Muzzle-Loading Guns, rifles & pistols. Police Seizure Abuse - The Loose Cannon.

Although I once defied the odds and got nought out of thirty in an open book multiple choice Chemistry test, leading to me studying law and not an agricultural science, Newton’s third law ‘for every reaction there is an equal and opposite reaction’, has always appealed to me, because at least on one level it applies to human and organisational behaviour and not just objects.

Thus when Police are affected by something they react.

Most readers would be familiar with the Edwards tragedy last year.  Mr Edwards was granted a special Commissioner's Permit for a handgun, against the wishes of a gun club he had previously approached, and then he went oput and commited a murder suicide soon after.  Further compounding the tragedy, his distraught former spouse committed suicide earlier this year. 

Police did not blame themselves for granting the permit, and are now targeting anyone who shoots and who is involved in a Family Law break up.

Case in point, I am acting for a small dealer at present who is in the process of going through a break up with his spouse.  The parties are separated under the one roof.

On my instructions his former partner was somewhat jealous because he was having a discussion and was actively engaged in play with his son. His wife’s mother suggested she call Police, which she proceeded to do.

Police attended, and as no threat was made, and there was no apprehension of violence, no AVO was issued.

Nevertheless, my client’s licence was suspended.  The reason on the suspension was ‘child at risk’- yet there was on these facts no evidence of this.  The only thing that happened that night that would have been scary to a child was the arrival of two Police Officers after the child’s bed time - although I stress that in this particular situation the officers behaved commendably well, and only followed instructions.

Not every child in a break up is a child at risk, and if Police wanted to target children at risk their attention would be better spent visiting shopping centres and rounding up truanting children during the day, and getting tired drivers off the road.

As you may be aware, Police policy of seizure, for a ‘cooling off period’ of 28 days, does not appear to have any statutory basis and any seizure of firearms needs to comply with Firearms Act 1996 or the Law Enforcement (Powers and Responsibilities) Act 2002.

The Police power to suspend a Firearms licence is set out in paragraph 22 of the Firearms Act 1996, and I have set it out below.

22   Suspension of licence

(cf APMC 6, 1989 Act s 35)

(1)  The Commissioner may, if the Commissioner is satisfied there may be grounds for revoking a licence, suspend the licence by serving personally or by post on the licensee a notice:

(a)  stating that the licence is suspended and the reasons for suspending it, and

(b)  requesting that the person provide the Commissioner with reasons why the licence should not be revoked.

(1A) If a licence is being suspended because the Commissioner is satisfied that there may be grounds for revoking the licence under section 11 (5A), the notice suspending the licence is not required:

(a)  to state the reasons for the suspension, or

(b)  to include any request that the licensee provide the Commissioner with reasons why the licence should not be revoked.

(2)  The Commissioner must suspend a licence in accordance with this section if the Commissioner is aware that the licensee has been charged with a domestic violence offence within the meaning of the Crimes (Domestic and Personal Violence) Act 2007 or the Commissioner has reasonable cause to believe that the licensee has committed or has threatened to commit a domestic violence offence within the meaning of that Act.

(3)  A suspended licence does not authorise the possession or use of firearms during the period specified in the notice suspending it.

Whilst not relevant, I shall set out section 11(5) below for your convenience

11(5) A licence must not be issued to a person who:

(a)  is under the age of 18, or

(b)  has, within the period of 10 years before the application for the licence was made, been convicted in New South Wales or elsewhere of an offence prescribed by the regulations, whether or not the offence is an offence under New South Wales law, or

(c)  is subject to an apprehended violence order or interim apprehended violence order or who has, at any time within 10 years before the application for the licence was made, been subject to an apprehended violence order (other than an order that has been revoked), or

(d)  is subject to a good behaviour bond, whether entered into in New South Wales or elsewhere, in relation to an offence prescribed by the regulations, or

(e)  is subject to a firearms prohibition order, or

(f)  is a registrable person or corresponding registrable person under the Child Protection (Offenders Registration) Act 2000.

Turning to the Law Enforcement (Powers and Responsibilities) Act 2002 which again relevantly provides:

      20   Relevant offences

The following offences are relevant offences for the purposes of this Division:

       (a)  indictable offences,

       (b)  an offence against section 93FB of the Crimes Act 1900,

       (c)  an offence against the Weapons Prohibition Act 1998, the Firearms Act 1996, or a regulation made under either of those Acts,

       (d)  an offence against a provision of Part 2 of the Explosives Act 2003.

