HOME AFFAIRS MINISTER, KAREN ANDREWS, is responsible for why we have ‘appearance laws’ in the National Firearms Agreement.

However her bureaucracy has been caught out making up a story to back why we have appearance laws.

In this article:

  • The NSC asked Minister Andrews, to remove the appearance laws from the NFA after no jurisdiction was able to provide evidence supporting the need for it;
  • Her response stated there were ‘numerous incidents’ that justified the law;
  • We challenged the minister to provide just one example of such an incident;
  • The deadline for a reply has passed. Not one government has been able to provide evidence of why the law exists

Could, May, Potential and Assumption

Readers might recall our previous article where we revealed reasons our respective police ministers gave for having the laws which are in the National Firearms Agreement.

The explanations were based on things that ‘could’, ‘may’ or had the ‘potential’ to happen and an ‘assumption’, rather than incidents that had happened.

We were curious about how Minister Andrews, would react knowing this – so we wrote to her in April asking her to explain why the law was in the National Firearms Agreement. 

NSC asks minister to remove appearance law

To make our case out, we provided the Minister Andrews with copies of the responses from the jurisdiction. We then asked her to lead a:

“process to have the provision removed and obtain the specific agreement of the jurisdictions to reflect this in their respective statutes by a common date.”

Feds say there were “numerous incidents”

Our letter was referred to the Assistant Minister for Customs, Community Safety and Multicultural Affairs, Jason Wood MP turn referred the matter to the Department of Home Affairs.

In their response, Assistant Secretary of Strategy and Law Enforcement, Daniel Mossop, stated:

The fact that Mr Mossop asserts were ‘numerous incidents’ suggests there is evidence that supports the need for the law. Or so you would think.

So we wrote back to Minister Andrews asking her to provide “any examples that support the assertion of there being “numerous incidents and involving “fully automatic firearms”.

Just one would be a good start. 

No incidents. No evidence.

We asked the minister to provide a response with a month of our latest approach – and sent a polite follow up letter on 17 May that was acknowledged.  We also offered to fly someone to her to discuss the matter further.

More than a month on, we are still waiting.  In fact two months after first raising this with the minister, we are still yet to see anything that explains why the law is needed.

It remains a policy based on nothing more than a fabrication – and we hold Minister Andrews responsible for failing to take this matter seriously.

The problem we have is that she is in a safe seat, so we are working on our next plan to target two of her colleagues in more marginal seats.

27 thoughts on “Feds make up story on appearance laws

  1. Jonathan Laird says:

    Great work NSC. I cannot tell you how pleasing it is to be a part of an organisation that actually fights for it’s members instead of merely living from them.

  2. Trent says:

    Nice work NSC! Keep the Ministers on their toes. It’s good to see my membership fees and donations being put to work. Thank you.
    Did you know you have the right to put in a Freedom of Information request to the relevant Department to see what these numerous incidences are?

  3. Neville Bryant says:

    Great move. I have been concerned with the gun laws ever since Port Arthur. There is so much controversy over if he was the shooter to this day.
    We had safe houses till these gun laws with no home invasions like today, now the police are loaded down with weapons that we used in Vietnam, not to mention that they look like gunslingers with quick draw holsters slung low.
    I turn 75 this year and have two registered rifles that I have applied to Victorian Police for a renewal that has expired on the 10th of June 2021. I am wondering if they are planning on refusing my renewal?

    • Michael Mazur says:

      They are. Not just you, everyone. They and the politicians smugly pine for a literal police state – once all the guns in the hands of the people are crushed. My own prediction is that the elections for Nov 2022 will be suspended indefinitely – the Covid virus, you know. And there you have it, a police state. These quarantine centres that they intend to build are not that at all, but will be concentration camps. Critics of commie Dan will be hauled away to their new accommodation to be detained for the duration.

  4. Lawrence Lyons says:

    Demonising non-criminals erodes the public’s confidence in the Police. You are not a criminal if you are a shooting shooter and possess a firearm that is not semi-automatic simply because to non-expert it looks like something from a Hollywood movie. Take, for example, the demonising of Brad Towner, a seller of harmless colourful toy guns that are an alternative to the Nerf brand toys. Brad built a successful business over several years, in full view of the NSW Police, selling colourful plastic toy guns that shoot a harmless gel ball at harmless speeds. He was charged for unlicensed firearms dealing and is facing severe penalties, including prison time if a court convicts him. It is a cultural war being waged by many government agencies and politicians against anything that looks like a firearm and anyone who takes an interest in them erodes public confidence in the legal system. The public donated about a 100 thousand dollars to his legal defence. It took a jury less than 20 minutes to find him NOT GUILTY. How much public money spent on the idiotic prosecutions of non-criminals will it take to remove those politicians wages this cultural war?

