When You Read Through The Firearms Reform Bill Remember To...

When You Read Through The Firearms Reform Bill Remember To... Take Notes. Why? So youconsider putting them in easy to follow dot points & share them with others. Share them with the WA Firearms Community Alliance, your local MP, your friends & family & on whatever social media you use. Try & help others spot glitches, faults as well as positive changes. If you're looking at the new Bill you'll not between the new Bill & the old(current) Act the number of pages has gone up. A LOT. From 128 to the new Bill which has 241 pages. That is an extraodinarily large change. The new Bill is available for download here https://www.parliament.wa.gov.au/Parliament/Bills.nsf/EB595277534C5BFD48258ACA000A0914/$File/Bill%2B150-1.pdf There is also the "Explanatory Memorandum presented in the Legislative Assembly" available for download here... https://www.parliament.wa.gov.au/Parliament/Bills.nsf/EB595277534C5BFD48258ACA000A0914/$File/EM%2B150-1.pdf The minister's speech on tabling the new Bill is available for download here https://www.parliament.wa.gov.au/Hansard/hansard.nsf/0/4e644a08282d4c6d48258aca004487ca/$FILE/A41%20S1%2020240221%20p3c-9a.pdf something pages to what 200+...it's reforms that's When You Read Through The Firearms Reform Bill Remember To... You Read Through The Firearms Reform Bill Remember To... object of the exercise & consultation being heralded as achieved. I'm going to have a look thru. 

If you put in a submission during the consultation period, keep those recommendations in mind & see if any were included. There are people who have read the new Bill top to bottom already & now re-reading it to see if anything they suggested went into the new Bill.
So far the people I know (not many I admit) haven't found a single thing which is undermining their idea of consultation. Some of those sbmission were actually real reforms by name & by nature. Improved the system, were solutions to existing problems, made navigating red tape more efficient, were fit for purpose ideas & were beneficial to all stakeholders without sacrificing safety to anyone.

At this point, some things are very clear. The fees have risen in very recent times prior to this bill. One fee related to firearms has risne by 96%. That is not a reform & fixing that would be. All fees should be an average of all other states.

The implementation of so many different forms of licence types is added bureaucratic tape, cost & harder to navigate. It does not add to public safety, it makes things far more difficult.
Implementing an Upper Limit is actually completely against the Law Reform Commission recommendations. The claim from the Minister is that some people want US Style Laws & Unlimited Guns.

This cannot happen in WA or Australia & we still haven't been able to find the people the minister says who want this. It's not reflected by anyone in the Peak Representative Body of Licenced Shooters, the WA Firearms Community Alliance.

For starters if that was sought, you'd have to completely rewrite the Australian Consitution to have a US style clause like the USA's 2nd Amendment. I don't know of anyone who either wants that, has asked for that or rationally thinks thats achievable. It's a blatantly absurd false bolster.

As for unlimited guns. Again I know of no one who wants that, who's asked for that or thinks that is remotely possible let alone remotely beneficial let alone actually achievable.
Try and apply for a dozen identical rifles. It will go in the big because the trusted & reliable system we have that Gun Reform Groups in the USA want to copy is the 2 primary tests.

Demonstrate you are a fit & proper person
Demnstrate your genuine need for EACH firearm when you apply

And the 2 primary test system is then set before WA Police for approval or is declined.
What the minister has done by installing a Restricted Upper Number of Firearms is cancel out genuine need. Exactly opposite of the Law Reform Commission's recommendations.
All submissions to this legislation are publicly available.
I'll wait to see who in the submission phased called for this wrongful idea.

The minister will have to set out how the Law Reform Commission got this wrong.
Underpinning his argument are some gun statistics.

In Hansard the Minister states...

"The Numbers show that for the period 1 July 2018 to 30 June 2023, 1 769 firearms were stolen, with the rate of firearm thefts across this period amounting to 6.8 firearms stolen a week"

Those numbers maybe correct, however they are coaxed in a direction by leaving out very important matters of context. How many incidents of theft was that? 
The numbers include the 2 biggest firearms thefts in WA history
Claremont Firearms & Barry and Sons 
The actual numbers stolen appear very vague.
Claremont was reported by the media as being 200 guns & Barry's being 140 guns.
Good round numbers but what were the exact numbers?