      21   Power to search persons and seize and detain things without warrant

      (cf Crimes Act 1900, ss 357, 357E, Drug Misuse and Trafficking Act 1985, s 37)

       (1)  A police officer may, without a warrant, stop, search and detain a person, and anything in the possession of or under the control of the person, if the police officer suspects on reasonable grounds that any of the following circumstances exists:

       (a)  the person has in his or her possession or under his or her control anything stolen or otherwise unlawfully obtained,

       (b)  the person has in his or her possession or under his or her control anything used or intended to be used in or in connection with the commission of a relevant offence,

       (c)  the person has in his or her possession or under his or her control in a public place a dangerous article that is being or was used in or in connection with the commission of a relevant offence,

       (d)  the person has in his or her possession or under his or her control, in contravention of the Drug Misuse and Trafficking Act 1985, a prohibited plant or a prohibited drug.

       (2)  A police officer may seize and detain:

       (a)  all or part of a thing that the police officer suspects on reasonable grounds is stolen or otherwise unlawfully obtained, and

       (b)  all or part of a thing that the police officer suspects on reasonable grounds may provide evidence of the commission of a relevant offence, and

       (c)  any dangerous article, and

       (d)  any prohibited plant or prohibited drug in the possession or under the control of a person in contravention of the Drug Misuse and Trafficking Act 1985,

       found as a result of a search under this section.

      22   Power to seize and detain dangerous articles on premises

      (cf Crimes Act 1900, s 357)

A police officer who is lawfully on any premises may seize and detain any dangerous article that the police officer finds on the premises, if the police officer suspects on reasonable grounds that the dangerous article is being or was used in or in connection with the commission of a relevant offence.

 Premises include vessels, vehicles, aircraft and other places.

       The difficulty for Police here is that while a firearm is a dangerous article within the meaning of s21(2)(c) there is no relevant offence, nor is there any suspicion on reasonable grounds that the article is or was used in commission of an offence (s22).

After realising that they were on shakey grounds a Sergeant rang my client, alluded to gaol, and referenced the following alleged offences, none of which are supported by available evidence.

1.     That my client was in possession of 14 unregistered firearms.  This allegation was denied.  My client had completed all PAB28 and 31 paperwork as required by legislation as required and had forwarded these to the Registry by Registered Post.  My client also completed his quarterly return with respect to these entries and forwarded the quarterly return to the Registry by Registered Post.  Apparently, Police wish to hold my client responsible for processing tardiness at their Registry.

     That my client was in possession of a number of prohibited firearms specifically firearms fitted with a folding stock. Allegation admitted. My client is authorised by virtue of his dealer licence to possess prohibited firearms no 11 of Sch 1 of the Firearms Act 1996, item 11 are any firearms fitted with a folding stock.

1.     That my client was informed he would be asked why one firearm had a defaced serial number.  Upon entering details of all firearms acquired by my client the physical serial number of the firearm was sighted at all times when making these entries.  My client can answer no explanation why one has a defaced serial number he questions if part of a serial number may be partially obscured by a stock.  I requested further particulars.
2.     The Sergeant informed my client that his decision to suspend my client in the morning of 9 May 2019 was supported by an allegation involving matrimonial property.  On the 8 May 2019 attending Police referred to this as a civil matter, and it was not raised as a complaint until the afternoon of the 9 May 2019. For this reason, this allegation was not raised on the Suspension Notice and had no bearing upon the decision to suspend.

My criticism is with a Police Policy in practice in respect to domestic situations that exceeds the law, and that involves the seizure of firearms without probable cause merely on suspicion of a domestic break up. 

Just because Firearms ownership is a privilege and not a right, does not mean that privilege is subject to unfettered discretion by Police to seize firearms or suspend licences without appropriate due process.

When I first came to Australia, I was amazed how far this country has progressed since it was a penal colony, a mere couple of hundred years ago.  However the longer I practice law, the more convinced I am that my assumption is wrong, for certainly in terms of Police attitude, this state is still a Penal Colony.

Simon Munslow

National Firearms Lawyer
P: (02) 6299 9690
M: 0427 280 962
E: solicitor@bigpond.com
W: firearmslawyer.com.au

Simon Munslow is a lawyer who has a lifelong interest in shooting, having acquired his first firearm at the age of nine, and has had an active interest in firearms law since writing a thesis on the topic over thirty years ago at University.
Simon Munslow practices extensively in Firearms Law matters throughout Australia.

He is a regular contributor to the Australian Sporting Shooter magazine’s website on Firearms law matters, has published articles on firearms reviews and firearms law, and occasionally is asked to comment in the broader media on firearms matters.

This article is written for general information only and does not constitute advice. 
He can assist you with:

Criminal law & Administrative law and in particular that related to Firearms

• All firearms, weapons and game charges
• Avoiding & setting aside Apprehended Violence Orders
• Possession of unregistered firearms
• Unsafe transportation & storage matters
• Applications for prohibited weapons
• License Appeals
• Freedom of Information / Government Public Access matters
• Importation & Customs problems
• Advices & opinions related to Firearms law matters

Read more at http://www.sportingshooter.com.au/latest/police-seizure-abuse-the-loose-cannon#iq2kiJvR6Pw57ZCw.99
http://www.sportingshooter.com.au/latest/police-seizure-abuse-the-loose-cannon

A 17th Century Xmas Poster.

