Is A Bow And Arrow Illegal In NSW - The Loose Cannon By Simon Munslow | 5 May 2020

I have written previously about Weapons Prohibition Act 1996, and unfair results that can arise from its all-encompassing wording, which makes even the submarine pressure hull in the park at Holbrook, and WW1 trench art, prohibited weapons. (Schedule 1, 1A (1).

The prohibition of some of the items listed is understandable, however the definition of flick knife ‘a knife that has a blade which opens automatically by gravity or centrifugal force or by pressure applied to a button’ could be applied to many innocently owned folding knives where the screw between the bolster and blade has worked loose (Schedule 1 1(1).

A flame thrower is defined as ‘Any device that is of military design or any other device that is capable of projecting ignited incendiary fuel’- (Schedule 1, 1A (3).  So, a pressure can could be considered a flame thrower- so don’t try that James Bond trick any time soon.

Perhaps the most worrying is Sch 1 4(9) which prohibits:

‘Any device (regardless of composition) that is designed to propel or launch a bomb, grenade, rocket or missile by any means other than by means of an explosive, including a device known as a PVC cannon’.

Missile is not defined in the Act, but if one turns to the most commonly used interpretive aid in Australian Courts, the Macquarie Dictionary, it lists arrows as an example of a missile.

So, whilst clearly intended to target the PVC cannon- a tube used to fire frozen apples and oranges by using aerosol gas as a fuel, and a barbecue igniter as a trigger, (and which physics teachers love to demonstrate) captures the common bow and arrow.

I realise a lot of you are thinking at the moment, your daft, Game laws permit hunting with bows!

Yes, they do, but that does not mean that the bow is lawful!

You have to remember how much of an Ass the law can be!

Is this a mistake?  I do not think so.  This legislation has been written very broadly as a result of two things:

Policy Officers have not understood all of the permutations of weapon that could be involved, let alone quite possibly what they were seeking to prohibit, and there has been a desire to anticipate other types of devices, so the law has been written broadly.

The breadth of approach dovetails with another problem. Whether an offence has been committed or not often comes down to the interpretation of a Police Officer, and in some instances, the officer’s imagination, desire to protect the community from that imagination, plus the desire for a result.

Generally, Police do not go looking for this sort of prosecution, it would typically be by what a Police Officer considered a public order matter where someone had lodged a complaint, or a Policeman has wasted time attending your home in respect to an allegation of violence, or you have upset the officer, or for some other reason the officer is looking for a ‘result’.

Sadly, I see enough matters involving what I would class as petty criminal offences that to me should fall below a discretionary threshold decision of whether or not to be prosecute to cause me concern.

Should you go running off and lodge an application for a Prohibited Weapons Permit for a bow and arrow?

Here I can only speak for myself- and this is not advice- If I was just a bow hunter, I probably would not bother, but as a licenced firearms owner, I am particularly cautious about avoiding ANY breach of the law, including prohibited weapons legislation, because my firearms licence means so much to me, and a breach of the law for me, would have certain legal implications as a legal practitioner.

I am also conscious of an ‘attitude’ that some Police (thankfully not all) hold toward firearms owners and the impact of a culture of booking people in order to get a ‘result’, rather than the kind of community Policing / caution methodology used in other states that regards prosecution as a last resort.

If the Registry is concerned about a flood of Permit requests, from bow hunters, I make the following suggestion.

When I worked as a Regulatory Lawyer for the Commonwealth, we developed the concept of a Class licence, as a means of licensing everyone with certain types of equipment (ie CB radio) that we did not want to be bothered regulating. It worked well.

The logical choice here would be for the Commissioner to issue a Class Permit, that effectively grants a permit a device to certain types of prohibited weapon, which are held with a genuine reason for possession.

Another possibility would be a prosecution policy that removes low threshold offences from the realm of prosecution unless there is a significant aggravating factor.  The Director of Public Prosecutions in NSW has a clear policy in this regard, but I have been unable to find such a policy for Police.

The solution is quite easy- it just calls on some good will and common sense on behalf of regulators and a willingness to educate themselves about what they seek to regulate.

The outcome of such an approach would be that the public know where they stand, and at present, we do not.

Simon Munslow

National Firearms Lawyer
P: (02) 6299 9690
M: 0427 280 962
E: solicitor@bigpond.com
W: firearmslawyer.com.au

Simon Munslow is a lawyer who has a lifelong interest in shooting, having acquired his first firearm at the age of nine, and has had an active interest in firearms law since writing a thesis on the topic over thirty years ago at University.
Simon Munslow practices extensively in Firearms Law matters throughout Australia.