That's 340 minimum.
Remove that from "the numbers", detail the exact number of incidents & then detail how many were recovered and give a wider explanation of the other thefts for better context please Minister.
Removing the vague numbers from the 2 biggest firearms burgarlies in WA History it drops down to 4.6 firearms per week.

I'm sorry minister but if you're not going to be very accurate with the numbers & explain the number of incidents with the amount of recoveries we're drifting into fear mongering territory.

We also need to be very aware a gun store owner was kidnapped, bundled into a car & forced to open security. The criminals were convicted in June 2020. Over 3 & 1/2 years ago & they get released in another 3 years, possibly sooner with parole.

Security & limiting guns doesn't reduce crime, it does however increase the value of the black market gun & can cause criminals to be more desperate possibly more violent when stealing firearms.
More security & limits will not reduce crime, but the likelihood of getting caught will will much greater penalties in place.

Penalties should be 10 years in jail per illegal firearm. Each firearm being a seperate crime with a seperate jail term. Caught with 5 illegal guns, you should be looking at 50 years jail served one sentence after the other. I mean illegal guns are either serious or they're not.
Gun crime is either serious or its not.
It's either serious or its an election tool to yabber on public safety.

A burglar who breaks into a home where there's a gun safe, immediate tripling of the jail time for the break in, whether a firearm is stolen or not. Firearm theft is either serious enough for that or its not.

Perhaps increase that, for every firearm in the safe, 10 years jail whether any firearm is stolen or not.
I mean breaking into a home with firearms is either serious or it is not.

Imagine a criminal breaking into a home, starts filling their sack of goods & then spots the gun safe.
Unless they're willing to risk most of their life in jail the chances are they'll drop their swag of stolen goods & get the hell away ASAP.
That makes the home with firearms securely stored far more unlikley to be robbed. A criminal is going then break into another home & have to worry about whether or not there is a hidden gun safe that is going to get them jailed for most of their life or not.
I mean, firearms theft & gun crime is either very serious or its not.

With 2 criminals who kidnapped a person, forced him to open security to steal the very minimum of 140 firearms...well if we do what the minister did & split the firearms up with days...

THOSE 2 CRIMINALS ARE SERVING ONLY 18 DAYS JAIL TIME PER FIREARM STOLEN WHILST VIOLENTLY KIDNAPPING A PERSON

And the minister wants more licences, 2 mm extra thickness on gun safes, clauses that go against the Law Reform Commission Recommendations and a myriad of other non reforms. 

18 DAYS IN JAIL PER FIREARM AND WE'RE EXPECTED TO BELIEVE THE MINISTER IS SERIOUS ABOUT GUN THEFT & GUN CRIME?

On the Claremont Firearms breaking (rough number suggested to be 200 firearms) the reporting says the convicted thieves sentencing is as follows

• " Christensen will have to serve at least eight years of a 10-year term
•   Egan will need to serve seven years of a nine-year term
•   A third man was handed a 12-month suspended sentence "

That means
One convicted criminal will serve 14.6 days per firearm
One convicted criminal will serve 12.7 days per firearm
One convicted criminal will serve no time at all (suspended sentence for some reason)

ZERO to 12.7 days to 14.6 DAYS IN JAIL PER FIREARM AND WE'RE EXPECTED TO BELIEVE THE MINISTER IS SERIOUS ABOUT GUN THEFT & GUN CRIME

It is very clear he's bringing in the toughest gun laws in Australia, the toughest laws on Law Abiding Citizens & Soft Fluffing Nothing on Criminals & Gun Crime.
Now if I was at all cynical I'd say an unoffical Election Campaign is underway & we're facing another monumental legislative disaster that will rival the now repealed disaster called the Aboriginal Cultural Heritage Act. The minister has 2 choices in this total firearms debacle, withdraw the Bill & rewrite it now or push it through like the ACH Act & then have to repeal & replace it.