. We’ve already seen what NSW Police’s attitude is to self-defence with the David Dunstan fiasco last year. And we all remember Steve Fontana’s infamous “just be compliant” advice.

That being said, there are plenty of cops that would like the ability to protect themselves off-duty as well, but aren’t trusted to by the same employers that trust them to while they are being paid.

The message is simple: support the law-abiding public protecting ourselves against these nutjobs practically and we’ll support you. Spare us the authoritarian lectures on self-defence as we’re supposed to be on the same team.

The first responder is always the victim.

Dean Webber case exemplifies everything that’s wrong with defending yourself in Australia

It looks like a Queensland teenager may fall victim to Australia’s archaic view on self-defence:

“A teenager who put his life on the line for a terrified young woman desperately fought off three men with a small kitchen knife “in pitch-black darkness” but did not realise he had ­fatally stabbed two of them, sources close to the investigation have revealed.

Despite two desperate calls for police help, a source says local police at first refused to come because they were understaffed and only arrived up to 50 minutes later to discover the two men dead, one of them on the street in the fishing hamlet of Alva Beach in north Queensland.

Dean Webber, 19, had been asleep on the couch of his family’s Topton Street home in the early hours of Monday morning when he heard a woman banging on his front door, screaming: “Don’t let them get me. They are very bad people.”

Once inside the house, 29-year-old Candice Locke told Mr Webber some men were chasing her and she feared for her life after she had been thrown out of a moving four-wheel buggy, badly injuring her shoulder.

Mr Webber hid Ms Locke on the floor in the kitchen as a car, carrying as many as four men, drew up to the house. He immediately called the triple-0 emergency number, asking for police and an ambulance. The operator put him through to the closest police ­station at Ayr, a 15-minute drive away, but the ­officer told Mr Webber he could not leave because there were people in custody and advised him to “just see how it went”. The source told The Aus­tralian the triple-0 operator could hear Ms Locke screaming in terror after three of the men approached the house and began banging on the glass sliding doors and windows, trying to break in.

He was advised by the operator to keep the lights off.

The car then drove off with the men, but reappeared a few minutes later with up to seven men in the car. Mr Webber dialled triple-0 again — and this call would remain open for another 40 minutes until police arrived. Within seconds of his making the call, the three men had again gone to his front door, “ripping it off its tracks” and storming into the house.

The Australian understands Mr Webber later told police that while Ms Locke remained hidden behind the kitchen bench, one of the three men grabbed him “round the throat, lifted him off the ground and then threw him to the floor where all three men set upon him”. Mr Webber, a slight man weighing about 60kg, had grabbed a small knife from the kitchen bench as he was lifted off the ground, and began blindly thrashing it around in the dark, “fighting for his life”.

“He couldn’t see anything, so he didn’t know he had even stabbed anybody, let alone killed them, until he saw the blood on his hands later,” the source said. “The fact that lives were taken has just destroyed him. He is totally devastated.” One of the men is believed to have died inside the house. The second staggered from the home, leaving a trail of blood splashed from the front door, weaving across the driveway and ending in the gutter, where a pool of blood still remains.

The dead men are a local ­father of three young children, Corey Christensen, 37, and Tom Davy, 27, an aircraft mechanic from Tea Gardens, north of Newcastle in NSW.

Mr Christensen’s widow, Jaye, broke down yesterday at the Ayr police station as she delivered a statement, telling media her husband was a kind man who would “never hurt anyone”.

Going to have to disagree on that last one.

Sure, more information may come out about this ongoing investigation that sheds more light on what was happening. However, if we take it on face value, Webber has acted appropriately – what else was he or a reasonable person supposed to do in that situation?

A female comes asking for help because she’s being pursued by three men already with obvious signs of violence. These men then break into the house, and attack you and the female – you’re in fear for your life. There is definite justification for what he did – outnumbered, outmuscled and already under attack. And all the while Police were unable to attend and just gave it the “see how it goes.” It went south very quickly as you can see.

The “just call the Police” crowd and Ian Stewart are pretty silent on this one for obvious reasons.

Australia’s overall attitude on self-defence is quite frankly, pathetic. We saw this last year with the case against David Dunstan. The fact also that 46 Senators, 19 of them female, voted against a recent motion to allow women to carry non-lethal self-defence items exemplifies what the ruling class think of the plebs in this country being able to protect themselves – while they surround themselves with M4-wielding, taxpayer-funded armed guards in Canberra.

