What do you think the Arms industry will do if a permanent AWB happens
- Thread starter MagnumDweeb
- Start date
- Status
5knives
Member
Thanks for the links, pretty Anti as I read them.
This per Wikepedia (I know, but it's all I can find) is the current state as far as owning, but per the original Poster, it doesn't tell us anything about what happened to their Firearms industry as a whole.
----------------------------------
Current Australian firearm laws
State laws govern the possession and use of firearms in Australia. These laws were largely aligned under the 1996 National Agreement on Fireams. Anyone wishing to possess or use a firearm must have a Firearms Licence and be over the age of 18 with some exceptions. Owners must have secure storage for their firearms.
Before a person can buy a firearm, they must obtain a Permit To Acquire. The first permit has a mandatory 28 day delay before it is first issued. In some states (e.g. Queensland, Victoria, and New South Wales), this is waived for second and subsequent firearms of the same class. For each firearm a "Genuine Reason" must be given, relating to pest control, hunting, target shooting, or collecting. Self-defence is not accepted as a reason for issuing a licence.
Each firearm in Australia must be registered to the owner by serial number. Some states allow an owner to store or borrow another person's firearm of the same category.
Firearms categories
Firearms in Australia are grouped into Categories with different levels of control. The categories are:
Category A: rimfire rifles (not semi-automatic), shotguns (not pump-action or semi-automatic), air rifles, and paintball markers.
Category B: centrefire rifles (not semi-automatic), muzzleloading firearms made after 1 January 1901.
Category C: semi-automatic rimfire rifles holding 10 or fewer rounds and pump-action or semi-automatic shotguns holding 5 or fewer rounds. (Restricted: only primary producers, occupational shooters, collectors and professional sporting shooters can own working Category C firearms)
Category D: semi-automatic centrefire rifles, pump-action/semi-automatic shotguns holding more than 5 rounds (Category D Firearms are restricted to occupational shooters.)[2]
Category H: handguns including air pistols, deactivated handguns and guns less than 65 cm long. Target shooters are limited to handguns of .38" calibre or less. (Participants in "approved" competitions may acquire handguns up to .45", currently Single Action Shooting and Metallic Silhouette. IPSC shooting is not "approved" for the larger calibres, for unstated reasons. Category H barrels must be at least 100mm (3.94") long for revolvers, and 120mm (4.72") for semi-automatic pistols, and magazines are restricted to 10 rounds. Handgun collectors are exempt from the laws stated above.)
Category R/E: restricted weapons: machine guns, rocket launchers, assault rifles, flame-throwers, anti-tank guns, Howitzers, artillery, .50-calibre BMG weapons, etc. (Collectors in some states only, weapons must be comprehensively deactivated. Deactivated firearms are still subject to the same storage and licensing requirements as 'live' firearms in many states.)
Antique firearms can in some states be legally bought without licences. In other states they are subject to the same requirements as modern firearms.
All single-shot muzzleloading firearms manufactured before 1 January 1901 are considered antique firearms. Four states require licences for antique percussion revolvers and cartridge repeating firearms but in Queensland and Victoria a person may possess such a firearm without a license, so long as the firearm is registered.
Unlike most other countries, Australia has tight restrictions on air pistols, airsoft guns, and replica firearms. Suppressors (or 'silencers') are extremely restricted and generally not available to most shooters.
----------------------
As I understand it local authority rules the granting of licenses, and anything other than Class A or B is virtually impossible to obtain and depending on local Constabulary attitude, even class A or B may be very difficult. That from Australians posting on other boards in the past.
One would presume from this that the Australian Firearms Industry was gutted, but there seems to be no hard facts available.
At least none I've been able to discern, that's why I'd hoped a knowledgeable Australian Citizen might respond.
Regards,
This per Wikepedia (I know, but it's all I can find) is the current state as far as owning, but per the original Poster, it doesn't tell us anything about what happened to their Firearms industry as a whole.
----------------------------------
Current Australian firearm laws
State laws govern the possession and use of firearms in Australia. These laws were largely aligned under the 1996 National Agreement on Fireams. Anyone wishing to possess or use a firearm must have a Firearms Licence and be over the age of 18 with some exceptions. Owners must have secure storage for their firearms.
