States agree on gun control code
The states took a tentative step towards uniform gun laws yesterday when police ministers agreed to establish a national gun-control code on shooter licensing, mail-order sale, safety training and secure storage.
The Federal Government will also further restrict the importation of ammunition and machine pistols. But those attending the Australian Police Ministers Council yesterday left unresolved a national argument on the registration of all guns.
The federal Justice Minister, Mr Kerr, described yesterday’s code decision as “a step towards uniformity”.
He said quick responses to shooting tragedies in different states in recent years had led to ad hoc, potentially conflicting standards. Now ministers had set up a mechanism to take a more considered, long-term view.
Mr Kerr said the latest statistics showed that in 1993, only about 70 of Australia’s 526 firearm deaths involved violent crime.
The planned code was welcomed by Victoria’s Police Minister, Mr McNamara, as the most significant improvement in decades, and one that would remedy Victorian concerns about the effect of more relaxed laws in other states.
“It’s the hoons and lunatics that everyone wants to see firearms removed from,” he said. “We need to look at measures where we can more closely interact with mental health authorities so that we can identify persons who should be prohibited from obtaining firearms.”
The NSW Police Minister, Mr Paul Whelan, did not attend the meeting and is awaiting a briefing. Mr Kerr was confident that NSW and the other absent states, Queensland and the Northern Territory, would agree with the proposals.
While all jurisdictions now follow the principle that firearms be securely stored, the provision was variously interpreted. A Western Australian model is being proposed in which guns must be kept in steel cabinets with separate lockable ammunition storage.
The Victorian Justice Department is to coordinate the development of the code, which will be put before the next Police Ministers’ Council meeting in Tasmania in November.
The Commonwealth’s tightening of imports will outlaw a variety of ammunition, including military ammunition greater than 12.7mm, tracer bullets, armour-piercing and flechette ammunition.
Imports of standard hollow-point and soft-nosed ammunition will still be allowed, but a prohibition on military-style weapons will be extended to pistols configured as semi-automatic machineguns.
The president of the Sporting Shooters Association of Australia, Mr Ted Drane, said there were up to four million licensed shooters who ought to be consulted before changes were made to gun laws.
“We will never have national gun registration because that would mean that too many people (politicians) would lose their seats if they did in places like Queensland, New South Wales and Tasmania,” he said.
A spokesman said Victoria’s chief commissioner of police, Mr Neil Comrie, said he supported uniform gun laws.
THE PROPOSED GUN CONTROL CODE.
Recognition of licensing, perhaps with a categorisation system.
Control of mail order firearm sales.
Firearm safety training standards.
Pistol registration methods.
Secure storage standards.
Regulations governing types of ammunition are to be tightened.
A Planned Event Designed to Disarm the Australian Public
“None are more hopelessly enslaved than those who falsely believe they are free. The truth has been kept from the depth of their minds by masters who rule them with lies. They feed them on falsehoods till wrongs look like right in their eyes.” ~ Johann Wolfgang von Goethe.
This year again, there will be an increasing amount of Australians (more and more ladies) will buy hunting rifles, shotguns and target rifle without mentioning the real reason for their new interest in the sport of shooting, survival and defending their families. They will all enjoy our shooting sports, but all will want to keep their firearms close by. This phenomena has to be encouraged, without exposing the reason as again these new shooters increase our numbers. When they appreciate the impositions we live under, this will bring even more power to our cause, not only in our voting power but in forming networks to shape the future. We will have to sustain some small losses to win a victory, but this year as international troubles increase so to will our numbers increase, we are in the third final stage of our campaign to win back our rights. In 2016 the worm turned in the world, populations have discovered that the mainstream media has been lying to them for years, internet media now has greater credibility than mainstream, internet media is quicker and has the eyes on the spot, the mainstream takes the government, or Sorus funded approach and then quickly has to correct and make excuses. This will continue as the establishment has had the media power for so long that they have not yet accepted the plain fact that its credibility is blown. We have seen its destructive effects on One Nation, on the firearm industry, on Brexit and the latest example on Trump. It’s not working and this coming year the success of the past will form the foundation of the future. Youtube, Wikki leaks, Facebook Twitter will be our victory battle ground.
