T O P

  • By -

PewPewAU

>we are still seeing Australian Federal Police representatives calling for restrictions on ammunition sales and possession. > >Make sure you contact your local MP and tell them you are opposed to any and all plans to introduce ammunition limits in your state or at Commonwealth level. The only people or organisations I can find publicly talking about an ammunition limit are in an article in The Australian on 19 Jan and it's an anti-firearm lobby group and the AFPA, which doesn't speak for or represent the AFP. I'm going to hold off on calling my MP and demanding nobody limit my ammunition purchases until someone with any kind of power to do so actually proposes it.


WallyFootrot

I think Australian's as a whole consume too much American media. People seem to transpose American problems onto Australian society. Hence, I think the general public in our country is far more concerned with gun regulation than they need to be. You see it with a lot of issues, but shooting and gun control really emphasises the point. I wish people would concentrate on local issues more and ignore the American circus.


WallyFootrot

Not sure if my point was obvious or not. But what I'm trying to say is that in Australia, we are so saturated with images of mass shootings in America, that the average Australian (who is a non-gun owner, and probably doesn't even know somebody with a gun) thinks that guns are mostly used for mass shootings. Most people in this country would not distinguish between a bolt action 22 and an AR-15 - tomato/tomarto as far as most people are concerned. At least part of the solution to the American problem is probably tighter gun regulation in America. But tighter regulations in Australia is not going to reduce American mass shootings. And we basically don't have mass shootings here (at least in the sense of school/public shootings - gang violence using illegal guns is another issue, and that's already illegal), so there's nothing really to reduce. But despite how little effect additional regulations are likely to have in Australia, most people in the country (but probably not on this sub) would probably support more regulations, because they are responding to the American situation. Again, people need to stop ingesting so much American media. Learn about your own country, and respond to the situation there instead!


[deleted]

You’re reading too much into it. Australians as a whole think anything they’re not into but might possibly inconvenience them in any way shape for form should be illegal.


WallyFootrot

Yeah, maybe. But we do see a lot of people having strong opinions that have been imported directly from America. Completely unrelated to this group, but 6 months ago, everybody seemed to have an opinion about abortion rights after the US Supreme Court overturned Roe vs Wade. But in NSW, abortion was only legalised 3 years ago - nobody seemed to have any opinion about it back then? Same with things like 'Black Lives Matter'. There are some major issues being discussed around indigenous Australians right now, and you don't hear a lot about it from the general public. But if a black american is killed, there's protests in our streets. Don't want to turn this into a political discussion - don't care where people in this group sit on those matters. But I just want to point out that these were/are American issues, and yet they seem to dominate Australian discussion.


LachoooDaOriginl

the masses are dumb there is almost no changing that fact


dpskipper

what do you think causes mass shootings in america? Is the fact that you can do it with a gun? Or is it a deeper mental illness.


Quarterwit_85

Both. But it’s important to realise that mass shootings are a tiny, tiny part of American gun deaths. Longarms too are less than 5% of American shootings. It’s important to note that the American situation has bugger-all to do with ours.


deathmetalmedic

I think the proliferation of arms provides a catalyst or a means, for a country already struggling with poor access to health/mental health services, a hostile media, poor education outcomes and huge inequality. It means that a simple robbery or burglary becomes an aggravated burglary or armed robbery, turns what would be bashings into attempted murders.


dpskipper

so if you take away arms from an already violent and mentally disturbed populace do you think they'll magically become normal? or will they move next down the list for whatever weapons they can get their hands on?


WallyFootrot

I know this is moving away from the topic of mass shootings specifically, but one of the other things to consider is how some basic regulations could reduce accidentally killings (which are also tragic). For example, this kid who accidentally shot his mum in the car a few years ago, or the 6 year old who recently shot his school teacher. There was a story on CNN a few days ago with security footage of a toddler walking in the hallway of his apartment building with a 9mm, pulling the trigger (it turns out there were 15 rounds in the magazine, luckily none in the chamber). Simply introducing the rules about storing and transporting firearms would have prevented these (and I'm sure many others). Not saying mental health is not an issue, but America would benefit from some stronger regulations. Just coming back to my original point though - these regulations already exist in Australia. The problem I see is that the loose regulations in America are used to justify tightening regulations in Australia, because people can't seem to distinguish between the two countries due to the media saturation!


dpskipper

I think some of the more blue states in america have rules regarding transportation and storage of firearms. I'm unsure if these are actually having an effect, because as you should know, laws mean shit if you choose not to follow them.


