The glorious state of NSSRW delivers again. Not content with being
probably the second worst state after WA for firearms laws, comes this
latest exercise in collective punishment:
“Shooters who fail to declare serious mental health issues will be weeded out and family law court proceedings taken into account when ruling on gun licence applications under the biggest-ever overhaul of NSW firearm regulations.
In a bid to stop potential “red flags” going unheeded, doctors will also be encouraged to be more proactive about reporting patients who own guns and show signs of risky behaviour.
“The changes are part of historic reforms being introduced by Superintendent Anthony Bell, who became the new boss of the NSW Firearms Registry late last year.
In his first interview in his new job, Supt Bell declared: “It’s about making sure people who shouldn’t have access to firearms don’t.”
Same old shit. Kinda like these guys who illegally imported an AR last week?
“Supt Bell, who took over the politically charged role after 25 years as an operational cop, has wasted no time addressing systemic issues around the registry, which is responsible for regulating 238,000 gun licence holders in NSW and the one million firearms they own.
Among his reforms is appointing senior adjudicators to deal with “grey area” firearm licence applications or renewals. That includes determining if a person’s mental health or family law court matters makes them unfit to own a gun.
In the past, such applications have not been treated differently to more straightforward decisions, such as mandatory refusals for those who have been subject to an AVO in the previous decade. Now they will be triaged.”
A summary of what is being proposed:
“Mental health assessment: The registry can ask for a psychological assessment from an applicant’s doctor. A senior adjudicator will then decide if the illness, be it anything from mild depression to bipolar disorder, rules a person unfit to have a gun.
The Commissioner’s Permit: Where a person’s background automatically rules them out for firearms training, the registry can grant an exception. The permit has been renamed after it was used by John Edwards to start handgun training after he was knocked back from several gun clubs. The old title gave the illusion the permit was signed off by the police commissioner himself, rather than registry staff.
Doctors reporting: While doctors can already report patients’ risky behaviour, police claim they rarely do. Supt Bell said: “What you were when you presented as a new gun customer and had no issues can change, as lives and circumstances do.”
Database: The registry is considering a database so gun clubs can report people trying to get licences for the wrong reasons. Supt Bell said: “If we had a system that said ‘Tony Bell went here, here and here and was turned away’, wouldn’t we want that?”
Family law: National working groups of firearm experts, law enforcement and legal minds are seeking ways to make sure police know about Family Court orders.”
The usual paid for propaganda by the Daily Telegraph, who have been running interference for NSW Police on the John Edwards incident since day one.
Firstly, no plan as to how any of this is to be implemented or costed. We know how state governments all roll when it comes to projected finances.
One only has to look at the MyHealth Record fiasco to know how much of a disaster the mental health proposal is. How are Police going to obtain private medical records from a number of private health care providers and keep that information safe, when their own registry can’t do that already? The answer is they can’t, particularly when they were mailing out licences to the wrong addresses.
Further, “mental health” is a vague term in itself. There’s a difference between a fully functioning adult with a mild bout of managed anxiety or depression, which would also realistically rule out a lot of serving Police, to a full-blown schizophrenic who likely should be institutionalised. Who defines what is a precluding condition?
The issue of domestic violence is also a grey area. It already is the law that an IVO subjects you to a 10-year exclusion period on firearms. Given that knives are clearly the choice of weapon in domestic violence incidents, it’s easy to argue that this really makes little difference. There’s also plenty of vexatious domestic violence claims made by ex-partners to have their firearms taken away – how will this be addressed?
The recent audit of the NSWFAR displayed how much of a calamity Australia’s firearm registries really are. It’s also not much of a stretch to suggest that this incident was deliberately cherry picked by NSW Police in order to advance long proposed firearm laws.
One only has to look at the AMA’s website to see the similarities in what is being proposed. It’s not hard to suggest that these laws have also long been in the works and they have been waiting for an excuse – the Edwards case provides them with that.
Just another example to show that there’s no such thing as “knee jerk” gun laws. What is being proposed, as per the red flag laws in the US, is teetering on the edge of Minority Report.
Finally, enhanced reporting means very little if no Police action is going to be taken. This is exactly what happened with the John Edwards case and then NSW Police overrode that and gave him a licence anyway.
NSW’s gun laws don’t need to get tighter. NSW Police need to change their attitude as to how they deal with firearm owners and the registry needs to go completely, as it’s a proven ineffective waste of tax payer money.
Cases in point: David Dunstan, Brad Towner, Gel Blasters and the rest.
So what about veterans who are now to scared to go seek help with PTSD or other things because they also like to shoot and be licensed. Its a right not a privalage. Contstution dude.
It’s not just veterans, it would apply to serving police, it would ensure that most rural people will not speak to a Doctor about anything and it means that the non rural part of the 1 million plus gun owners out there won’t speak to Doctors either.
Always beware of the unintended consequences of these things, I expect after introduction the suicide rate to increase because people cannot seek help – but that is pretty obvious, it’s the non obvious stuff that is likely to bite later.
