Thread: Maximum number of guns a person can own in NSW

https://www.researchgate.net/publica...ies_in_America

Have a read of this - it is well worth the time. Then consider the number of British Police moving here, and the attitudes they bring with them. This from the abstract While each of Britain's incremental steps towards gun control was, in itself, reasonable, the cumulative effect was to destroy the right gradually. Sound familiar - or not quite yet?

4 per calibre sounds like an acceptable minimum. Maybe there should be a law that states you should require 500 rounds of ammo per firearm as well?

Originally Posted by Zedrex

More reason to get your submissions in, NOW is the time to show the govt. that there's enough FAL holders out there who do care enough to do something......freedom is eroded one grain at a time

I have already made my submission. Get yours in early fellas. The more of us that do so early, the more others will see that this time we all need to putting our weight behind protecting our valued shooting sport pass times.

Originally Posted by Dicko

There is more to this. If you have a target shooting endorsement on your license you can have 10 firearms.
Collectors licenses are still valid. You can’t shoot firearms held on this license I believe but maybe corrected.

The goal appears to be to reduce firearms in the hands of hunters as a primary target.

Most hunters are well in problem solving. Joining target shooting clubs, getting wife and kids licensed, becoming collectors etc.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Quick count up in my head about 25 22 rifles and rarely a trip to the range without half a dozen.
This is a recreational sport/hobby/lifestyle and is not a danger to anyone,

These are the good old days,make the most of them.

Originally Posted by 300CALMAN

Something's happened to you @Thar you seem to be singing from a different song sheet.

@300CALMAN You missed the cue. "trumps everything".
What has just happened in South America got me thinking about standing up to unilateral actions that are a breach of legal or social rights. I had a little angry moment.
Normal service has resumed.

Originally Posted by Ross Nolan

https://www.researchgate.net/publica...ies_in_America

Have a read of this - it is well worth the time. Then consider the number of British Police moving here, and the attitudes they bring with them. This from the abstract While each of Britain's incremental steps towards gun control was, in itself, reasonable, the cumulative effect was to destroy the right gradually. Sound familiar - or not quite yet?

You could equally say and apply in a global context While each Governments incremental steps towards control was, in themselves, reasonable, the cumulative effect was to destroy all rights gradually.

so if you buy a 500 round brick of 22 and you have some loose ones around youll be a crim. No thanks

Originally Posted by Zedrex

More reason to get your submissions in, NOW is the time to show the govt. that there's enough FAL holders out there who do care enough to do something......freedom is eroded one grain at a time

Where do I submit? is there a link?

Originally Posted by Waitati Hunter

The difference there is that cars aren't made for killing but guns make killing a doddle and that's the point of them. The road toll continues to fall as a result of tighter laws and improved safety measures.

The problem with there being no restrictions on how many guns you can own is you can acquire them legally then sell them illegally or they can get nicked.

God help us if the powers that be decide to bring in a WOF system and annual rego fee for firearms...

If authorities limit the number of rifles anyone can legally own, I guess they’ll have to do a buy back again.

Originally Posted by Alistair82

Where do I submit? is there a link?

www.colfo.org is a starting point

Originally Posted by Ingrid 51

If authorities limit the number of rifles anyone can legally own, I guess they’ll have to do a buy back again.

Have a look at the WA (west Aust) buy back schedule. They state a price for new and second hand ( based on years). No distinction between a $15k Dakota or a $1k How. We are talking $500 per Centre fire. Now that would get you going if you had a safe full of Blasers, Heyms, or other top end rifles. So buy back is one thing, fair prices are another. I pick they will continue to depress prices like they have achieved so far before any buy back.
Let’s hope our country leaders have some back bone and less woke polices. I’m watching with interest.

Originally Posted by whanahuia

I could survive with 4, but I use 8 regularly. Id probably look at my partner to get her licence. She's been talking about it for a while.

You might not be legally allowed to use them,thats the UK model. Well unless you have them shared on your fac and that still means you can only have say 4.

Before you say " well how would anyone know?" Thats not the point,you would still be breaking the law.

The register is the most effective way to reduce the number of Firearms in circulation,once the guns are registered you dont own them your really just borrowing them until the government confiscates them

.In the NZ confiscation i got $600 for a $6000 rifle amongst others and in the Norwegian buy back $0 for a $4000 rifle,nothing for the scope,mags and other stuff. Oh and i had to have dispose of all the ammo before hand in.The reason for me getting nothing,was that fact it was registered,if I had failed to hand it in I might have had my door kicked in and potentially shot in my own home.

Imagine the financial carnage if/when the long range stuff gets banned. I "Charlie Kirk" incident its all it would take unfortunitly.

Originally Posted by Tahr

@300CALMAN You missed the cue. "trumps everything".
What has just happened in South America got me thinking about standing up to unilateral actions that are a breach of legal or social rights. I had a little angry moment.
Normal service has resumed.

Oh THAT yes, hahaha
Your not breaking the NO POLITICS rule here are you?

Just checking.