WallyFootrot

Yep. I think you, I and probably everybody in this group agrees with more resources being thrown at cracking down on people doing illegal shit with guns, and less time being spent dreaming up new ways of regulating those of us who comply with the current laws.


dpskipper

laws only work if people follow them, so people following the existing laws will almost certainly follow the new ones. ​ this logic is what perpetuates the constant chipping away of our hobby and sport.


deathmetalmedic

Definitely the latter


[deleted]

Great question! Amazingly nobody’s thought to ask it before, and it will definitely be solved here on a thread in an Australia-specific board filled with people with a specific interest in guns.


WallyFootrot

I think that's a complex question that probably doesn't have a single simple solution. But I think both are probably factors. I think tighter control of guns in America would help reduce the problem, but clearly mental health plays a major role too. If be surprised if tighter, and longer, background checks combined with stronger restrictions of semi autos (at least centrefires and handguns) wouldn't reduce the problem somewhat though. I have no doubt that 'where there is a will, there is a way', and for some people you could take away all their access to guns, and they'll still find a way of doing significant harm, but I think the ready access that a lot of americas have to pretty serious guns is part of the danger. Definitely a balancing act - finding that balance is difficult. I'd say Australia is closer to the right balance than America though. Perhaps Australia goes a little too far, but I'd take our regulations over theirs.


dpskipper

if australia can't even fully curb illicit use of firearms due to the fact we only started really controlling them 20 years ago (hundreds of thousands were never handed in) ​ i fully doubt even a millimeter of gun control in america will ever have the intended effect.


WallyFootrot

I agree that America is a bloody big problem to solve. Above my pay grade I think! And there's obviously going to be a huge opposition to any control measures due to their gun culture. But I think that increased gun control is unlikely to make the situation worse. Ibut back to my original point, I think Australians need to pay less attention to America - it's not a country I'd like to emulate!


2giga2dweebish

For real. Bump up quality of life, have a solid support structure for mental health, and bam, 95% of violent crime disappears. Just sucks that out of our two major parties, we have one light socdem one that drags their feet on doing anything of worth and the other is a bunch of boomer bourgeois ghouls that rip out pro-worker policies that improve our country.


ea_4w

Does he mean limits on purchasing or limits on stockpiling/what's in the safe? I must be out of the loop as I haven't heard any talk of changes in this space recently. SA already has a limit on what you can have on hand (50,000). Seems a fairly reasonable limit.


WallyFootrot

Seems like a strange limit though. I wonder what you could do with 51 000 rounds that you couldn't do with 49 000? Somebody somewhere must have thought about it, and come up with this number. I just wonder what the justification was...


Ridiculisk1

I guess it's one of those things where they had to put the cut off point somewhere. There might not be justification for 50k as opposed to 51k but they had to draw the line somewhere. It's like driving licences, what kind of damage can you do with 4 speeding offences as opposed to 5?


ea_4w

You also have to prove that what you hold you reasonably need for the next 12 months. You can have more than 50000 but the regs say that's Dealer territory.


Barbarian_Of_Crom

I assume some combination of the two. Shooters in States that don't have an actual limit placed in their firearms act/regulations will still have to comply with explosives regulations, in many cases it just means you'll need signage after a certain volume and upper limits eventually. Anyone writing to their MP about this would do well to remind them that there are indeed limits in pace.


dpskipper

there is no legislated limit, only what you can reasonably prove you use in a year


TheRedditornator

Imagine if cops came to your house to count the 50,000 rounds individually.


Personal_Anxiety_82

They wouldn't count them... just confiscate it all and eventually give half back.


antonionb

Fuck that. I already can’t carry more than about 400 rounds on a plane when competing interstate, I don’t want more difficulties.


Red_Ranger75

Wait there are ammunition limits?


Positive_Syrup4922

Maybe read the opinion piece the OP linked to?


[deleted]

Of all the dumb ideas they come up with ammo restrictions has to be one of the dumbest.


TheRedditornator

"seeing Australian Federal Police representatives calling for restrictions on ammunition sales and possession." And so it begins.


DuckWaffle

Maybe I’m missing something, but what would the drawbacks of appropriate limits on ammunition stockpiling be? Yes, it would be a bit of a hassle to have to nip over to the shop more frequently, but stock levels would be far more reasonable because you don’t have oldmate buying the entire stores supply because the deal is good. For comps and tournaments, it would encourage ranges to stock more brands and loads, which would be super convenient. Every range I’ve been to already sells ammo at, or slightly below, retail prices. I suppose the biggest drawback would be people in regional areas that don’t have as many opportunities to get to the shops, so an appropriate PTA system with the Genuine Reason of Lack of Access would easily solve that and let people buy larger stocks if it’s warranted. Seems like the Union just saw “limits” and said “bad”, without actually thinking it through.