If Webber had been allowed to carry a pepper spray or have a firearm on hand, he could have ended the situation non-lethally or deterred it by presentation of a firearm, two men might still be alive and behind bars instead of in a casket and Webber might not be a psychological wreck.

Indeed, if Ms Locke had been carrying something she may have prevented the entire situation before it had started.

Australia’s ridiculous attitude and laws on self-defence facilitate situations like this. The legal right to self-defence means absolutely nothing when you are denied access to the legal means. Yes, the normal factors of training, situational awareness, etc apply however, unarmed in a situation like Ms Locke’s puts you right on the backfoot.

Slow clap Australia – incidents like this will keep happening because a large segment of the population have been so indoctrinated to embrace victimhood as normal, instead of taking responsibility for their own safety and having the chance to prevail over the criminal element and protect themselves and their families.

Dean Webber doesn’t deserve to be the next David Dunstan. Let’s hope Queensland Police show some common sense on this one.

Firearm Owners United are taking Queensland Police to court over WT15-01 fiasco

If you follow us online, you’ll probably have come across our posts about the recent Wedgetail WT15-01 drama in Queensland. But what is it, will it affect you, and why should you care?

If you shoot IPSC, ISSF, Metallic Silhouette; or enjoy collectable pistols; you should read on.

Background

Unfortunately, there is a lot of apathy going around the shooting community at the moment, mostly driven by some shooters’ belief that this will not affect them. It might not affect you directly, but the implications might. This toxic paradigm needs to go, which is exactly why we do what we do.

“If they’re going to start just arbitrarily changing categories of anything, we can expect they’ll keep doing this in the future so it’s the principle, that’s the issue.”Bob Katter (October 2017)

In late 2017, the Federal government and state governments were trying to ratify a 20-year review of the NFA – one of the outcomes of which was a push to reclassify (and effectively ban) lever-action shotguns in all states and territories. In Queensland in particular, this saw the “Weapons Legislation (Lever Action Shotguns) Amendment Regulation” come into force, and all lever-action shotguns with a capacity over five rounds were moved from Category A to Category D. This time, owners got to keep them under “grandfathering” laws.

Fast forward to 2018, and the Australian Border Force decides it has made a mistake by allowing the Riverman OAF rifle into the country. They are reclassified to Category D and a seizure notice is issued to owners.

This time though, whilst they are compensated they are not allowed to retain ownership of the guns – the same ones that Queensland Police Weapons Licensing Branch (WLB) saw fit to issue Permits To Acquire (PTA) for, and allowed them to purchase and obtain.

This is the same QPOL WLB that is currently at war with Queensland farmers, attempting to take Category H licences off of the farming community for no good reason at all.

Notice a pattern? Those seem like isolated cases? What’s the big deal?

Wedgetail Industries have been producing a handgun named the WT15-01 since 2016. The manufacturer was told by QPOL WLB that they would be a Category H firearm.

Weapons licensing issued PTA’s for the WT15-01 some time in 2016 for Metallic Silhouette unlimited division per IHMSA & NRA match rules. In mid 2017, they asked an owner for photos, they were provided and still nothing was said; weapons licensing continued issuing PTA’s until early 2018.

Suddenly in late July, demand notices are sent out telling owners to surrender the firearms to a dealer or Police, and PTA’s start being rejected.

Owners will receive no compensation, and the value of these firearms if sold in Category D would be virtually nil; as there are numerous semi automatic firearms in that category with more utility and a lower price than the WT15-01 which retails for $5850 AUD plus costs.

This is entirely a backdoor method of confiscation without any form of compensation. It shows that QPOL WLB are getting more reckless with their behaviour towards firearm owners.

The Facts

These firearms are under 750mm, semi-automatic and under .38. They are usable in approved matches. By all reasonable logic (and previous decisions by the courts), they should be Category H.

Weapons licensing approved PTA’s for a period of almost two years, and did so after seeing photos of the firearm. In short, weapons licensing are using reclassification as a backdoor method of confiscation without compensation. They won’t even return the cost of their “mistakenly” approved PTA applications

The reasoning given by weapons licensing for the reclassification of these firearms is:

  1. They don’t like the calibre (not covered under the act as it’s < .38)
  2. The “parent firearm” (also not covered in the act)
  3. They believe that it has the appearance of a Category D self-loading rifle. Therefore (they claim), it is exempt from the Weapons Regulation 1997 7(1) (Category H) because Section 5(1) (Category D) captures it (except that it only applies to a rifle).