He is a regular contributor to the Australian Sporting Shooter magazine’s website on Firearms law matters, has published articles on firearms reviews and firearms law, and occasionally is asked to comment in the broader media on firearms matters.

This article is written for general information only and does not constitute advice.
He can assist you with:

Criminal law & Administrative law and in particular that related to Firearms

• All firearms, weapons and game charges
• Avoiding & setting aside Apprehended Violence Orders
• Possession of unregistered firearms
• Unsafe transportation & storage matters
• Applications for prohibited weapons
• License Appeals
• Freedom of Information / Government Public Access matters
• Importation & Customs problems
• Advices & opinions related to Firearms law matters

How The NSW Government Has Turned Objects Into Time Bombs - The Loose Cannon

The dangers of producing legislation on whim, without adequate stakeholder scrutiny are clear to us all, but not apparently to the NSW Government. You see, we have a problem in NSW, where, every time the Telegraph writes about something, the Premier’s knee twitches, and another piece of ill-considered legislation that has been passed without due consideration and scrutiny is born.

I am acting for a shooter who had a grenade casing found during a safety inspection.  He was initially charged with an Explosives offence- and clearly this does not apply, as there was no explosive, or explosive precursor in the case.

He has now been charged with a Weapons Prohibition Act offence the relevant section being:

1A MILITARY-STYLE WEAPONS

(1) Any bomb, grenade, rocket, missile or mine or other similar device (such as a tear-gas canister) that is in the nature of, or that expels or contains, an explosive, incendiary, irritant, gas or smoke, and whether or not it is live, has been deactivated or is spent. 

For the purposes of this subclause, 
"bomb" includes a device known as an Improvised Explosive Device (or IED). 

(2) Any device intended for use by a military or defence force and that is designed to propel or launch a weapon referred to in subclause (1). 

(3) A flame thrower that is of military design or any other device that is capable of projecting ignited incendiary fuel. 

(1) Any object that substantially duplicates in appearance a weapon referred to in clause 1A (1), but not including an object that is produced and identified as a children's toy.

Let’s consider the case in point:

Police attended to seize firearms for unrelated reasons and ‘discovered’ a grenade shell casing. Grenade casings were until relatively recent times often sold at disposal shops in Australia.

When I was a boy, de-activated grenades were everywhere, and I used to play soldiers, throwing deactivated mill’s bombs and German stick grenades. 

It was good clean, safe exercise, we knew not to throw them at one another because they could do serious injury if one hit you with force, and if one dropped one on a toe whilst wearing thongs, bad bruising or bone breakage could result.

That was the sum total of the risk associated by their possession.

More recently, I have practiced law in Jerrabomberra, which is something of a Defence Service Homes ghetto near Canberra.  Soldiers in a pre-deployment phase are instructed to prepare wills, and often when visiting homes, I have seen similar grenade casings functioning as paper weights, or mounted as memorabilia of service on a stand with plaque.

Also caught, as the definition includes ‘expels’ or contains explosive’ would be a shell casing parked by grandpa’s front door and used by him as an umbrella stand, or the hapless relative who inherited it and has retained it to remember him by.

You can also add to those ‘guilty’ of offences under this artless expression of political ignorance the many thousands of good, harmless people who collect Trench Art made of deactivated weapons.

Also caught are those who have purchased one of the deactivated .50 Cal Browning casing (or look alike) bottle openers.  

What the government has done, is to criminalise being normal. 

But then they have a history of that don’t they? Remember gun laws that created a situation where we are now treated as criminals in waiting.

It is probably good that the net of politically correct persecution has broadened, because the more people who realise what this type of legislation does to the lives of good people who are charged with offences, the more politicians shall be forced to answer for the consequences at the ballot box.

What the Government has done is perform an act of legislative alchemy, by transforming a piece of old metal into a time bomb for its owner; politicians need to know that bombs have an interesting consequence, and it is often called collateral damage.

Simon Munslow

National Firearms Lawyer
P: (02) 6299 9690
M: 0427 280 962
E: solicitor@bigpond.com
W: firearmslawyer.com.au

Simon Munslow is a lawyer who has a lifelong interest in shooting, having acquired his first firearm at the age of nine, and has had an active interest in firearms law since writing a thesis on the topic over thirty years ago at University.
Simon Munslow practices extensively in Firearms Law matters throughout Australia.

He is a regular contributor to the Australian Sporting Shooter magazine’s website on Firearms law matters, has published articles on firearms reviews and firearms law, and occasionally is asked to comment in the broader media on firearms matters.

