Is it legal to have an application knocked back on a "what if?"

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Is it legal to have an application knocked back on a "what if?"

    When Firearms branch knocks back a bolt action repeater, due to the fact it "could be converted to semi-auto with gunsmith work"
    (Was looking at getting a 10/22 converted into a spring-assist straight pull bolt repeater)

    Or knock back a Cat C rimfire rifle due to "could be converted into a pistol"
    (Browning buckmark rifle).

    Thats like saying they will not license your V8 because you may speed.. Is this legal by the firearms branch to deny applications on these merits? It's sort of accusing you of intent to commit a crime.

  • #2
    Don't know what State you're in, but that hardly matters. Of course its legal for them to decide whatever they want regulations to apply to. And since its all in the "interpretation" of said regulations, pretty much anything they interpret, goes.

    Comment


    • #3
      Originally posted by QuickShooter" post=35229
      When Firearms branch knocks back a bolt action repeater, due to the fact it "could be converted to semi-auto with gunsmith work"
      (Was looking at getting a 10/22 converted into a spring-assist straight pull bolt repeater)

      Or knock back a Cat C rimfire rifle due to "could be converted into a pistol"
      (Browning buckmark rifle).

      Thats like saying they will not license your V8 because you may speed.. Is this legal by the firearms branch to deny applications on these merits? It's sort of accusing you of intent to commit a crime.
      The specifics depend on what State you're in but you can challenge an administrative decision. There is a specific process to follow, in some states you can use the Civil and Administrative Tribunal, in some not. In short zhuk is right, they can decide whatever they like, that's the danger if devolving legislation.
      The Act is written by the legislature and passes through parliament. The Regulations however, where the nuts and bolts are held, well that's basically written by the authority that enforces it. In this case the police. They write there own rules and in some cases they write them so they cannot be challenged at all. Customs do that, and it's been upheld by the court,,,,,, so far.

      It's a great system we have hey. The best legal system in the world, perverted beyond recognition by shiny arsed powerbrokers.

      Comment


      • Guest's Avatar
        Guest commented
        Editing a comment
        Originally posted by tinytim" post=35247
        Originally posted by QuickShooter" post=35229
        When Firearms branch knocks back a bolt action repeater, due to the fact it "could be converted to semi-auto with gunsmith work"
        (Was looking at getting a 10/22 converted into a spring-assist straight pull bolt repeater)

        Or knock back a Cat C rimfire rifle due to "could be converted into a pistol"
        (Browning buckmark rifle).

        Thats like saying they will not license your V8 because you may speed.. Is this legal by the firearms branch to deny applications on these merits? It's sort of accusing you of intent to commit a crime.
        The specifics depend on what State you're in but you can challenge an administrative decision. There is a specific process to follow, in some states you can use the Civil and Administrative Tribunal, in some not. In short zhuk is right, they can decide whatever they like, that's the danger if devolving legislation.
        The Act is written by the legislature and passes through parliament. The Regulations however, where the nuts and bolts are held, well that's basically written by the authority that enforces it. In this case the police. They write there own rules and in some cases they write them so they cannot be challenged at all. Customs do that, and it's been upheld by the court,,,,,, so far.

        It's a great system we have hey. The best legal system in the world, perverted beyond recognition by shiny arsed powerbrokers.

        Well said, tinytim. That is precisely the point - the decisions on the ground on 'interpretation' lie with the authority which enforces it - and that authority is unelected.

        Although. sometimes politicians work hand-in-glove to 'assist' - NSW range closures/restrictions case in point. Ranges charged with suddenly having to do expensive capital works never demanded of them before (and this is only the tip of the iceberg) have found that the Govt has pulled the rug out from under as regards promised funding....from the SFP Nov newsletter

        I know many shooting clubs have been anxiously awaiting news about the opening of applications for the new round of funding grants under the MACOSC scheme – unfortunately, it seems shooters have again been “done over” by the Government. The Premier has apparently decided to end his three year agreement to fund the Ministerial Advisory Council on Shooting Clubs sporting grants program which helped ranges comply with Firearms Registry safety issues.The agreement he made with the Shooters and Fishers Party was to provide $800,000 a year for three years. The first instalment was paid, but Mr O’Farrell is now blocking the funding for this year, and by implication, the following year.