Herein lies the problem, Right To Information requests obtained by LAFO Inc show that the officer who carried out a ballistics report for weapons licensing admits he never obtained one, and analysed the firearm from a photo alone. Incorrectly identifying the calibre among other specifics, and even alluding that it could be considered a pistol.

There is a clear agenda at play here – the same one that has been in play the last 22 years.

Previous cases in QLD have seen an Uzi, Jager AP80, Mac-10 and others tested, and declared to be Category H firearms. This is not unwinnable!

It’s a very technical case, and nothing is certain, but we have a chance to set a precedent here. We just need to be organised and well enough funded to challenge it.

The thin end of the wedge

The main argument being made is that of a “parent firearm”, and substantial duplication of a military rifle. This will affect you regardless if you shoot IPSC, Metallic Silhouette, ISSF or collect historics.

Here are some stand out firearms that could be captured, because they also have rifle equivalents. Do I have your attention yet?

1911

Ruger charger

Browning Buckmark

Mauser C96 “broomhandle” (we’re not kidding, the stock makes it arguably more at risk)

And if we allow them to start blurring the lines and applying Category R “parent firearm” arguments, then even the humble collectables like the C96, or the common Glock are not immune.

This isn’t some hypothetical. This sets a precedent. If this case is lost, QPOL WLB have the precedent to keep pushing this argument. You can be sure Ruger Chargers will be next. Then where will they stop?

First they came for the Adler, and I did not speak out; I don’t shoot cowboy action..
Next they came for the Riverman, and I did not speak out; the OAF is a toy.
Then they came for the Wedgetail, and I said nothing, because no one needs one of those…
Then they came for the Chargers, the Glocks, the Mausers; and more. The remaining shooters were not enough to speak out for me.

Regardless how you feel about the WT15-01, much more is at risk here. We need to stop this in its tracks.

So what has FOU done? What do you need?

We’ve consulted a very prominent lawyer in QLD, well versed in firearms law. We’ve considered our options, made several QCAT applications and begun fundraising.

Our best bet is Judicial Review, this means the Supreme Court will hear the case, which tends to favour more technical argument surrounding the legislation. But, this costs money. Serious money.

We’re a relatively new organisation and unlike some organisations, we don’t hoard member’s money. It goes into elections and political campaigning and action like this. We need $20,000-30,000 just to have the case heard if we apply for judicial review.

Worse, we only have 28 days to apply. Regardless what happens, we will continue to fight all using all avenues available to us until we exhaust funds or options to appeal.

If you wish to strike a decisive blow against the continued onslaught facing our community, then now is your chance.

If every follower on our Facebook page alone gave just $1, we would blow past our target. We urge you, if you enjoy shooting and you like interesting firearms or pistol shooting. Please donate whatever you can afford. $1, $5 or $50. Help protect the future of shooting!

If you wish to strike a blow at this continued assault on our firearm freedoms and turn the tide then now is your chance.

You can donate at our GoFundMe here: https://www.gofundme.com/WT15-01FightingFund

A huge thank you to all who have already donated.

If you want to learn more, have a listen to the conversation between FOU Vice President Kirk and Jason from the Australian Hunting Podcast:

http://australianhuntingpodcast.com.au/ahp-175-qld-police-bans-wedgetail-firearm-with-kirk-yatras/

Queensland Police hypocrisy over semi-auto rifles and self-defence

Earlier in the week, Queensland Police had a whinge about why they didn’t have self-loading semi-auto rifles:

“Queensland police should carry a rifle in every squad car, with every officer trained in how to use them, a senior officer has argued. Police headquarters would not rule out the sizeable increase in weaponry but criminologist and former cop Terry Goldsworthy warned it was uncalled for.

But Senior Sergeant Tony Collins, officer-in-charge at Brisbane’s Moorooka police station, said the policy change was essential to keep up with a changing world.

“There are members of the senior executive who are opposed to rifles and rifle training for no reason other than that it is their personal opinion,” he wrote, in the latest Queensland Police Union journal. “Get over it. Times are changing more quickly than they think.

“Training with rifles needs to be more comprehensive and more than just a marksman course; it needs to be built into recruit training.” The Metropolitan South Region union representative said the proposed shift was not sparked by any individual incident but about “getting ahead of the game”.

His comments came in the wake of two police shootings in Queensland, which allegedly involved knife-wielding offenders, and shortly after a mass shooting at a high school in Florida. Liam Scorsese was killed at Wakerley at the weekend while 16-year-old Jai Hunt survived his shooting at Springfield following a fight with his father, after which both were charged.