I hope you all have a pleasant and safe xmas. Personally I am going to wait for the winter solstice.
Keith.

On Firearms Control In Australia By Robert Borsak.

Robert Borsak

20 hrs

Today I was asked by Fox News in London to comment on whether or not Australia's firearms laws work to stop crime in light of the decision by President Obama to reform American gun laws.

Our advocacy is being internationally recognized and it is about time that law abiding firearms owners get a fair go.

The show will air soon and we will get a copy of the segment as soon as we can get our hands on it.

In the meantime, here are my thoughts as an Australian law abiding firearm owner:

As President Obama attempts to reform America gun laws, the issue of gun control and violence is yet again in the spotlight. My thoughts and sentiments on this are not centred around American gun control or gun culture per se, but rather the Australian experience.

It is deeply disturbing that every time the issue of gun control is debated in America or other jurisdictions for that matter, Australian guns laws are hailed as the gold standard – a benchmark for leaders to achieve. Well, they are not.

As a starting point, we are not America, we do not have a constitutional right to bear arms, and in fact our constitution does not afford ordinary citizens many rights at all. Instead, what we have is an array of draconian and impractical state and national firearms laws, underpinned by a ‘Howard’ mentality that somehow regulating law abiding people will deter crime.

But the facts and evidence fly in the face of many of these ‘anti-gun’ lies and misinformation.

In late 2015, following intensive discussions with Robert Brown and I, the NSW Deputy Premier and Police Minister, Troy Grant, rightly pointed out what the Shooters and Fishers Party have been saying for over 20 years, “Greater than 97% of all firearms incidents reported in NSW relate to unregistered, or unbranded, or unmarked firearms… NSW has an illegal firearm problem”.

This has been the reality in Australia for decades. The vast majority of firearms crimes committed are done so with the use of an illegal or unregistered firearm by an unlicensed individual.

Logic dictates then, does it not, that the Government should focus the vast majority of its time and resources on curbing the illegal firearms trade and tough sentencing measures? Rather, successive governments have spent over a billion dollars on targeting law abiding firearms owners through failed registration schemes, confiscation and pointless “tough gun control” measures.

Further, independent and statistical research indicates that the regulation, including banning, of firearms, has little to no causal effect on the rate of crime. The Melbourne Institute of Applied Economic and Social Research published a working paper on The Australian Firearms Buyback and Its Effect on Gun Deaths, which ultimately concluded that the NFA did not have large or long-term effects on reducing firearms homicide or suicide rates in Australia.

Our gun laws are nothing to be proud of. In fact, they represent one of the most vile and draconian attacks on personal freedoms and culture. They have been formed, and continue to be formed, on lies, political mileage and misinformation.

In 1996, the Howard Government decided that we couldn’t be trusted with semi-automatic rifles and pump action shotguns anymore, yet it seems criminals didn’t get the message?

Even today, the ordinary Australian citizens cringes or questions me when I tell them I love shooting and hunting. I don’t blame them though. I blame the collective efforts of politicians like John Howard, anti-gun groups like The Australian Greens and Gun Control Australia, and most of the media. This atmosphere of paranoia and ignorance was created by them. It is our job to unwind the damage and further our rights in the process.

Licensed firearms owners are among the few classes of people that are acknowledged and endorsed as fit and proper persons. Criminals are not allowed to obtain firearms licences period. Ownership and use of a firearm is a highly held privilege. With that privilege we have the right not to be associated with or disadvantaged by the action of senseless cowards. Relaxing firearms laws to make it easier and more practical for law abiding citizens to enjoy their sport and cultural pastimes is not going to result in a mass shooting or spike in gun crime.

To my fellow law abiding firearm owners, and to anyone who truly values personal freedoms and fact based decision making, I say this: The fight for the roll back of these firearms laws will be a generational struggle, but united, we have a strong and growing voice that will not be silenced!

 https://www.facebook.com/groups/1502950643337038/permalink/1523002614665174/

STOP THE BLAME OF LAW ABIDING SHOOTERS FOR THE ACTS OF CRIMINALS!

STOP THE BLAME OF LAW ABIDING SHOOTERS FOR THE ACTS OF CRIMINALS!

