The Victorian Government has been caught in their own web of deception. Just last week, we were informed by the Andrews’ Labor government that the reason gun shops had to be closed was because of alleged ‘panic buying of firearms’. Lisa Neville the Victorian Police Minister reported that attempts to purchase firearms (we can only presume this means permits to acquire lodged) rose to 2200 in a single week. She characterised this activity as abhorrent and implied that people were panic buying guns.
At the time we pointed out that this was a fiction, with the stringent controls applied to the purchase of firearms in Australia, with each requiring justification and police approval in the form of a ‘permit to acquire’ it is not possible to panic buy them.
And now we have been vindicated and the malicious lies of the Andrews’ government have been exposed.
Today figures were released indicating that for the past 7 years show that the average number of permits to acquire issued in Victoria each week is roughly 1850. This figure sees some seasonal and yearly variations. Given an expected price rise (due to the dollar’s fall), the annual March/April ‘rut’ a peak time for deer hunters, and the belated announcement of a duck season. It would only be natural to expect a small uptick in the firearms being purchased, and this is exactly what has occurred. A rise from 1850 in a typical week to 2200 is well within the normal bounds of the purchasing habits of the community.
This clearly shows once again how fundamentally ideological the attack on gunshops by the Labor held State governments is. There is no real justification for this move, the figures show it.
More good work on the self-defence front by Senator Fraser
Anning has been met with the usual contempt by the major parties, this time
Straight into character assassination, invoking Godwin’s law and absolutely no attempt by either Labor Senator to address the right to self-defence or Anning’s argument. Labor might want to look into that so-called non-discriminatory immigration program in relation to crime, particularly in Melbourne. It might also want to explain that if there is not enough crime to warrant self-defence items, why does it now feel the need to arm state police jurisdictions with rifles for general duties Police, as we are now seeing in Melbourne and other capitals?
The further irony of taxpayer-funded public servants
lecturing to the public that government will protect them, while enjoying M4-wielding
AFP Protective Service officers out the front of parliament house, is just the
usual hypocritical hubris.
Meanwhile, in the real world:
Queensland Senator Chisholm might also want to go and talk to Dean Webber about what he was forced to do to protect himself in his own home when Queensland Police refused to help.
Anning previously introduced a motion to legalise non-lethal self-defence items in the wake of the Eurydice Dixon murder and Labor voted it down that time as well.
It’s as clear as day: Labor, Liberal and the Greens have repeatedly demonstrated nothing but contempt for Australians when it comes to self-defence. The right to self-defence is meaningless without access to the means. If Australians can’t protect their own homes, then they are nothing but legally enforced victims – not that Victoria Police Assistant Commissioner Steve Fontana disagrees with that.
Labor and Liberal are both unelectable. Crush them both at the federal election.
Australian firearm owners are very familiar with the phrase “Public Safety”. It’s usually bandied about whenever new restrictions are about to be imposed, or as an excuse for not removing laws that are not only unfair but lacking in evidence that they actually increase public safety.
Our ACT Representative asked ACT Police minister Mick Gentleman to provide an explanation on how some of the laws in the ACT benefit public safety and evidence that would support these gains. It only took 3 months and a request to the Shadow Minister for Police and Emergency services to raise the issue with the Minister to get a response, and to say that it is underwhelming is an understatement. Reviewing the response given to us, it is glaringly obvious that the ACT Labor Police Minister and possibly his staff have absolutely no respect for lawful firearm owners, or for evidence-based policy. Some of the idiocy expected of Gun Control Australia taints much of this response as well.
On the issue of suppressors it is claimed that the sound of a gunshot “serves an important public safety purpose” in that it allows anyone who hears it to protect themselves. From what exactly? It must from all those thousands of bullets whizzing through forests as hunters blaze away indiscriminately, Elmer Fudd style – except that only happens in cartoons. But never mind the fact that a suppressor only reduces the noise level of a shot being fired, a point that we made but was completely ignored. Don’t mind your hearing either, recreational hunting is only a “hobby” so hearing damage is less likely. I’m sure all the target shooters will be glad to hear that. Oh, wait…
We have been informed that the appearance laws are highly controlled because of the potential for the use of a gun that appears fully automatic to be used in a crime, and may cause a “disproportionate response” by police, security, and the public. I don’t know about you, but if a bloke with a balaclava walks into the 7-11 while I’m paying for fuel and puts a barrel to my head, it’s brown trousers time, particularly as a lawful citizen as I don’t carry the means to defend myself. I don’t care if it’s a MAC-10 or a single shot .22 rifle. And I sincerely hope that the police take my concern as seriously as I do and kill him before he kills me.