Senior Sergeant Collins said the presence of a rifle would not have made those situations any more or less dangerous but argued it could help in situations were criminals were armed with high-powered weaponry, such as the shooting of Toowoomba police officer Brett Forte.”

The article also goes on to show the AIC’s own stats that doesn’t justify the upgrade.

This comes after both NSW and Victoria Police have rolled out similar to their officers. And let’s not forget NZ Police carry an AR in their patrol cars but are mostly not armed with handguns. Although Chris Cahill wants to take both off of NZ firearm owners.

Firstly, just who are you outgunned against? This is basically another overt omission of failure of Australia’s “world class” gun laws. You can’t hold up our gun laws as some kind of magical protector and then cry poor that the crims are better armed than you.

Sure, the death of S/C Brett Forte was incredibly tragic, but considering the laws didn’t prevent Rick Maddison from acquiring a full-auto then this has far more bearing on the debate than just arming up the Police. How long before one of these rifles goes missing? We’ve already seen QPOL’s record with that after an R4 went walkabout and more recently a Glock went missing.

It’s also concerning to see the rank hypocrisy of the Police saying they need semi-auto rifles, but if the public want or need them then they’re just “the next mass shooter in waiting.” No thanks, a government pay cheque and a uniform is not a good enough argument to justify this. If a member of the public can meet a similar standard, then what is the big deal?

How about Police become more proficient at what they already have before giving them bigger toys? The current requirements for Police in terms of hand gun proficiency are quite frankly a joke and they even admitted that Cat H licence holders have more experience than they do.

Finally, if the situation is that dire that Police need them then what about the rest of us? Reminder that the first responder to any violent crime is the victim, not the Police. The fact that Australian Police, more so at the Command and Commissioner level than rank and file, continue to stand in the way of the public having access to appropriate self-defence tools does not send a consistent nor reasonable message. Calling 000 and waiting 20 minutes is not a good enough anymore.

We’ve previously been supportive of Victoria Police taking their firearms home in the wake of Victoria’s crime wave but their recent treatment of firearm owners sends a different message.

If Police want greater access to semi-auto rifles, then it’s only fair to give that same access to already licenced shooters. Otherwise, it’s purely a double standard.

I can’t wait to see Ian Stewart’s excuse on this while at the same time continuing to disarm Queensland Farmers.

Queensland Labor whinge about gun laws again

Another day in Queensland:

Queensland Police Minister Mark Ryan has attacked Deputy Opposition Leader Tim Mander after a video surfaced of the then LNP police spokesman saying he was “open” to weaker gun laws.

Mr Ryan on Tuesday took a swipe at Mr Mander over the March 2017 video, which shows Mr Mander discussing weaker gun laws with the Shooters Union of Australia.

 In the video Mr Mander is asked whether he would support licensed owners having access to semi-automatic rifles for sports or hunting. The guns were banned by the Howard government following the 1996 Port Arthur massacre, in which 35 people were killed and 23 wounded.

 Mr Mander replied he would like to see “less regulation” as long as there is no risk to safety.

“If a case can be given to me that shows that there’s a good rationale for that, and there’s no increase in safety risks or some other risk to the community, I’m very open-minded about those type of things,” he said.

 Mr Mander added that he was not fully across the issue, which could help ensure an unbiased debate. “Probably one of the advantages of me not having a lot of background in this is I’m an open canvas,” he said. Mr Ryan called on the opposition to clarify its policies on gun ownership.

 “Queensland families and Queensland police would be very worried that the LNP are ready to weaken Queensland’s gun laws,” Mr Ryan said. However, Mr Mander dismissed Mr Ryan’s concerns as “absolute rubbish”, saying the LNP “do not support any weakening of John Howard’s tough gun laws”.

 “We don’t support US style gun laws full stop… community safety must always come first,” he said in a statement to AAP. “We support farmers having access to firearms as an important tool of trade, we support stronger penalties for gun crime and more resources for police.”

 The Labor government and LNP agreed late last year to strengthen regulations that would limit access to the Adler lever-action shotgun.

So, in other words Judas, Police Minister Mark Ryan, used a nearly year old video in a feeble attempt to point score. Queensland’s favourite communist, Jackie Trad, also chimed in on her Facebook page. It’s really not worth the calories looking at it, so we did it for you.

All being said – why? Have Labor really got nothing else to do since barely holding on to power at the election in December?

