Suppressors in Queensland- update number 2 February 2024
Vložit
- čas přidán 1. 02. 2024
- A second update on suppressors in Queensland. Additional context and what you can do to support. #Suppressor #shooting #australia #queensland #fvrcontracting #fvr375 #shootersunion #shootersunionaustralia #agforce #update #firearms
- Věda a technologie
Link to the first suppressor update.
czcams.com/video/uyxnMMUQFvg/video.htmlsi=R2gajRvZJUYv6ofQ
They seem to have no problem suppressing individual rights.
It seems that as it is incredibly easy to manufacture a suppressor. That you can now easily 3D print them..... the fact the police aren't finding them absolutely everywhere is proof that the overwhelming majority of firearms owners are law abidi g citizens. That even though they disagree with the laws in Qld they follow them. Though the Govt and police make it so difficult to get licenses, PTA and treat even licensed firearms owners as. criminals we follow their rules. Patiently wait for our PTAs. Secure our firearms and use them safely.
Thanks for what you are doing. I will get to and send some letters. I’m 52 and nearly deaf from shooting as a teenager.
Thanks!
Thanks for your efforts and comms mate 👍
now that anna is gone we now need the useless police commissioner to be sacked for failure to do her job ( worst and most divisive police commissioner ever hated by the grass roots officers)and only then will there be change in QLD police culture.
Hey you mentioned earlier in the presentation that you would like to see QLD change categories to align with other states that allow occupational use of suppressors. Is the ministerial brief directed as occupational only or include recreational?
Well done mate. Keep going. Thanks
keep the pressure on them, suppressors are a no brainer to anyone that thinks it through. Good luck going forward.
Thanks, will do!
a lot of shooters like to support the police but lets not forget that the police unions as well as top cops and their advice to politicians are the reason we have such restrictive laws in the first place, category C is basically just a group of guns the police wanted gone. a lot of these organisations are paranoid and believe that they're the only ones that should possess firearms. its utter unfounded paranoia since to even be a licenced shooter you need a (relatively) clean record.
Stupid question, but is the gov liable for hearing damage caused due to not having a suppressor?
There is an angle there. Although it requires significant funding and legal representation. Simpler to resolve through a simple regulation change.
Love all your videos mate, where about you get that chair? Looks like something a lord mayor would sit in
Hey thanks. Chair and desk have been in my family for generations. Old school timber and leather. Not flash but functional
As they say Nathan "you can't make this stuff up." And as it is you, I and any Australian citizen could legally purchase a suppressor in New Zealand before lunch time tomorrow with just a 4 hour flight, just don't put it in your luggage to come home because it could become a danger to the public 🤷♂️
Absolutely
Given that suppressors are completely uncontrolled and can be sold to anyone at any time right across the ditch in New Zealand, yet aren't a problem, definitely points out how ridiculous anti-suppressor laws are. Seems like 99% of the government and police's opinion on suppressors come from movies.
Absolutely 👍
Edit: 8:10 sorta covers 👇
(But surely a class action law suit or something will make enough noise to be heard. But then agai, I guess there's a bit going on in the world atm and people are distracted 24/7 already
With all the laws surrounding WHS, and the obligation to be provided with
a safe working environment, surely there must exist some degree, legal recourse for claims of damages and losses, caused by negligence and/or fraud of the relevant authorities failing to adequately adress a known safety issue that leaves workers vulnerable to serious and irreversible injury.
Im suee there is PLENTY of data and precedents to support the argument.
A class action would be an option but I would simpler and more practical to resolve this without utilizing legal channels.
Need to get them to change the language and call them sound moderators.
Suppressor is fine. Its silencer that is in accurate and a problem.
@@FVR375 play them at their own game. They use all kinds of emotive negative discriptions, we use softer discriptions that robs them of that power.
Maybe going to the docs and getting a certificate for hearing reasons and then applying just a thought
Unfortunately its not that simple given the current legislation
It is impossible to apply for a suppressor as in their is no process to apply for one. Only way is if you have a collector licence or are an armourer.