The whole western world is currently in peaceful revolt. 2017 will be the end of one world and the birth of another, last year was the year for the awakening of the people, this year will see the return of nation states. Since our enemies have only one advantage, mainstream media power and their shortcomings are numbered and we have only one disadvantage no mainstream media outlets and our only advantage is power in numbers, in the past this has resulted in putting the Anti Gun people in a dominating position, now we know that the battle ground has to be fought with the internet media tools, or we will always be in this inferior position of Subjugation (Slavery by another name). We have to be involved, ‘If we do nothing, we may well lose everything.’
On the State and National front its not as gloomy, due to 22 % of voters at last years Federal Election voting against the Major Parties, the Orange By Election when the Shooters Party took a Blue Ribbon seat off the National Party, Brexit Results, Trump Results have caused large cracks to appear in the hearts of the major parties. Nationals senators Bridget McKenzie and John Williams voted with Liberal Democrat David Leyonhjelm in an attempt to overturn the Turnbull government’s import ban on the Adler lever action shotgun. Cabinet ministers Fiona Nash, Matt Canavan and Nigel Scullion abstained from the vote, along with backbencher Barry O’Sullivan.
If it does not it will not get very far as it traditionally relies on shooters to man booths and hand out for them on election day. This will force the LNP in Queensland and the Nationals in NSW and Victoria to change its firearm policy and begin the walk back to freedom. Still a long way off, but due to our increased number of voters and internet media, the ‘Writing is truly on the Wall’ we are ‘defiantly’ in phase three.
Police say at least eight Thureon AR-15 assault rifles remain in the community after others were found in the hands of dangerous criminals involved in armed robberies and drug trafficking.
A former gun trader turned black-market importer has pleaded guilty before a Melbourne Magistrate to smuggling the guns into Australia.
Victoria Police Detective Senior Constable Paul Jones said the machine guns first surfaced in Caroline Springs in April 2014.
Armed Crime Squad detectives seized another on Williamstown in February 2015, and a third in Rockbank in January last year.
“That firearm in its fully automatic state is capable of firing 1000 rounds per minute. It’s accurate to ranges in excess of 100 metres.
“The fact that the firearms … have ended up in the hands of criminal elements linked with organised crime is a serious concern to the community,” Sen-Const. Jones said during an August 31 bail application for Munro.
The Melbourne Magistrates Court heard Munro met Huebschmann at the Shooting, Hunting and Outdoor Trade Show in early 2013, later arranging to buy six assault rifles.
In 2015 Munro bought six more, giving Huebschmann a container of car parts fitted with a concealed compartment to ship the weapons from Winsconsin to California, then on to Australia.
Sen-Const. Jones said the weapons imported in 2015 were made without any branding or other markings after Munro told Thureon Victorian criminals had been arrested with the guns.
The court heard Huebschmann fingered Munro to US authorities after admitting to the illegal export of the rifles in June last year.
Munro was arrested in possession of an assault rifle in Clifton Springs in August, after negotiating to sell five assault rifles and 10 handguns for $110,000 to an undercover officer.
“The accused has imported at least 12 Thureon assault rifles and other firearms. Police have only recovered four of the weapons, leaving at least 8 outstanding in the community,” Sen-Const. Jones said.
Victoria Police have confirmed to the Herald Sun the frightening weapons are still on the loose.
The court heard Munro, of Koraleigh, near the Victorian-NSW border, had a previous licence to sell guns, which was revoked in 2012.
He has seven convictions for breaching NSW gun laws, Sen-Const. Jones said.
Munro has pleaded guilty to several counts of importing illegal firearms and will face a plea hearing in the County Court on April 7.
Please share this post widely for all Australians.
Action Required Now COAG MEETING is This October 2016.
(All feel good stomach massage, and then!!!)
Action Required Now COAG MEETING is This October 2016.
24 Mc Mahon Rd
Gympie, 4570 Q
The old ‘news’, but it was good news, was that 25% of the 15 million voters at the Federal election did not vote for the major Tweedle Dee and Tweedle Dummer parties and instead voted for Independents and small (more independent) parties. Two million licensed shooters 14% of the voting population helped to make that difference.
“The ban on lever-action shotguns with a magazine capacity greater than five rounds was due to expire on August 7, but Justice Minister Michael Keenan said on Friday it would be extended until a review of the National Firearms Agreement is completed and the agreed outcomes put in place. The review of the agreement is due to be considered by commonwealth, state and territory ministers later this year.” AAP.