We’d like Mark Ryan to clarify his position on gun ownership, being a patron of a pistol club but continually selling out his fellow LAFO’s at every turn.

This notion of “US style gun laws” is another throwaway line often inserted in any discussion by those wishing to restrict freedoms and derail debate. As usual, there is no definition about what laws they are pertaining to at the federal, state and county level in the US and the incredible variance thereof. Comparing Australia’s laws to Arizona’s laws or California’s laws are completely different ball games, but that’s expecting far too much from the LNP.

If it wasn’t clear from the article, the video was pure lip service from the LNP. We all remember their treachery over the Adler and their acquiescence over Labor’s continued gun grab of Queensland farmers.

We also remember the LNP’s comments in the Gold Coast Bulletin just over a week ago, when they claimed that there was a correlative relationship between legal firearm ownership and an increase in crime on the Gold Coast. Pity there was an entire federal Senate inquiry devoted to refuting that.

This pathetic stunt by Labor just goes to show how the majors are increasingly irrelevant – which saw the Queensland election record the lowest ever primary vote ever for the two major parties since 1907. It’s also because they are really feeling the heat and the backlash from the Queensland’s LAFO community, particularly from the agricultural sector, Robbie Katter and the ongoing Category H debacle.

SA, Vic and TAS are all up for their turn this year – it’s best we continue the trend of #putthemajorslast

And if you’re a firearm owner and still voting for Labor, the LNP or Greens then you might want to consider putting yourself off the electoral roll.

Absurd: Labor and Queensland Police refuse record number of Category H permits for farmers

One of the leading issues in the recent Queensland election was the abhorrent treatment of Queensland farmers by Queensland Police and their non-renewal and outright refusal of Category H licences for primary producers.

FOI documents recently obtained show that Queensland Police in 2017 refused a record 227 Category H permits, nearly 3 times as many as 2016:


No agenda here.

 

In true double standards fashion, QPOL are allowed to use their Glocks to euthanize wildlife or injured stock:

And it’s look like they’re proficient at it too:

 

Yes, you read that correctly, six shots to put down a wallaby. Take a bow, QPOL. Thank god you’re getting semi-auto centrefire rifles.

We put this to Commissioner Ian Stewart on Twitter:

He was then promptly corrected by the public:

It’s this kind of authoritarian arrogance from Australian Police Commissioners that we’re sick of. Hard working Queensland farmers are having their livelihoods made even harder by some Labor ideologues and their QPOL lackies, not the least of which Police Minister turned Judas, Mark Ryan. This is what saw Queensland record the lowest ever primary vote for major parties since 1907.

Of course, there surely are some legitimate refusals in among those decisions, but the increase is staggering. This is purely gun grabbing from the Labor Party as they attempt more civilian disarmament and make things more financially difficult for already struggling farmers.

Queensland farmers should be considering sending QPOL the bill every time they have to euthanize a sick animal.

Watch how quickly the Cat H refusals cease then.

Australian Gun Owner trolls National Firearm Amnesty by surrendering Nerf Gun

It didn’t even take 10 minutes.

On the first day of the National Firearm Amnesty, a Queensland gun owner has surrendered a Nerf Gun:

What is interesting is that names and details are being taken (although it is standard procedure to do so when handing in surrendered property to Police). What will be done with the data of those who have surrendered firearms remains unclear given it is supposed to be a “no questions asked”amnesty. However, it has been stated publicly that no prosecutions will take place.

On the Nerf gun surrender, the surrendee told FOU: “I didn’t do this to cause a media shitstorm, I did this to quietly protest, what I believe to be, poorly written and fundamentally unfair firearms laws. I also did it to show that I can own Nerf but I cannot own Airsoft in Australia.

We 100% agree. Although Australia did ban Nerf Rival blasters because of Helen Lovejoy, while you can still buy others. Go figure. Australia is also one of only three countries that bans Airsoft.

We don’t know what’s more amusing, the gentleman who did this or Queensland Police for actually accepting it. Fair play to the Queensland Police Service member who did receipt it, if he did so out of the spirit of it.

The National Firearm Amnesty has been hailed a waste of time and “window dressing” by firearm owners and politicians Senator David Leyonhjelm and Jeff Bourman. Although announced last year, this follows on from many recent notable incidents of the use of illegal firearms such as the shooting of Brett Forte and the Brighton Shooting and previous incidents such as the Lindt Café Siege and Curtis Cheng.