Before a person can buy a firearm, they must obtain a Permit To Acquire. The first permit has a mandatory 28 day delay before it is first issued. In some states (e.g. Queensland, Victoria, and New South Wales), this is waived for second and subsequent firearms of the same class. For each firearm a "Genuine Reason" must be given, relating to pest control, hunting, target shooting, or collecting. Self-defence is not accepted as a reason for issuing a licence.
Each firearm in Australia must be registered to the owner by serial number. Some states allow an owner to store or borrow another person's firearm of the same category.
Firearms categories
Firearms in Australia are grouped into Categories with different levels of control. The categories are:
Category A: rimfire rifles (not semi-automatic), shotguns (not pump-action or semi-automatic), air rifles, and paintball markers.
Category B: centrefire rifles (not semi-automatic), muzzleloading firearms made after 1 January 1901.
Category C: semi-automatic rimfire rifles holding 10 or fewer rounds and pump-action or semi-automatic shotguns holding 5 or fewer rounds. (Restricted: only primary producers, occupational shooters, collectors and professional sporting shooters can own working Category C firearms)
Category D: semi-automatic centrefire rifles, pump-action/semi-automatic shotguns holding more than 5 rounds (Category D Firearms are restricted to occupational shooters.)[2]
Category H: handguns including air pistols, deactivated handguns and guns less than 65 cm long. Target shooters are limited to handguns of .38" calibre or less. (Participants in "approved" competitions may acquire handguns up to .45", currently Single Action Shooting and Metallic Silhouette. IPSC shooting is not "approved" for the larger calibres, for unstated reasons. Category H barrels must be at least 100mm (3.94") long for revolvers, and 120mm (4.72") for semi-automatic pistols, and magazines are restricted to 10 rounds. Handgun collectors are exempt from the laws stated above.)
Category R/E: restricted weapons: machine guns, rocket launchers, assault rifles, flame-throwers, anti-tank guns, Howitzers, artillery, .50-calibre BMG weapons, etc. (Collectors in some states only, weapons must be comprehensively deactivated. Deactivated firearms are still subject to the same storage and licensing requirements as 'live' firearms in many states.)
Antique firearms can in some states be legally bought without licences. In other states they are subject to the same requirements as modern firearms.
All single-shot muzzleloading firearms manufactured before 1 January 1901 are considered antique firearms. Four states require licences for antique percussion revolvers and cartridge repeating firearms but in Queensland and Victoria a person may possess such a firearm without a license, so long as the firearm is registered.
Unlike most other countries, Australia has tight restrictions on air pistols, airsoft guns, and replica firearms. Suppressors (or 'silencers') are extremely restricted and generally not available to most shooters.
----------------------
As I understand it local authority rules the granting of licenses, and anything other than Class A or B is virtually impossible to obtain and depending on local Constabulary attitude, even class A or B may be very difficult. That from Australians posting on other boards in the past.
One would presume from this that the Australian Firearms Industry was gutted, but there seems to be no hard facts available.
At least none I've been able to discern, that's why I'd hoped a knowledgeable Australian Citizen might respond.
Regards,
UhKlem
We are in the same boat here,hey I love guns.
Personally I find this obsession with 50 BMG from the anti gun folks absurd...it is not a concealable device, you can take it around easily and so on.
What I mean is I would throw them a bone like some sort of "supervised" or registered use if we can get a federal conceal carry permit and not being arrassed if we cross state lines with our guns.
We are in the same boat here,hey I love guns.
Personally I find this obsession with 50 BMG from the anti gun folks absurd...it is not a concealable device, you can take it around easily and so on.
What I mean is I would throw them a bone like some sort of "supervised" or registered use if we can get a federal conceal carry permit and not being arrassed if we cross state lines with our guns.
benEzra
Moderator Emeritus
Full auto is already so tightly controlled as to put it out of reach of most Americans, myself included. I can't afford to drop $17,000+ on a rifle.