But can you imagine:
*Police radio: Armed hold up in progress…
*Cop responds: What are they armed with?
*Police Radio: A gun that doesn’t look like an automatic.
*Cop again: Pfft. I’m on smoko. We’ll get there in time to take a statement.
We questioned why a firearm license renewal in the ACT is treated as a new application. Apparently, this is to provide an opportunity to review the suitability of license holders. Apparently, the cancellation of a firearms license when a license holder commits a crime or is otherwise found to be legally unfit is too inefficient. This is also the most efficient and effective way to make the registry aware of any change in circumstance such as mental health issues. Because advising the registry if you have an issue immediately, or just ticking a box on a renewal slip (rather than filling out the 6 page document) is just too cumbersome. Never mind that in Western Australia, home of possibly the most draconian laws in Australia, it is just a case of paying the renewal.
On the issue of the “genuine reason” clause for the registration of a firearm, the question was basically regurgitated as a statement. There was no attempt to explain what possible public safety benefit there is to impeding a recreational hunter from competing in target shooting without it being on their license. Are there concerns that a hunter might suddenly get hunting flashbacks, develop that 1000 yard stare, and start stalking anyone not wearing blaze orange? Or that a target shooter who decides to try their hand at hunting will be involved in animal cruelty by trying to patch the hole on an animal and shoot it again? Possibly from very far away? Who knows? I’m quite sure that Minister Mick Gentleman doesn’t.
In fairness, the response we received was not the cut and paste response typical of politicians when firearm issues are raised with them, and actually appears to have the Minister’s signature on it which suggests that he might have actually seen it before it was sent.
It’s almost possible that he even wrote it, scary as it is that the person responsible for the legislation in question couldn’t even answer a few questions about it.
You can read our letter, and the response from the Minister below.
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.
Now the ABC have doubled down on this week’s “2 minutes hate of gun owners” campaign with Queensland Labor MP Leanne Enoch resurfacing:
“A YEAR after Queensland MP Leeanne Enoch fought to remove a billboard encouraging people to buy guns for Christmas, the politician has revealed the extent of the backlash.
Ms Enoch started a petition in November last year to have the towering Brisbane billboard, featuring a gun-toting woman dressed in a Santa Claus outfit, removed. Speaking to ABC’s Four Corners last night, Ms Enoch said her attempt to get the billboard advertising Gun World Australia was met with brutal opposition.
“Let someone break into your house and rape and kill you,” a Facebook commenter wrote.
“Someone shoot this b**ch. Would be the most cliche murder. You have no place in our community woman. Take ur (sic) opinion elsewhere,” another added.
Ms Enoch, who was Queensland’s Small Business Minister at the time, had around 3000 people comment on her Facebook post linking to the petition. “I was receiving threats of sexual violence, of physical violence. I had threats to my life and that spilt over towards some of the people that were making positive comments about bringing the billboard down as well,” Ms Enoch told the program.
“There were moments when I really thought, ‘Am I in danger here?’ These are people who were advocating the watering down of gun laws, these were people who had access to guns.”
Ms Enoch launched the petition a few weeks before the Queensland state election, held on November 25, 2017.
“My first reaction to it was one of horror,” Ms Enoch said, referring to the first time she saw the billboard.”
Pics or it didn’t happen, Leanne.
So in other words, what Sean Nicholls and the hacks at the ABC have apparently done is made a quick sweep of Leanne’s Facebook page and looked for the most polarising comments they can find and tried to make them collectively representative of everyone’s opinion, because guns are bad mmkay. Newscorp also did the same.
Comments like this are certainly not to be condoned at all, but in lieu of any screenshots or knowing who or what the motivations of the alleged posters were, it’s hard to take the claims seriously at all. It could also very likely be one of the usual Labor/Greens/anti-firearm sock puppet accounts that love to infest any firearm thread to undermine it – the “I’m a gun owner but…” etc type of comment. You don’t know who is behind that keyboard.
Gun World also ran into another local Helen Lovejoy feigning outrage over another of their billboards earlier in the year.
Put simply, Gun World is a legal business selling legal products. Don’t like it? Don’t buy it. The fact that a Queensland MP went out on a personal vendetta against a business that was doing nothing wrong was what invoked a strong backlash, and rightfully so.
In other words, Leanne Enoch picked a fight, lost and tried to run away screaming ‘victim!’
God forbid you ever step foot in 4Chan, Leanne.
Queensland Labor are a train wreck. Revolving door Police Ministers, Jackie Stalin-Trad’s numerous anti-gun rants, Enoch and now Annastacia Palaszczuk’s underhanded stunt against the KAP and their staffers.