This is also one day removed from Justice Minister Michael Keenan giving a press conference with the latest ACIC report and virtually admitting that authorities are losing the war on illegal drug importation. But somehow, they’re ‘winning’ the same war on illegally imported firearms.

In honour of this gentleman’s efforts, a $50 voucher to spend at his favourite gun store is coming his way.

Another epic failure of Australia’s “tough” gun laws leads to killing of Queensland Policeman by full auto firearm

A 24 hour stand-off between Queensland Police and a known criminal has resulted in a Policeman being killed with a full auto firearm near Adare in Queensland.

Senior Constable Brett Forte was gunned down by reknown criminal Rick Maddison when Forte attempted to stop Maddison’s vehicle. This then led to a 24 hour stand-off at a farm house near Adare where Police and Maddison exchanged gun fire. This culminated in Maddison being shot and killed by SERT officers after negotiations failed and Maddison attempted to escape.

From the video evidence circulating it is 100% clear to us (until proven otherwise) that Maddison used a fully automatic firearm.

Fully automatic firearms have been banned on the Australian mainland since the 1930’s. The only state to allow automatic firearms before 1996 was Tasmania, and even then it was difficult to obtain a licence for one and they were not common place. They are also legal in New Zealand on a collector’s permit.

The media did their best to damage control the situation with their usual neurolinguistic schtick. There was this effort from The Chronicle “journalist” Tara Miko, repeatedly calling the firearm in question “semi automatic”and “high powered.” That was right after this gem from Channel Nine journalist Shane Doherty. Liberal MP Andrew Laming also made this incredibly ill thought out statement.

The ABC then asked the question about how Maddison was able to obtain his firearm despite his extensive criminal history. Perhaps they should have watched their own 4 Corners from two weeks ago? However, the shock of seeing Dr Samara McPhedran and Rob Nioa quoted in the ABC article instead of Philip Alpers and Sam Lee took us by surprise, as did this quote:

“I think that one of the big issues in relation to firearms legislation, is that there is this obsession with governments focusing on farmers and licensed individuals and not enough efforts put into stopping criminals getting illicit firearms.”

Credit where credit is due, however, this does not instantly atone for the preceding 21 years of regular anti-firearm agitprop and outright mistruths about firearm ownership in Australia coming from the ABC. The use of “high powered weapon” is also eye-roll worthy. This is quite the about face from a network just a few weeks removed from giving Rebecca Peters an unchallenged platform to spout her usual nonsense. Note that she hasn’t said anything about this incident but will likely wear her Order of Australia medal if required to.

The shooting of Senior Constable Forte is the latest in a string of epic failures of Australia’s “tough” gun laws and just days after the calamity of the Lindt Café was laid bare.

Rick Maddison had a charge sheet the length of your arm. He was disqualified from owning a firearm due to extensive criminal convictions, many with violence. Yet somehow, he was able to get his hands on a fully automatic firearm and plenty of ammunition and gun down a Policeman and then engage in a shootout with Police.

Note how David Shoebridge, Gun Control Australia and Philip Alpers have said nothing? That’s because they have absolutely no angle. None.

Further, the argument against Australia’s gun laws stopping mass shootings is null and void. Had Maddison wanted to go on a shooting spree instead of a suicide by cop saga against Queensland Police, he could have easily done it with the firearms he had and could’ve easily equalled or bettered the Port Arthur body count with no resistance.

There were also the arguments from the online tacticians “oh the policeman was armed and the gun didn’t save him so you don’t need a firearm for self defence”.

Forte was sadly ambushed and had practically no chance. Furthermore, had Forte been able to survive the ambush, although outgunned he would have at least had a chance to be able to return fire and buy him some time to escape or possibly eliminate the threat. Had he been unarmed he would have had no chance.

While the facts about exactly what firearm(s) Maddison used will hopefully come out in the wash, speculation still rages. Channel 7 claimed it was an SKS. After some extensive analysis, we suspect that it was actually a Chinese Type 63 and not an SKS, however we will have to wait and see when, or if, that is disclosed to the public. That and if Maddison indeed had more than one firearm.

The shooting of Senior Constable Forte is undeniably tragic. A tragedy that may have been prevented if the judicial system had done it’s job. A tragedy that also could have been prevented by the federal government pursuing criminals instead of wasting millions of tax payer dollars and months of resources on an authoritarian circus regarding a 140 year old lever action shotgun, attacking  the law abiding and wasting time “reviewing” laws that do absolutely nothing for “public safety” then only to change nothing and make some of them tighter.

Alright Sam Lee, let’s hear those excuses.