A Freedom Of Information request was denied by Stephen Bouwhuis, Assistant Secretary at the Attorney-General’s Department from Dr Samara McPhedran, (Senior Research Fellow at Griffith University’s Violence Research and Prevention Program,) who submitted a FOI in March 2016 to access the documents mentioned in a News.com.au article that the government has been circulating since November 2015.
Mr Bouwhuis confirmed the document existed, however refused to disclose it. He said in a letter to McPhedran,
“The information contained in the document was communicated to the Commonwealth Attorney-General’s Department by or on behalf of state or territory governments on a confidential basis, for the purposes of discussions about the proposed agreement,”
Well it seem the cat is out of the bag and the dangerous document is from the Tasmanian Police Minister, who is either a genuine certifiable nit wit, or a cold calculating power hungry potentate. The Tasmanian Minister of Police Rene Hidding, MP said,.
This is why flintlock pistols need to be controlled, to stop criminals & people like Man Monis from purchasing illegal pump action shotguns & cutting them down like this:
Well I guess all you gun owners better go out & purchase a bow, because if we can not be bothered to support each other in fighting gun control then we ARE GOING TO LOSE OUR GUNS!
I posted this petition about a month or so ago, & last time I looked, all I had was 262 signatures!!! 262; how many gun owners are there in Australia?
I advertised this petition on gun forums on Facebook, & on popular media outlets on the net, & 262 signatures is all I got. If this is any indication of how much we care about keeping our guns, then we are already lost. Oh but I forgot, SHE’LL BE RIGHT MATE!
Ralph Gilbertsen has no criminal record and he owns a state gun permit, yet police came to his home without a warrant and confiscated his three pistols.
Officers apparently took Gilbertsen’s weapons because he believes in UFOs, Bigfoot and conspiracy theories.
“I’m confident our officers seized the weapons with the best intention,” Lieutenant Mike Flaherty of the Richfield, Minnesota, police told The Minneapolis Star Tribune. “It was a mental health issue, and I think the cops responded appropriately. The process is being followed. If the court rules that we have to return his weapons, then we will return them.”
Police took Gilbertsen’s three handguns at the request of the Hennepin Community Outreach for Psychiatric Emergencies (COPE). The managers of Gilbertsen’s apartment building called COPE after he sent them a letter saying CIA agents were watching him.
Significantly, no psychologist or medical professional examined Gilbertsen prior to the weapons being taken last year. Gilbertsen, 74, has been forced to retain an attorney and go to court to get his own guns back. His plight was detailed in a Star Tribune feature story this month. Police took a .40-caliber pistol, a Smith & Wesson .357 magnum and an RG .22 revolver. Gilbertsen’s psychiatrist wrote a letter saying the man poses no threat.
Gilbertsen calls himself a patriot and Christian who has handled guns his entire life, the Star Tribune reported.
“He’s what some people would say is a conspiracy theorist,” Paul Baertschi, Gilbertsen’s attorney, told the newspaper. “But really, the police acted unilaterally in deciding that a person who has these beliefs can’t be trusted with a gun. And so they just took them, without a warrant.”
Flaherty defended the police department’s actions.
“The street cops nowadays have to be a psychologist,” Flaherty said. “People don’t wear nameplates saying ‘paranoid schizophrenic.’ So the police have to go in there and make judgment calls.”
Gilbertsen said he deserves his guns back.
“A lot of people believe these things, but they don’t want to talk about it,” Gilbertsen said. “I could see people being skeptical if I was saying something really outlandish, like space aliens with big heads were visiting me every night. But nobody can believe the CIA is squeaky clean.”
Gilbertsen “is an able-bodied senior citizen who lacks the physical strength to defend himself from an attack and has the constitutional right under the Second Amendment to have a weapon for personal protection,” Baertschi wrote in a court document. “The police have no right to confiscate his weapons based on the speculative worries of anyone.”
Gun Confiscation on the Rise
The use of suspicion of mental illness as a pretext for gun confiscation is on the rise. A typical example is a new California law that allows judges to order confiscation of weapons without giving gun owners a chance to appeal, as Off The Grid News previously reported.