        So yes, no matter what legislation may have been passed, it can not only fall foul of selective interpretation but can also be changed at whim.

    • #4
      Originally posted by QuickShooter" post=35229
      When Firearms branch knocks back a bolt action repeater, due to the fact it "could be converted to semi-auto with gunsmith work"
      (Was looking at getting a 10/22 converted into a spring-assist straight pull bolt repeater)
      Or knock back a Cat C rimfire rifle due to "could be converted into a pistol"
      (Browning buckmark rifle).
      Thats like saying they will not license your V8 because you may speed.. Is this legal by the firearms branch to deny applications on these merits? It's sort of accusing you of intent to commit a crime.
      You are making up your own rationalizations and your own arguments.
      It does not work that way. As a rule of thumb, once a particular system is "legal" (a certain Category) it remains legal until you alter it so as to take the form or function of a "system" that is restricted (or in a different category). Even then it is not to say that such alteration would necessarily make it "legal" in a different category. An example of this (in Victoria some years ago) if a s/a 22 rifle was initially sold with a 15 shot magazine it could not be had on a C Category licence even if the magazine was at a later date replaced with a ten shot one.
      BTW a cut down rifle does not "automatically" become a pistol nor does a pistol "automatically" become a rifle because you install a longer barrel.
      If you're going through hell, keep going."
      Winston Churchill

      Comment


      • Guest's Avatar
        Guest commented
        Editing a comment
        Originally posted by MrCarbine" post=35251
        Originally posted by QuickShooter" post=35229
        When Firearms branch knocks back a bolt action repeater, due to the fact it "could be converted to semi-auto with gunsmith work"
        (Was looking at getting a 10/22 converted into a spring-assist straight pull bolt repeater)
        Or knock back a Cat C rimfire rifle due to "could be converted into a pistol"
        (Browning buckmark rifle).
        Thats like saying they will not license your V8 because you may speed.. Is this legal by the firearms branch to deny applications on these merits? It's sort of accusing you of intent to commit a crime.
        You are making up your own rationalizations and your own arguments.
        It does not work that way. As a rule of thumb, once a particular system is "legal" (a certain Category) it remains legal until you alter it so as to take the form or function of a "system" that is restricted (or in a different category). Even then it is not to say that such alteration would necessarily make it "legal" in a different category. An example of this (in Victoria some years ago) if a s/a 22 rifle was initially sold with a 15 shot magazine it could not be had on a C Category licence even if the magazine was at a later date replaced with a ten shot one.
        BTW a cut down rifle does not "automatically" become a pistol nor does a pistol "automatically" become a rifle because you install a longer barrel.
        You are somewhat behind the times Mr Carbine. The police can indeed assess on the future potential of a firearm and choose to either allow an application or deny it. There is a case still progressing through the courts where customs decided a particular rifle 'looked' like something it wasn't. It's 'actual' classification is irrelevant. The particular statute allows them to make that assessment. Currently the courts have decided that the courts do not have the authority to overturn that assessment. As mad as it seems, if a Cat D is not importable and customs determine a firearm 'looks' like a Cat D they can prevent it's import. The police have similarly worded legislation along the lines of 'substantially resembles' or 'substantially mimics'.

    • #5
      If you really want tk get into it, start putting these issues to the attorney general in your state.... A couple of friends of mine have just had some cat C & D issues overturned by our local AG...

      Comment


      • #6
        I am in WA.

        Our Attorney General is an F-wit and is anti-gun. So i wouldn't even bother with him.

        Although i beleive he is more sympathetic to firearm collectors rather than users.

        Comment


        • #7
          Browning buckmark rifle isn't too scary, i was also looking at the black lightning .22 magnum S/A

          Comment

          Working...
          X