  5. Adam+Basham says:

    So licensed shooters are penalised because some idiot gets a toy AK or M16 from K-Mart and points it at someone..
    Mind you , I’m still scratching my head as to how Gel Blasters are now firearms..

  6. Sigmund says:

    Good work NSC.
    Another classic example of political and public misinformation. The level of political arrogance is sickening and examples such as this needs to be publicly exposed.
    I see that one of the biggest challenges for us, the law abiding firearms owners, is obtaining a platform to highlight these ever growing lies and assumptions. We need high profile media support.
    The fight for common sense continues ……..

    • Michael Mazur says:

      All the high profile media wants us disarmed so that there never can be any opposition to the installation of permanent police state. R J Rummel, late of Hawaii Uni, wrote that last century, in 17 countries, after the politicians confiscated the guns in peoples hands, 262,000,000 innocents were murdered by their own politicians, obviously using police to do it. He thought the number an underestimate.

  7. Brian Barber says:

    In my 73 years of life I have seen, in the last 30 odd years, any excuse used to restrict firearm laws. It is clear that the majority of members of the Federal Government have no idea that no so many years ago you could own and use virtually any firearm, no matter construction, appearance or calibre.

  8. Laurence Hare says:

    AS the “MAY , COULD , POTENTIAL AND ASSUMPTION ” then all males are “rapists ” all Females are prostitutes . Guilty until proven innocent .

  9. Mike Woods says:

    Struth but the NSC are scoring some goals! Well done! Thanks for keeping the pressure on these numb nuts in government who should really be on the unemployment line and hopefully after the next election will be!

  10. Philip+walter says:

    As usual a vreat job calling out 5he government ineptitude in making laws
    If MAYBE COULD wsre on cars we could never drive anywhere
    I have seen this attit3creep in to Australia in the last 20 years if we all lived by these ideas noone could go anywhere or do ANYTHING
    Great job NSC
    Cheers ppl h ok l

  11. Allen Jenkins says:

    It always baffles me when the left say that everything John Howard said or did was based on lies – except for guns. My response is that what he said about guns and Port Arthur was neither more nor less true than what he said about Iraq’s WMDs, children overboard, “never-ever” GST and several other of his scare campaigns.
    Think of what the little toe-rag could have done with coronvirus.

  12. Lindsay Boyd Barrass says:

    It is interesting that appearance is an issue. Most panty-wetting anti gun nuts would be intimidated by an air rifle, and a lot of the ignorant public not much better.
    The issue is not appearance, it is where a firearm is carried.

    At the range or out in the bush are the appropriate spots. Anyone carrying around an openly visible firearm in the street should be met with appropriate penalties, whether it is a .177 pellet or a .308 with big scary plastic bits.

  13. Ces Barraza says:

    Fantastic work. Hopefully we can get Appearance Laws and the restriction on folding/telescopic stocks repealled in NSW.

  14. Sigmund says:

    Yet again, based just released information, we have a government driven operation to “remove guns from our streets”, by means of creating a no questions asked gun amnesty.
    The logic being that if law abiding shooters hand in their firearms, there will be less guns out there for criminals to steal and use in crime.
    WOW, what backward thinking.
    Such an approach screams three things, 1. They have no idea. 2. They know they cannot control gun crime. 3. Their answer is to remove all the guns from society that they know about.
    Yet again punish the innocent because it is easy.

  15. Stephen Biden says:

    These firearms cause “public concern” when SEEN by them, thus the need for the laws.
    So WHEN do the general public see this type of firearm ?
    Well not if owned by us as they are either in a safe at home, in a CASE and thus unidentifiable or at the range.
    This TYPE is only seen by the public when Special Ops. are staring down them in a THREATNING pose whilst also displaying their piston in a low slung GUNSLINGER fashion.
    I am more concerned by gung ho cops that emulate the plethora of cop shows on TV.

  16. Jeff+Blackmore says:

    When I first became involved in talking Firearm safety matters and good governance, I remember talking to the then Minister for Police, Frank Madill. He spoke directly to the firearm community. In my opinion, now Police and similar authorities tell Police ministers what they want to see changed in the status quo. And the truth gets bent as we all know. Quoting supposed claims without evidence must not be accepted and Ministers MUST quote from whom the supposed facts came. Police have too much power, without accountability.

  17. pklogging@hotmail.com says:

    Typical Of Our BUSTED ARSE GOVERNMENT , The Love DICTATING , Good Work NSC Keep Boring It Up Them They Need To Be Made To Pull Their Heads In & Wake Up To Themselves !! Pete ,

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *