Interesting…
For some reason they get hung up on $1 vs $19 PTA-like system for buying ammo, I really look past that. What I am interested in is everything else.
On the face of it (I haven’t done any fact checking), sounds like the ammo bill is a back door way to smoke out some proportion of the guns that weren’t ever registered. Interesting that he states the NRA aren’t actively fighting for their rights…
NRA is generally considered a sellout these days, after they supported bump stock ban.
Strange how like you say he is hung up on the price rather than the principle behind it. I hate the sound of them keeping a register on how much and of what you buy. It will no doubtfully end up being used for inspections if the have them like us. Or even worse just shakedown type inspection on some other trumped up homeland security type reason.
Hmmmm. I’m probably missing the point, but I’m not sure thats the monster in the cupboard. I think it’s a back door way of achieving retrospective firearm registration. If as a LAFO you want to buy ammunition for a calibre you don’t have a registered firearm for, you won’t be able to until you register something chambered in that calibre. Would flush out some proportion of currently unregistered firearms…
Was there much push back from the firearms community there when the bump stock ban was proposed?
Honestly, the stocks just sound like a mechanical work around to be able to mimic full autos with a semi.
In terms of stocks… There’s plenty of videos or at least used to be, how people do that with a rubber band or a hair tie. In any case, it’s more of a gimmick than anything else… Point was about losing rights, which in their eyes translate to freedom.
NRA was considered the industry giant, that would fight for their rights. However, with that much heat, NRA couldn’t do it and instead came out and said that anything that makes a legal firearm illegal (convert semi to auto) should be banned. This is when big shooting media personalities started calling them sellouts and it snowballed from there. Though I’m sure there’s more to that story, but I’m more an American, so that’s just my take on it, all in all that’s the gist I guess. I’m hoping SSAA gets called out like that too.
Yeah, definitely sounds like there is a lot more to it. I imagine it would be very hard to publicly defend the stocks after the events in Las Vegas, and probably not something to burn political capital on for minor gains.
Has the SSAA recently supported any further firearms control? I’ve heard they have decent lobbying potential, due to how much money they have, because nearly everyone gets a membership for the genuine reason on their licence.
Don’t know, mate. Probably need to be well versed in US politics to be able to answer that question.
Re: SSAA - is basically a scam. On a state level, they do alright. Operationally speaking. But from governance point of view, for example, their primary charter statement… They take money, but sit on it, paying board member without any return. There’s actually zero evidence they have done anything for shooters since 1996 and I could find evidence of them doing the opposite. So yeah, they have the funds, unfortunately they are managed by people who don’t know anything about managing.
If you search Facebook, SSAA - NSW, they posted what would it take to have shooters united. That backfired badly. Pretty much everyone commenting that they need to sack the entire Board. Even their own range officers having a go at the Board.
1 Like
Actually, I’m not sure if management there is paid. Regardless, NFI what that money is used for. I just use them because I need club membership for some of my sporting needs.
I had a look, I think they deleted the thread on the NSW page, but there was one on the Sydney page that had some good replies.
I did like what one person commented though, that we should be more like NZ, where there are less restrictions, but they also do a police interview.
I don’t know what it’s like in the other states, but in Victoria, it feels pretty bloody easy so far. It’s just a bit of waiting, as well as not being so much of a retard that you can’t fill in paperwork.
Maybe it was Sydney… I took a screenshots lol.
It’s not hard in Vic, it’s very financially taxing though. But that’s a silly mentality. Why should it be hard? You do your background checks and that’s that. However, the whole concept of a PTA is stupid and dangerous.
That’s a fair point, nothing dictates that it needs to be a difficult process. I guess including an interview in the process would alleviate concerns in the wider community.
PTA is permit to acquire right? What dangerous about them?
Now I wasn’t going to comment on this one because I know what you will say but you blokes have it a lot easier than we do in getting firearms. I would love to be able to send in half a dozen PTA’s online and buy all the guns that I would love to , unfortunately the regime won’t let us.
On the ammo bill, we have had a similar thing in place for years. If we want to buy ammo or powder we have to produce our licence and in the case of ammo if your not licensed for that calibre you can’t by it.
If for example Juststarting asked me to grab him a box of 308 shells I can’t as I don’t have a license for one.
I know that it’s my fault for living here but the NT is too muggy in wet season, QLD is either in fire, flood or drought, NSW has similar issues, VIC is too bloody cold, SA is nearly as bad as us in a political sense and TAS is like VIC but with better scenery 
Righto kick away.
@Tempestman
Re: PTA – I am about to open a can of worms here…
So, PTA or Permit to Acquire is obviously what you need file with police to be allowed to by a firearm. Sure, in Vic it’s $9 or realistically like $15 if you just offload all that to the shop and they will do it all for you and get it done and ready in no time. 1-2 days in Victoria.
So let’s break this down.
Option 1: paper based – DIY
You fill the form, put it in the envelope and send it off. What happens if through some means this PTA ends up somewhere else? No, you made yourself a target, so to speak.
Option 2: electronic
You do this via a shop. A shop will (a) file the form and (b) register the firearm when it arrives. You will notice it’s a notepad that they write in. So what happens if a rogue employee takes a photo of notebook pages, again you are a target. What happens if someone breaks in and all they take is just this notebook – a shopping list of sorts.
Finally we land on actual computer systems where this stuff is stored. There have been numerous, countless leaks of these data. Over and over again with little to no consequences to employees. Lack of responsibility and accountability.
I am not blaming LRD or anyone specifically, managing these type of data and commensurate security controls for it is very, very hard and expensive. Companies invest millions in to protecting this type of information. However, this is government with lack of personnel, IT know-how, no budget and general ‘government bureaucracy’ type of attitude (“it’s not my fault”, i.e. this is why industry pays more by the way, because people need to be accountable).
So why is PTA dangerous? Because your name, address, what guns you have and who knows what other data is accessible by people who have no business looking at it and will be leaked over and over again.
Basically this is an argument for or against long arm registration, due to public safety. I am not stating that it should or shouldn’t be the case, I am simply explaining why they are dangerous.
Similarly, think about millions opting out of Health Record. this only with guns - government cannot be trusted to keep things secure. We have a good government, nothing to do with any Americnisms like fighting tyranny or freedom and everything to do with lack of skills, strategy, budget and general know-how.
1 Like
Double edge here… Someone has to sign off on your mental state. So lets say a qualified psychologist. Besides financial burden and wasted time, can you imagine putting your career on the line on what essentially is an educated guess?
Not even talking about a legit mental case. What about someone who gets into a fight or through some other means, completely unrelated to firearms, gets tagged as ‘person of bad character’. they lose their firearm licence. So at that stage, they go to court and say, hey, well, this is a one off, I am a good person, this psychologist over there said so and they are qualified. Or someone else starts asking why this person was issued a licence in the first place, when they have a tamper on them. Again, the poor psychologist gets put between a rock and a hard place. I don’t think they’d agree to this.
What about someone else interviewing, like a police officer - well, then you have a clear conflict of interest, when you have QLD police commissioner hanging shit on gun billboards.
What about someone else? Who? How are they qualified to conduct an interview and how are they impartial and what professional standards (like a doctor or a psychologist) do they have to abide by? If you can’t name those, then they shouldn’t be interviewing.
Finally, more people die from cars than guns, do you get an interview every time you buy a car? What about a bottle of alcohol? A kitchen knife? A BBQ gas cylinder? Yep.
2 Likes
Nah man, we are not like that, we don’t make fun of hostages locked in the Communist People Republic of WA.
2 Likes