Please follow this link and sign the petition.
https://www.communityrun.org/petitions/stop-the-blame-of-law-abiding-shooters-for-the-acts-of-driminals

Australian National Firearms Lobby

This is a National Firearms Lobby group and our aim is to lobby for the complete change of the National Firearms Laws. The current State by State laws are far to confusing and frustrating. The proposed new law is as follows-: "It shall be the right of every Australian citizen to own and posses any firearm other than fully automatic weapons". This right shall be subject to the following-: 1) That applicant shall provide documentation that certifies such applicant to be safe and competent in the use of firearms.
2) That such applicant has passed a stringent criminal background check and has documentation to support same.
3) That the applicant has been given the, "Ok", after having completed a psychological evaluation questionnaire.

https://www.facebook.com/groups/australiannationalfirearmslobby/

Australian Gun Legislation. Not For The People.

Changes to the Control of Weapons Act

http://www.police.vic.gov.au/content.asp?Document_ID=31128

http://www.police.vic.gov.au/content.asp?Document_ID=31106

The Gunpowder Threat. Who To Contact.

The address to send submissions to is

The Manager
Legislative and Regulatory Branch
Worksafe Victoria
GPO Box 4306
Melbourne
Vic 3000


This is a precursor for the " National Harmonized Explosive Laws" that are currently in the pipeline for 2013 . What is decided in Victoria, will not only affect Victorians, visitors into Victoria, but will impact on all states.
The more submissions, the better, from as many different groups and states as possible.

I suggest you also contact your local member.

To whom it may concern



Sheer disappointment was my first response when having read the Draft RI that Black Propellant Powder Shooters have been completely ignored in the consultation process used to create this draft RIS.


Black Propellant Shooting Powders have been classed as 1.1D Blasting Explosives. These powders are specifically used as shooting powders only as the name suggests. In accordance with the draft RIS, all black powder shooters and re-enactors will be required to obtain a blasting explosive licence to store and use their propellants in the pursuit of the sport or interest. The maximum amount they will be able to store will be 5kg as proposed. This amount penalizes them as most of these shooters would hold /store in excess of this proposed quantity. There are 8 grades of these shooting powders of which most users would possess. They are only supplied in 1Kg compliant containers so to continue shooting as they do they would need to either relinquish some of their firearms or move to a large magazine storage facility. Hence there is the potential for in excess of 2200 large scalestorage facilities to be built.


The number quoted has been gleaned from the memberships of Black Powder Shooting Clubs here in Victoria along with members of the Sporting Shooters Association of Victoria, The Victorian Amateur Pistol Association that use Black Propellant Shooting Powders and re-enacting groups. There are still individuals who possess and use these firearms for hunting purposes and arenot connected with any of the abovementioned groups or organizations so one can only calculate with any confidence a minimum number. Some of the above Clubs organize and run multiply day shoots or rendezvous where an average of 1pound, 1/2KG of powder would be expended in their pursuit of their sport or interest per day. Hence the participants would not have sufficient quantities to be able to participate for the duration of the event due to the now proposed storage quantities and proposed transportable quantities. A majority of the firearms used by the above are ONLY designed for Black Propellant Shooting Powders. Most black powder shooting clubs are only accredited for use of Black Propellant Shooting powders. With the restrictive supply due to the transportation restrictions in the availability of compliant transport companies, transportable quantities and point of supply availability, there future becomes very unsure.


One can see that we the Black Powder shooter have been completely ignored and have been severely penalized with this draft document. A simple solution to this unfortunate situation that has been created is to move all the Black Propellant Shooting Powders into the propellant class


1.3C or creating a sub-category that has the same requirements and storage quantities as the 1.3C classified explosives. With the adoption of the above proposal, this would have a minimal disruptive effect upon each member and our respective clubs. We hope you will view these suggestions in a positive way.
Thanking you
Yours sincerely.


This is a precursor for the “National Harmonized Explosive Laws" that are currently in the pipeline for 2013. What is decided in Victoria, will not only affect Victorians, visitors into Victoria, but will impact on all states.


As I understand it this legislation will effect all states in Australia in the future, and basically the end product is that sporting black powder gunpowder will no longer be available in Australia. The restrictions on storage will mean that Australian dealers will no longer be able to store black powder & therefore will not be able to supply it to customers. This will be the death of our Armidale group & many others. I founded this group in Armidale over 20 years ago.


I trust you will do all you can to help us & all other black powder gun clubs, historical re-enactment clubs, & living history clubs & groups in Australia. The consequences of this legislation are far reaching beyond the closure of these clubs & groups.


Sincerely,


Keith H. Burgess.


New England Colonial Living History Group 1680-1760.

No More Gunpowder. More.

 The need for a blasting permit, fallout zones for powder storage- which leads to no dealers being able carry the product, and the National Harmonised Explosive Law.

Child's Skull Found In River Bank.

http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/news/3443249/18th-century-childs-skull-discovered-in-river-bank-with-dark-secret.html