This article is written for general information only and does not constitute advice. 
He can assist you with:

Criminal law & Administrative law and in particular that related to Firearms

• All firearms, weapons and game charges
• Avoiding & setting aside Apprehended Violence Orders
• Possession of unregistered firearms
• Unsafe transportation & storage matters
• Applications for prohibited weapons
• License Appeals
• Freedom of Information / Government Public Access matters
• Importation & Customs problems
• Advices & opinions related to Firearms law matters

Read more at http://www.sportingshooter.com.au/latest/how-the-nsw-government-has-turned-objects-into-time-bombs-the-loose-cannon?utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=Newsletter%20-%20111019&utm_content=Newsletter%20-%20111019+CID_e1dcb3b8b8c58dc3d5d3b2a05879d568&utm_source=Email%20marketing%20software&utm_term=Government%20has%20magically%20turned%20inert%20objects%20into%20bombs#hAj9rFbaQC3tvTxJ.99

Police Seizure Abuse - The Loose Cannon.

Although I once defied the odds and got nought out of thirty in an open book multiple choice Chemistry test, leading to me studying law and not an agricultural science, Newton’s third law ‘for every reaction there is an equal and opposite reaction’, has always appealed to me, because at least on one level it applies to human and organisational behaviour and not just objects.

Thus when Police are affected by something they react.

Most readers would be familiar with the Edwards tragedy last year.  Mr Edwards was granted a special Commissioner's Permit for a handgun, against the wishes of a gun club he had previously approached, and then he went oput and commited a murder suicide soon after.  Further compounding the tragedy, his distraught former spouse committed suicide earlier this year. 

Police did not blame themselves for granting the permit, and are now targeting anyone who shoots and who is involved in a Family Law break up.

Case in point, I am acting for a small dealer at present who is in the process of going through a break up with his spouse.  The parties are separated under the one roof.

On my instructions his former partner was somewhat jealous because he was having a discussion and was actively engaged in play with his son. His wife’s mother suggested she call Police, which she proceeded to do.

Police attended, and as no threat was made, and there was no apprehension of violence, no AVO was issued.

Nevertheless, my client’s licence was suspended.  The reason on the suspension was ‘child at risk’- yet there was on these facts no evidence of this.  The only thing that happened that night that would have been scary to a child was the arrival of two Police Officers after the child’s bed time - although I stress that in this particular situation the officers behaved commendably well, and only followed instructions.

Not every child in a break up is a child at risk, and if Police wanted to target children at risk their attention would be better spent visiting shopping centres and rounding up truanting children during the day, and getting tired drivers off the road.

As you may be aware, Police policy of seizure, for a ‘cooling off period’ of 28 days, does not appear to have any statutory basis and any seizure of firearms needs to comply with Firearms Act 1996 or the Law Enforcement (Powers and Responsibilities) Act 2002.

The Police power to suspend a Firearms licence is set out in paragraph 22 of the Firearms Act 1996, and I have set it out below.

22   Suspension of licence

(cf APMC 6, 1989 Act s 35)

(1)  The Commissioner may, if the Commissioner is satisfied there may be grounds for revoking a licence, suspend the licence by serving personally or by post on the licensee a notice:

(a)  stating that the licence is suspended and the reasons for suspending it, and

(b)  requesting that the person provide the Commissioner with reasons why the licence should not be revoked.

(1A) If a licence is being suspended because the Commissioner is satisfied that there may be grounds for revoking the licence under section 11 (5A), the notice suspending the licence is not required:

(a)  to state the reasons for the suspension, or

(b)  to include any request that the licensee provide the Commissioner with reasons why the licence should not be revoked.

(2)  The Commissioner must suspend a licence in accordance with this section if the Commissioner is aware that the licensee has been charged with a domestic violence offence within the meaning of the Crimes (Domestic and Personal Violence) Act 2007 or the Commissioner has reasonable cause to believe that the licensee has committed or has threatened to commit a domestic violence offence within the meaning of that Act.

(3)  A suspended licence does not authorise the possession or use of firearms during the period specified in the notice suspending it.

Whilst not relevant, I shall set out section 11(5) below for your convenience

11(5) A licence must not be issued to a person who:

(a)  is under the age of 18, or

(b)  has, within the period of 10 years before the application for the licence was made, been convicted in New South Wales or elsewhere of an offence prescribed by the regulations, whether or not the offence is an offence under New South Wales law, or

(c)  is subject to an apprehended violence order or interim apprehended violence order or who has, at any time within 10 years before the application for the licence was made, been subject to an apprehended violence order (other than an order that has been revoked), or

(d)  is subject to a good behaviour bond, whether entered into in New South Wales or elsewhere, in relation to an offence prescribed by the regulations, or

(e)  is subject to a firearms prohibition order, or

(f)  is a registrable person or corresponding registrable person under the Child Protection (Offenders Registration) Act 2000.