Just another in a long list of many reasons not to vote for Team Red (or Team Blue or Green) and another reason to defund the ABC.
Well it’s election time in Mexico, and while Labor are doing their best to pork barrel the hell out of Victoria, Police Minister Lisa Neville gave us this doublespeak:
“Victoria’s new firearms regulations come into effect today following significant consultation with the firearm community, industry stakeholders, the public and Victoria Police.
Minister for Police Lisa Neville today confirmed there would be no increases in licensing fees under the Firearms Regulations 2018, which maintain the same fee structure as the 2008 regulations.
The new regulations also introduce small amendments to improve the operation of the regulations, including:
Requiring a permit for the use or possession of a handgun chassis kit, which can alter the operation of the hand gun, while also giving it the appearance of a higher-powered weapon like a submachine gun,
Making line throwers and dog training devices exempt devices, and
Adding Field and Game Australia to the list of bodies who can nominate members to the Firearms Appeal Committee.
A Regulatory Impact Statement (RIS) was released for public comment in December 2017. The RIS primarily focused on fees for firearms licences, permits and approvals, as well as other aspects of firearm licensing.
The legitimate firearms community constructively engaged with the consultation process. After reviewing the feedback, the Andrews Labor Government decided to maintain the existing fee structure. Importantly, the new Regulations contain no new fees for the activities of historical re-enactment groups. We value the efforts of the historical re-enactment groups who voluntarily give their time to support commemorative ceremonies and community events across Victoria.
Firearms in Victoria are regulated in Victoria by the Firearms Act 1996. The Firearms Regulations 2008, which are made under the Act, deal with some aspects of the use of and trade in firearms. They also set fees for licences, permits and approvals relating to firearms.
We will continue to support legitimate firearm owners in Victoria through a strong regulatory system that protects the interests of responsible firearm owners, while continuing to crack down on organised criminals and serious offenders who seek to use firearms illegally to cause harm in our community.
Our new laws targeting the illegal use of firearms, including Firearm Prohibition Orders, are already having an impact and getting illegal guns off our streets and out of the hands of criminals.”
Oh good, thanks for not extorting firearm owners to the proposed tune of nearly $330.00, for a historically free re-enactment permit that has never caused any issues.
The chassis kit statement further sums it all up – a purely cosmetic feature that adds no influence to the performance of a firearm has been virtually banned, because “muh high powered submachine gun.” Proof once again that Police and politicians know nothing about firearms, they just know they want disarmament at all costs.
It’s quite obvious that the definition of “fairer firearm regulations” differs greatly between Victorian Labor and the firearm owning community.
“Fairer” in our books would mean logical things like getting rid of registration, deleting the appearance law, eliminating storage inspections, deregulating suppressors, getting rid of minimum range attendances on Category H licences, etc.
This is also rich coming from the same Victorian Labor that’s doing it’s best to eliminate duck hunting, restricting deer hunting with the Great Forest National Park proposal and has brought in firearm prohibition orders, which are really just a trojan horse for warrantless Police search powers.
All the while victims of crime are not able to protect themselves from Victoria’s violent crime epidemic, that apparently doesn’t exist.
Labor are a joke and are no friend of firearm owners. Put them last next to the Greens at the state election in November.
Exactly like moving in next door to race track and complaining it should be shut down.
So who managed to secure the lease for Malabar Range for another 50 years? None other than Liberal Democrats Senator David Leyonhjelm:
“SHOOTERS will be able to operate at the ANZAC Rifle Range on the Malabar Headland for another 50 years, after a lease was signed by the NSW Rifle Association.
The deal was championed by federal Liberal Democrats senator and gun enthusiast David Leyonhjelm, who claimed credit for the outcome on Facebook. But it was slammed by community group Friends of Malabar Headland, with chairman Dave Pyett branding it “a totally secret deal done in the back corners of Canberra.”
“Nobody consulted FoMH or anybody else. What on earth are they doing?” he said.
“Malabar was a big fight, but I won in the end,” Leyonhjelm wrote on Facebook.
He said the “future of shooting sports in Sydney” had been assured.”
The park is still accessible to the public some 280 days a year, as opposed to the 70 odd days it’s accessible for firearm owners – who have been there well before the soy mochaccino set were. If anything, it should be balanced the other way.
Politics is all about timing and it’s clear that Thistlethwaite is cynically trying to cash in on the ongoing bipartisan attack on Leyonhjelm.