“With as little as a misunderstood Facebook post, your gun rights could be STRIPPED AWAY and your LIFE TURNED UPSIDE DOWN,” a petition on the website of the Firearms Policy Coalition, a gun rights group, states.
“In other words, a judge could issue the order without ever hearing from the person in question, if there are reasonable grounds to believe the person is a threat based on accounts from the family and police,” a Firearms Policy Coalition press release states.
Do you believe this man deserves his guns back? Share your thoughts in the section below:
Rather a strange title for us in Australia, as we have already lost so many of our freedoms. Let’s make sure we do not lose any more human rights!
Never take for granted the freedoms we enjoy today! https://ww…
Posted by Gabby Franco on Wednesday, 2 March 2016
Ammunition To Send To Those Annoying Illogical Anti’s.
This is very well put, it expresses perfectly what I have wanted to write for more than 30 years. Please pass it about. It was originally written by Marko Kloos in March 23, 2007and published on the Munchkin Wrangler website. In 2009, it was published and wrongly ascribed to a Maj. L. Caudill (ret) who may not even exist.
The Gun is Civilization.
Human beings only have two ways to deal with one another: reason and force. If you want me to do something for you, you have a choice of either convincing me via negotiation, or force me to do your bidding under threat of force. Every human interaction falls into one of those two categories, without exception. Reason or force, that’s it. In a truly moral and civilized society, people exclusively interact through persuasion. Force has no place as a valid method of social interaction and the only thing that removes force from the menu is the personal firearm, a paradoxical as it may sound to some.
When I carry a gun, you cannot deal with me by force. You have to use reason and try to persuade me, because I have a way to negate your threat or employment of force.
The gun is the only personal weapon that puts a 100-pound woman on equal footing with a 220-pound mugger, a 75-year old retiree on equal footing with a 19-year old gang banger, and a single guy on equal footing with a car load of drunken guys with baseball bats. The gun removes the disparity in physical strength, size, or numbers between a potential attacker and a defender. There are plenty of people who consider the gun as the source of bad force equations. These are the people who think that we’d be more civilized if all guns were removed from society, because a firearm makes it easier for an armed mugger to do his job. That, of course, is only true if the mugger’s potential victims are mostly disarmed either by choice or by legislative fiat–it has no validity when most of a mugger’s potential marks are armed. People who argue for the banning of arms ask for automatic rule by the young, the strong, and the many, and that’s the exact opposite of a civilized society.
Who is the slave and who is the Master?
Questions to Provoke Thought and Action.
Personal liberty is the birthright of all persons and our Constitutional documents recognize that liberty is personal and cannot be sacrificed by a majority vote of representatives, but only by individual consent? What would change if powers given in our Constitutional documents no longer limited parliament but were actually used as a justification to extend parliamentary authority over every realm of human life? What if our Monarchs, first Minister in Australia, Prime Minister Turnbull made himself a Monarch? What if the Prime Minster assumed that everything he did was legal just because he has the numbers in the House of Parliament? What if he could interrupt your regularly scheduled radio and TV programming for a special message from him? What if he could declare war on his own? What if he could read your emails and your texts without a search warrant? What if the violation of the right to privacy is a gateway to all other government violations of personal liberty? What if the High Courts, Justices no longer looked to the Constitutional documents to determine the authority of a law, but rather simply to what other Justice’s who preceded them thought about it? What if the rights and principles guaranteed in the Constitutional documents were so ignored that our grandparents would think they were living in the old Soviet Union? What if the States were mere provinces of a totally nationalized and fully centralized government. What if the Constitution was amended stealthfully; not by Constitutional amendments dully ratified by the people in a referenda but by the constant and persistent expansion of the Government’s role in our lives? What if our parliaments decided that its own powers were above the Constitution? What if the Constitutional document were no longer the Supreme Law of the Land? What if you believed that our Constitutional documents represented the moral principles of our forefathers who valued our rights and freedoms at a higher in price than the parliament powers to interfere with them? What if those who wrote the Constitution believed that personal liberty is the default position and parliament power the exception? What if the Constitution means that our rights should be maximum and governments control minimum? What if the greatest right protected by the Constitution is the right to be left alone, the right to be oneself, the right to answer only to one’s own free will? What if our parliament is essentially the contradiction of that liberty?