When does a muzzle break become a suppressor?
totally different muzzle BRAKES usually increases the noise level
It doesn’t but i appreciate the point you are driving at
Nathan how can i contact you, maybe help a little from the other side of the pond, with some stats etc
Email is easiest. Fvrcontracting@outlook.com
Hi nathan just found hoq to contact , email.will be on ita qay shortly
I see comments in here about approaching this from a WHS/OHS perspective and class actions etc. Be very careful in taking this approach. The easy answer to the WHS/OHS approach is to apply the hierarchy of controls and eliminate the risk i.e. completely remove the risk by banning firearms all together!
It is not a risk. Firearms are just too important to a country like Australia. There would need to be a viable alternative to firearms. Which there very clearly is not.
Worksafe Qld have acknowledged the problem but have no ability to change legislation.
They have said this in an email about WHS, suppressors and occupational firearm noise.
"I agree that your argument regarding suppressors is a sound argument as you have set out to discover the best remedy to mitigate the risk of noise arising from the use of firearms"
I'm pretty sure we'll get further if we're careful to not come off looking paranoid and irrational. It's much easier for QPS to marginalise peoples concerns if the support base of the people asking can be dismissed as cranks.
@@Alan.livingstonThe problem is Alan that there are lots of people who talk a big game about getting involved or have lots of advice but the absolute reality is that most in the shooting community are lazy and do little to resolve issues with legislation or unsatisfactory regulations.
Im not sure who you are implying as coming off as ‘cranks’ here but this is a very legitimate WHS issue which is resolved in other States but not resolved in Qld. I will shortly be releasing another video with some advice for those who wish to assist the cause.
@@FVR375 I absolutely agree that most of us complain and do nothing, and not just about suppressor’s. I’m as guilty as the next person. I am active in a political party but for the shooting community specifically I do nothing other than pay my dues to the shooters union and the ssaa. This sort of advocacy on my behalf is why I pay my dues so maybe in future I’ll leave the advice dispensing to them also.
As for cranks I wasn’t implying you or the general community, nor even the original commenter really. Maybe I was just hangry. Maybe I was just triggered by old mates implication that the community shouldn’t be engaging with the government department because of some possible vague negative outcome. I know it comes from a place of genuine concern on his behalf and ignorance of how the various arms of government interact. Some people take that to a whole other level though and it concerns me how that looks to the wider community. That’s all I meant.
Any credible information on exactly what is being reviewed / considered in the NFA reform? There's a little bit of info on WA's recent changes but next to nothing in regards to the Federal agenda.
Are there planned amendments in the pipeline, just waiting on legislative changes to federal law/s such as the Weapons Act, 1990 so the powers exist for them to be enacted? (Eg, kinda like how QLD has gone out on a limb and changed the definitions of disqualifying offences even though rhere is nothing that exists under federal law to give the revised definitions a valid line of authority. And is why a decent legal representative can more often than not have adverse decisions/actions made under these revised definitions overturned. *And which is why for a moment there QLD WLB (pretty sure it was WLB... Don't quote me on that.) attempted to deny citizens the right to legal representation during an appeal....)
I imagine there is a host of similar reforms waiting around the corner for the right moment to be quietly slipped into the rule book. Just a little odd how the NFA reform has been raised publically yet we hear nothing but small talk about the National firearms register.... And certainly nothing about proxy agendas that place set caps on licences, or increasing restrictions/obstacles for transport companies that supply ammunition and ammunition related products to retailers...
That is a big topic to cover and a difficult one given the poor communication around the entire NFA arrangement. Not sure I can offer any specifically useful insights there other than to note that we as a group of firearms enthusiasts/ outdoor enthusiasts and occupational users just need to stick together
Pathetic nanny state, they are a health benefit to users, animals(not the ones getting shot), bystanders.
Good information mate