We’ve taken this guy to task before. Thistlethwaite, like many Labor MP’s, is in bed with the Chinese and their real estate developer brethren and this is no different. Thistlethwaite has close personal ties with Huang Xiangmo, the same Chinese property developer who was responsible for the downfall of “Shanghai” Sam Dastyari:
A vote for Labor is a vote for Chinese interests and Thistlethwaite seems determined to prostitute himself out for the cause. Trying to offload one of the oldest and most historic shooting ranges in the Southern Hemisphere, let alone Australia, is a disgrace and a slap in the face to the 150 year plus ANZAC heritage that Malabar is synonymous with.
Perhaps take some of your own advice and take a hike, Matt.
Lisa ”Lobsters with Mobsters” Neville decided to get in the Murdoch press to spruik the novel idea of banning criminals from owning firearms:
“Victorian bikies, gangsters and potential extremists will soon be subject to strict gun bans in a bid to combat organised crime. Victoria Police will have access to new firearm prohibition orders next month, giving them powers to search suspects without a warrant.
“We are giving Victoria Police unprecedented powers to stop these criminals – because we know they’re responsible for causing much of the high harm crime in Victoria,” a spokeswoman for Police Minister Lisa Neville said.
The orders will be used to combat crime targeting outlaw bikies, Middle Eastern crime gangs, violent criminals, radicals and young offenders involved in serious crime. The scheme aims to suppress the black market for illegal firearms, limiting their availability and breaking up criminal networks. Anyone associated with a person slapped with an order becomes a liability within the network.
“We pushed hard against the Liberals attempts to weaken these laws – while they tried to water down the legislation that police called for, we’re focused on disrupting organised crime in this state,” Ms Neville’s spokeswoman said.
The decision to issue an order will be determined by Victoria Police. Police have a list of about 3000 organised crime figures who will be subject to the ban, including former bikie Toby Mitchell, the Herald Sun reported on Friday.”
Just a standard Andrews’ government “feel good” media release.
Criminals are already disqualified from purchasing firearms legally and this is a complete waste of time and money. Look out crooks, Lisa is going to double ban you.
Less than 2% of all Firearm Prohibition Order related searches in NSW turned up evidence according to the NSW Ombudsman’s report:
Furthermore, the illegal firearm used to kill Curtis Cheng was supplied by a man who was already the subject of a Firearm Prohibition Order, a charge which the NSW DPP later dropped. If NSW courts are not going to enforce this do you really think Victorian courts, given their reputation, will?
Logical responses, like getting rid of the firearm registry, ending safe inspections for firearm owners, actual prison sentences for crooks, etc which would free up Police resources to concentrate on the bad guys seem to elude the Police Minister. I would like to also know how a Police Force that is entirely stretched thin and having to deal with a population increase of nearly 150,000 people every single year into Melbourne, is going to now have to administer, monitor and enforce an additional 3000+ firearm prohibition orders. It won’t be able to.
Victoria Police LRD also already has it’s hands full of incompetence at the moment. FPO’s are a waste of time. Not to mention the “guilt by association” implications that this legislation has for the greater public.
The best thing that Victorians can do to combat crime, is to vote this complete joke of a Police Minister out of her seat at the state election in November.
In a cynical move designed deliberately to tie in with the #MarchForOurLives hysteria, Bill Shorten has written to Malcolm Turnbull over the Will Hodgman government’s proposals in Tasmania. This from the ALPBC:
“Opposition Leader Bill Shorten has called on the Prime Minister to review proposed changes to Tasmania’s gun laws and consider intervening to stop them going ahead.
“I ask you to order an immediate review into the compliance of the Tasmanian Government’s proposal with the National Firearms Agreement,” Mr Shorten wrote to Malcolm Turnbull ahead of the return of Federal Parliament. “If, as appears to be the case, that proposal would breach the agreement, I ask you to publicly demand that your Liberal Party colleagues in the Tasmanian Government abandon it.”
“Simply put, the weakening of gun laws threatens the safety of our community.”
Tasmanian Premier Will Hodgman did not release plans for the changes in the lead-up to the March 3 state election. They were made public on the eve of the poll, leading gun control groups to mount accusations of an attempted cover-up.”
The usual greasy opportunism from the most unelectable Labor leader and indeed, party, in history. Bill doesn’t know what the gun laws are either, so his opinion means nothing. And of course, the ABC went softball on Bill.
The proposals were made public and to relevant stakeholders by then Police Minister Rene Hidding on February 9, 2018:
For the ABC to suggest that it was not public knowledge is a complete lie, and the fact that they could not be bothered trying to investigate this and save their “outrage” until the night before the election in the hope of swaying it, smells of a certain group committing a cover-up. At best, it’s completely lazy journalism.
