WA reclassification: Shooter wins his Desert Tech SRS back.
WAPol’s registry simply can’t win a trick against the NSC.
They have lost yet another reclassification case against a shooter who started his own action, and helped along by the NSC.
That brings to 4-0 the number of cases we’ve run or helped to run against them (one on the gun shop closures, two on the Ruger PC Charger, and now one on the Desert Tech SRS).
M turned to NSC after being shunned by SSAA
A few weeks ago, we told you about “M“ who owned a Desert Technical SRS, which WAPOL reclassified in June last year. WAPol told him they were acting on the instructions of superiors by revoking his authority to have the gun, and forced him to surrender it.
M is a life member of the SSAA, but got shunned by them when he sought their help. Aware that the NSC was fighting a similar action on the Ruger PC Charger, M contacted the NSC which took the matter on.
As happened with the other matters the NSC was running, WAPol argued that SAT did not have jurisdiction, and relied on the case of Commissioner v Killen. WAPol argued that the Killen case found that decisions by the Commissioner to reclassify a firearm was not appealable – despite Western Australian legislation saying otherwise.
The NSC’s barrister and M then formulated a careful and solid legal strategy that resulted in that argument getting rolled. This means that the NSC has overcome a legal hurdle for shooters in WA and opened the way for more challenges to reclassification in the future.
M wins his case
A few hours before a hearing scheduled for a few days ago, the NSC got word through its barrister that M not only got his licence back but WAPOL will also refund his SAT application fee.
This is a really good win for shooters in WA and stamps the NSC’s authority as it continues to fight reclassification decisions by our registries. This fight is the thirteenth legal fight that the NSC has either started or helped shooters with.
It’s definitely a ‘slow road’ to take but paves the way for the eventual dismantling of our appearance laws, which simply have to go.
M has thanked the NSC for being the only shooting organisation to provide the support he needed to win the case against superiors in the WA firearms branch.
More sour grapes
After another recent win by the NSC, a SFFP supporter posted on Facebook and said:
“Last I looked, the NSC hadn’t achieved a single actual win in the courts. What they are claiming as “wins” are issues that have been resolved outside the courts, probably by the work of other parties”
The head of SIFA, James Walsh and the EO of the ADA, Barry Howlett, who should be providing constructive support for our legal fights, instead ‘liked’ this comment, effectively tying the brands of their organisations to positions of non-action.
For the record, when you take legal action and the other side caves in, and you get the result you wanted, that’s a win.
They weren’t the only ones who took a shot at the NSC. President of the WA Firearm Traders Association Bevan Steele, who is a WA Gun dealer and stood as a SFFP candidate at the recent WA State Election, posted on Facebook (commenting on a previous offer by the NSC to work with WAFTA):
“I remember u had nothing to offer and still don’t . Not seeing any case law being created or tangible victories for shooters-just pissing off govt and registries alike-yep good work”.
If avoiding “pissing off govt and registries” is a position that WAFTA wants to take, then fine – but there is no merit in pretending that all is well on our legal front.
Bring it on, Jack
If those who criticise the NSC are after the packed courtroom drama of “A few good men”, then sorry, we can’t offer that.
Not yet anyway.
The last thing shooters can afford is to have shooting organisations that say they represent shooters openly bag successful legal fights that are going to benefit the future of shooting – especially when we are yet to see them take actions of their own.