Regarding banning .50's, I believe you are forgetting that protecting .50 caliber firearms is ITSELF part of a compromise with the gun-control lobby (1968). Calibers .50 and under were deemed eminently suitable for civilian use under the NFA as amended by the GCA of '68, and .51 and up were placed under tight controls as Destructive Devices, with over-.50 shotguns and "sporting" rifles exempted case-by-case at the discretion of SecTreas.
The reason the Violence Policy Center invented the .50 caliber hysteria isn't .50 misuse; there have been ZERO murders with .50 BMG rifles in the USA in the quarter-century-plus they've been on the civilian market. Rather, the VPC invented the .50 caliber hysteria because they want to move the caliber limit from .50 down into the .30's (they explicitly mention the eeee-villls of the .338 Lapua and the fast .30's in their agitprop), and the .50 is just the poster child for that effort.
I am opposed to Federal oversight of CHL licensure, and doubly opposed to Federal "harmonization" of gun laws.
Any "harmonization" of the laws of most states with the likes of CA, MA, and IL are going to result in degradation of gun-owner rights in the vast majority of states, IMO. And I don't want politicians from California, Massachusetts, and Illinois having that level of influence on NC carry rules.
Unfortunately for the hunters, one regulation that I foresee it will increase from state to state is the banning of centerfire rifle deer hunting at least for some areas with increasing urbanization.
More and more states will mandate shotgun with slugs.
More and more states will mandate shotgun with slugs.
Saturno V:
I don't love guns. I appreciate tools. They amplify the ability of the person using them. Tools do not imply intent. Only a living breathing person can show intent; which can only be truthfully discerned after the fact. Placing a prior restraint by law is magical thinking. Until someone misbehaves for the first time, whether civilian, military, or law enforcement, no law on possession of inanimate objects that depends on background checks or bonafides can truly prevent evil behavior. The problem for humanity is always: who guards the guardians? Bureaucratic abuse and corruption is not a mythical construct.
I know people who own all manner of powerful tools, many not covered under the general headings of weapons or energetic materials that are capable of great harm if abused. But they don't threaten the government's monopoly on coercive force so they just get ignored. Many acquaintances however do own NFA regulated items (legally as far as I can discern). They are investments, they are toys, they are cultural and historical artifacts, and were it not for abuse of the power to tax, they are nobody's business but the owner's 99.99999% of the time.
I do love liberty. A prior restraint on a peaceable person's ownership, possession, lawful use, sale, or transfer among the peaceable is an affront to the concept of a government whose powers is derived from the people (who consent).
The problem with the civilian disarmament crowd and 50 BMGs has to do with their Goldie Locks mentality: no gun is just right. Some guns are too big, some too small and concealable, some too powerful, some too cheap and available, some low quality, and some whose quality is only for the elite officials. Their other idiosyncrasy(strength) is they understand class warfare and divide and conquer tactics. Your position plays right into this.
Thus, even though many NRA board members own full auto guns legally, they have no desire to publicly defend what is demonstrably the least misused guns in public hands. Not because of regulation either. Every one I know who owns a buzz gun wouldn't be likely to be a criminal even if there were no restrictions.
As to destructive devices, how hard is it to make an M-cocktail? They are hardly ever used even by criminals, and the law against them doesn't have much to do about it. If people were truly the seething, unstable, violent savages the disarmament crowd hallucinations consist of the homemade incendiary would deliver the goods cheaply and effectively.
Decades of concessions have lead us to where we are. Some of us remember when crime in this country was minor and what are now NFA regulated items could be ordered through the mail and useful explosives only required a Justice of the Peace to sign off on a blasting permit.
I don't love guns. I appreciate tools. They amplify the ability of the person using them. Tools do not imply intent. Only a living breathing person can show intent; which can only be truthfully discerned after the fact. Placing a prior restraint by law is magical thinking. Until someone misbehaves for the first time, whether civilian, military, or law enforcement, no law on possession of inanimate objects that depends on background checks or bonafides can truly prevent evil behavior. The problem for humanity is always: who guards the guardians? Bureaucratic abuse and corruption is not a mythical construct.