However, very simply only a fool of a gun owner would now tell their Doctor that they own guns (no matter what state you live in) and if my Doctor asks, I will deny it, then change Doctors because later on the activist “Doctors who think they know better than you” crowd will start diagnosing mental health issues where none exist.
I believe NSW was the only jurisdiction in Australia where a shooters licence didn’t have to get cleared by a doctor. I can’t see it not happening in NSW now because of Christchurch and the general misconception that it’s necessary for public safety.
@Shooter-there may be more to what you say than you realise. So many people go on about how Australia doesn’t have a Bill of Rights or R2KBA in our constitution, but this may be more from neglect and lack of awareness than anything else.
Firstly. Australia DOES have a Bill of Rights. Every jurisdiction in the country has a booklet available from the Government Printing Office that has a list of statutes in force within that jurisdiction. They all contain the Magna Carta and the Bill of Rights. These must be compatible with the Federal Constitution or they wouldn’t be in these booklets..
In the Victorian version, which reproduces the Acts Applications Act 1980, the Bill of Rights acknowledges the right to keep and bear arms on pp’s 40 (Bill of Rights 1689, s.8, 6) and 42 ( s.8, 7). It will be objected that these clauses only applied to Protestants who had been oppressed by the Catholic king James, but if they really are no more than an historical curiosity, why are they not better known? It’s as though TPTB don’t want anyone to know about this stuff. Catholics were admitted into the British Parliament in 1829 and being a Catholic was never a barrier to election to any of the colonial parliaments formed in Australia before Federation. The right to keep and bear arms was not undermined throughout all this time, ie the admission of Catholics into Parliament was not used as an excuse to restrict it. It seems on the face of it-and I claim no more than to offer possibilities and stimulate discussion-that the Bill of Rights DOES allow the right to keep and bear arms for personal defence and to defend against tyranny.
I too have long trird to tell people that Ausyralia does infeed hsve a bill of rights that declared this..
But few listened or believed.
Thankyou for pointing this out..
And every cop in Australia in posetion of a weapon they are not personally licenced for, and with legit ‘genuine reason’ is both an illegally armed crininal, and a political mercenary, by dictionary definition alone..
When our ‘sworn servant’ police, are themselves the creeps & thieves, and stealing from the very people & rights they swore to protect..they are no longer legitimate.
“When injustice becomes ‘law’..
Resistance becomes DUTY!”
All shooters should demand to see the same full & correct licences, of the required type, from all armed police officers in this country..
NO more hypocrisy, NO more double standards..NO more anti-democratic ‘Laws’ that are pure tyranny.
Lets start publicly arresting the all the bastards, with the exact same ‘force of law’ as they consider ‘legit & lawful to use on us.
And their families & coworkers can explain their own ongoing, willful aiding & abetting of them all in their many daily ‘crimes’ and illegal weapons acts, (that they arrest us for in an instant!).. in our country, on our watch!
If its a ‘crime’ for me & my family, nieces & neighbours..as humans & citizens, then its something no sworn cop EVER has any business doing..EVER.
We DO have rights, AND a Bill of Rights, and we ALWAYS had semi auto firearms in Australia!
How cowardly a creature must a police officer be, to need to hide behind an M4..in a country who’s people are now disarmed of anything like it.
How do you duppose real cops, who were armed only with .38 revolvers for decades, worked just fine in a country where ALL the decent folls had the far more serious stuff?
Simple answer: We used to love & look out for our cops..they used to be our servants..we had no tolerance, (and plenty of firepower to come to their aid) if anyone ever tried anything nasty..
Just like the Heroic Civilian owner of the gunstore in the Bank of America shootout, a few years back.
Now..after they stole all my guns, act like mercs, carry illegal & unlicenced weapons around my streets, for NO ‘legitimate reason’ under law, for real humans & citizens..like my family, and have ‘accidents’ in public..and ‘lose’ 200 Glocks’ and fail to save hostages & citizens, even in public shootouts, like the Lindt Cafe, and Port Arthur massacre incidents..but now want M4’s?
Are we expected to believe that police would’ve or will ‘next time’ a public shootout occurs?
If they couldn’t stop just 1 simple patsy ‘gunman’ at Port Arthur, with loads of them, all armed with modern, hi capacity, semi auto Glock .40’s..
Worry about learning how to use the Glocks you already have, and meeting ALL of the requirements, that you expect of us, every single day, for getting licenced, and for safe keeping of those, first..just like the rest of us!
Then manage to be even better, and more professional, and not comitting even a single ‘crime’ you would arrest me, or my family or neighbours for..Especially with regard to guns!
Because right now, cops commit more crimes with firearms every day, than our entire country’s worth of legit shooters ever did..in our entire nation’s history!
Anyone remember the Rum Rebellion of 1808?
Wake up australia, just because we momentarily had our own wool, pulled over our own eyes by
Murderous, political chlamydia infected charlatans, does not excuse us for ‘choosing to leave it there and pretend’..
That’s all on us..
And we’ll soon need to officially change “Lest we forget”
To “Long since forgotten’