If Bill indeed knew anything, it’s that the National Firearms Agreement is non-legally binding and the states do not have to comply with it, nor can the federal government compel the states to comply. As we’ve seen so many times, the only way to do this is to wave the federal funding stick at them. Whether or not Turnbull will pull a Howard remains to be seen, however, Hodgman is more within his rights to tell Malcolm where to go.
As we’ve stated before, the proposed changes are very reasonable, evidence based and quite frankly, nothing major. No-one is removing background checks or licencing, so the false “watering down” scare argument is completely moot.
Bill might want to think about keeping Chinese spies out of his party and why he is even more unpopular than Malcolm Turnbull – no mean feat by any means.
Once again reminding LAFO’s that the Labor Party are not and never will be your friends.
After embarrassing herself over kangaroo culling in Australia the last two weeks, former Gun Control Australia member and Greens’ Senator Lee Rhiannon took to federal parliament to complain about Will Hodgman’s proposals in Tasmania:
Senator Bridget McKenzie, Jim Molan and others also added their views to the debate which you can read further.
It wasn’t all Greens though, the ALP decided to join in via Tasmanian Senator Helen Polley:
The old collectivist guilt trick. “I own a gun and turned my guns in after Port Arthur and so should all of you.” Hope you handed your car in after Bourke Street and your kitchen knife in after the Cairns stabbings too, Helen. Not an argument but should have been an enjoyable dopamine hit from the virtue signal.
Whether this is purely Labor opportunism to bash the LNP who knows, but as history has taught us most recently in Queensland and Victoria is that the ALP are no friends of firearm owners, and are just as much civilian disarmament shills as the LNP or Greens.
The Greens are anti-gun but Labor aren’t your friends either. Unfortunately there are still some in the shooting community who somehow think that voting for a worker’s party that disarms the working class is in their interest.
Gun Control Australia’s Roland Browne also had a whinge in The Mercury playing the fear card as that’s all he has:
THREE weeks before the March 3 state election Tasmania’s then police minister proposed, among other changes to the state’s gun laws, a 10-year licence for shooters. That is twice the current five years. The changes were revealed only to a select group of shooters. On ABC radio’s AM program on March 2, the day before the election, Premier Will Hodgman denied the proposed changes breached the National Firearms Agreement (NFA), reached after the Port Arthur massacre in Tasmania in 1996. He said he had been advised by his police minister the changes did not breach the NFA.
Clause 34(d) of the National Firearms Agreement (updated in 2017) says: A firearms licence “must be issued for a period of no more than five years”. Despite the clarity of this requirement, our premier, assuming he had read the NFA, found it was not breached by a plan for 10-year gun licences.
This development — the day before a state election — is alarming on so many levels. It is alarming that our premier does not recognise that a 10-year gun licence would be twice the length of the NFA maximum.
It is alarming because the premier claims his police minister advised him that a 10-year gun licence did not breach the NFA. If true, that in itself says much about the police minister’s lack of understanding of the NFA.
The Liberals’ 2018 firearms plan will unquestionably breach the NFA, but not just for licence terms. The Liberals also want to free up restrictions for target shooting to make semi-automatic rifles and semi-automatic shotguns available for target shooting. This breaches the NFA which can claim, as one of its major achievements, limits on the availability of these weapons in Australia.
That very limitation is the key reason there have been no mass shootings with these weapons in Australia since 1996. In fact, a recent study estimated that the 1996 reforms prevented as many as 16 mass shootings in Australia in the last 22 years.
The Liberals also want to permit farmers to have silencers on their semi-automatic rifles and shotguns, and they want to introduce a new category for prohibited firearms, being category E. This would result in otherwise prohibited weapons becoming available to what the policy describes as “certain specialists”. Whatever the Liberals are proposing by this initiative, it will clearly breach the NFA.
As you can see, Roland Browne accuses others of “not understanding the NFA” when his above litany clearly demonstrates he is the one that doesn’t understand it.
That’s correct. A lawyer whingeing about the states choosing not to comply with a non-legally binding agreement that doesn’t make sense anyway. Not a great sales pitch for hiring him to represent you. Didn’t hear Roland complain too much when the Northern Territory changed the licencing period to ten years either.
Pauline Hanson went in to bat for gun owners:
As did Based Leyonhjelm:
Whether Will Hodgman delivers on the proposed changes remains to be seen and indeed, we will believe it when we hopefully do see it. However the bullying, attempted emotional blackmail over Port Arthur and complaining by people who have no idea about the laws in the first place, are really nothing short of pathetic and desperate plots to try and derail the debate and stifle rational changes to the NFA which as stated before, is non-legally binding nor an agreement in the first place.