I know people who own all manner of powerful tools, many not covered under the general headings of weapons or energetic materials that are capable of great harm if abused. But they don't threaten the government's monopoly on coercive force so they just get ignored. Many acquaintances however do own NFA regulated items (legally as far as I can discern). They are investments, they are toys, they are cultural and historical artifacts, and were it not for abuse of the power to tax, they are nobody's business but the owner's 99.99999% of the time.
I do love liberty. A prior restraint on a peaceable person's ownership, possession, lawful use, sale, or transfer among the peaceable is an affront to the concept of a government whose powers is derived from the people (who consent).
The problem with the civilian disarmament crowd and 50 BMGs has to do with their Goldie Locks mentality: no gun is just right. Some guns are too big, some too small and concealable, some too powerful, some too cheap and available, some low quality, and some whose quality is only for the elite officials. Their other idiosyncrasy(strength) is they understand class warfare and divide and conquer tactics. Your position plays right into this.
Thus, even though many NRA board members own full auto guns legally, they have no desire to publicly defend what is demonstrably the least misused guns in public hands. Not because of regulation either. Every one I know who owns a buzz gun wouldn't be likely to be a criminal even if there were no restrictions.
As to destructive devices, how hard is it to make an M-cocktail? They are hardly ever used even by criminals, and the law against them doesn't have much to do about it. If people were truly the seething, unstable, violent savages the disarmament crowd hallucinations consist of the homemade incendiary would deliver the goods cheaply and effectively.
Decades of concessions have lead us to where we are. Some of us remember when crime in this country was minor and what are now NFA regulated items could be ordered through the mail and useful explosives only required a Justice of the Peace to sign off on a blasting permit.
I agree on some points.
I'm not a victim of their divide et conquer tactics...actually I want to make ownership of guns easier than it is for lawful citizens.
I think that the increase in criminality has little to do with the increasing restrictive gun regulations many other factors are in place.....as well as I think that making guns easier to acquire for lawful citizens doesn;t increase criminality too...something the anti-gun folks want to believe.
I strongly support the right of everyone to defend himself/herself....it should be a basic right in the UN chart.
I'm not a victim of their divide et conquer tactics...actually I want to make ownership of guns easier than it is for lawful citizens.
I think that the increase in criminality has little to do with the increasing restrictive gun regulations many other factors are in place.....as well as I think that making guns easier to acquire for lawful citizens doesn;t increase criminality too...something the anti-gun folks want to believe.
I strongly support the right of everyone to defend himself/herself....it should be a basic right in the UN chart.
Duke of Doubt
member
- Joined
- Dec 29, 2008
- Messages
- 2,863
Oh, Lord. He dropped the U-Bomb.
Outside the U.N. compound in New York reposes a bronze sculpture of a revolver with the barrel twisted into a knot. I find this especially offensive, as the revolver symbolizes, to me, civilian and police armament as opposed to multinational military groups and standing armies. I'd celebrate for days if someone tossed an acid bomb at the hateful thing.
We've treated the U.N. with a sort of benign neglect for decades. But we really ought to kick their behinds out of New York, particularly considering what they happen to think of their saintly 9/11 terrorists.
Outside the U.N. compound in New York reposes a bronze sculpture of a revolver with the barrel twisted into a knot. I find this especially offensive, as the revolver symbolizes, to me, civilian and police armament as opposed to multinational military groups and standing armies. I'd celebrate for days if someone tossed an acid bomb at the hateful thing.
We've treated the U.N. with a sort of benign neglect for decades. But we really ought to kick their behinds out of New York, particularly considering what they happen to think of their saintly 9/11 terrorists.
chuckusaret
member
High capacity mags, who needs them. If a person needs more than ten rounds and an extra mag, he picked the wrong fire fight. I went on many patrols in Vietnam with a mag in the weapon and 10 extra mags against a known hostile force>On only one occassion did the need for more ammo arise but would have been of little help because we were so out numbered. Thanks to the Army Helicopter gunships and slicks we were extracted with no KIA's. I CC with one mag in the weapon an on occassion a extra mag.
Duke of Doubt
member
- Joined
- Dec 29, 2008
- Messages
- 2,863
That's nice, but unfortunately I don't have access to helicopter gunships (or much of any other air support) in my apartment. Fortunately, I do have access to high-capacity magazines.
- Status