Turning to the Law Enforcement (Powers and Responsibilities) Act 2002 which again relevantly provides:

      20   Relevant offences

The following offences are relevant offences for the purposes of this Division:

       (a)  indictable offences,

       (b)  an offence against section 93FB of the Crimes Act 1900,

       (c)  an offence against the Weapons Prohibition Act 1998, the Firearms Act 1996, or a regulation made under either of those Acts,

       (d)  an offence against a provision of Part 2 of the Explosives Act 2003.

      21   Power to search persons and seize and detain things without warrant

      (cf Crimes Act 1900, ss 357, 357E, Drug Misuse and Trafficking Act 1985, s 37)

       (1)  A police officer may, without a warrant, stop, search and detain a person, and anything in the possession of or under the control of the person, if the police officer suspects on reasonable grounds that any of the following circumstances exists:

       (a)  the person has in his or her possession or under his or her control anything stolen or otherwise unlawfully obtained,

       (b)  the person has in his or her possession or under his or her control anything used or intended to be used in or in connection with the commission of a relevant offence,

       (c)  the person has in his or her possession or under his or her control in a public place a dangerous article that is being or was used in or in connection with the commission of a relevant offence,

       (d)  the person has in his or her possession or under his or her control, in contravention of the Drug Misuse and Trafficking Act 1985, a prohibited plant or a prohibited drug.

       (2)  A police officer may seize and detain:

       (a)  all or part of a thing that the police officer suspects on reasonable grounds is stolen or otherwise unlawfully obtained, and

       (b)  all or part of a thing that the police officer suspects on reasonable grounds may provide evidence of the commission of a relevant offence, and

       (c)  any dangerous article, and

       (d)  any prohibited plant or prohibited drug in the possession or under the control of a person in contravention of the Drug Misuse and Trafficking Act 1985,

       found as a result of a search under this section.

      22   Power to seize and detain dangerous articles on premises

      (cf Crimes Act 1900, s 357)

A police officer who is lawfully on any premises may seize and detain any dangerous article that the police officer finds on the premises, if the police officer suspects on reasonable grounds that the dangerous article is being or was used in or in connection with the commission of a relevant offence.

 Premises include vessels, vehicles, aircraft and other places.

       The difficulty for Police here is that while a firearm is a dangerous article within the meaning of s21(2)(c) there is no relevant offence, nor is there any suspicion on reasonable grounds that the article is or was used in commission of an offence (s22).

After realising that they were on shakey grounds a Sergeant rang my client, alluded to gaol, and referenced the following alleged offences, none of which are supported by available evidence.

1.     That my client was in possession of 14 unregistered firearms.  This allegation was denied.  My client had completed all PAB28 and 31 paperwork as required by legislation as required and had forwarded these to the Registry by Registered Post.  My client also completed his quarterly return with respect to these entries and forwarded the quarterly return to the Registry by Registered Post.  Apparently, Police wish to hold my client responsible for processing tardiness at their Registry.

     That my client was in possession of a number of prohibited firearms specifically firearms fitted with a folding stock. Allegation admitted. My client is authorised by virtue of his dealer licence to possess prohibited firearms no 11 of Sch 1 of the Firearms Act 1996, item 11 are any firearms fitted with a folding stock.

1.     That my client was informed he would be asked why one firearm had a defaced serial number.  Upon entering details of all firearms acquired by my client the physical serial number of the firearm was sighted at all times when making these entries.  My client can answer no explanation why one has a defaced serial number he questions if part of a serial number may be partially obscured by a stock.  I requested further particulars.
2.     The Sergeant informed my client that his decision to suspend my client in the morning of 9 May 2019 was supported by an allegation involving matrimonial property.  On the 8 May 2019 attending Police referred to this as a civil matter, and it was not raised as a complaint until the afternoon of the 9 May 2019. For this reason, this allegation was not raised on the Suspension Notice and had no bearing upon the decision to suspend.

My criticism is with a Police Policy in practice in respect to domestic situations that exceeds the law, and that involves the seizure of firearms without probable cause merely on suspicion of a domestic break up. 

Just because Firearms ownership is a privilege and not a right, does not mean that privilege is subject to unfettered discretion by Police to seize firearms or suspend licences without appropriate due process.

When I first came to Australia, I was amazed how far this country has progressed since it was a penal colony, a mere couple of hundred years ago.  However the longer I practice law, the more convinced I am that my assumption is wrong, for certainly in terms of Police attitude, this state is still a Penal Colony.

Simon Munslow

National Firearms Lawyer
P: (02) 6299 9690
M: 0427 280 962
E: solicitor@bigpond.com
W: firearmslawyer.com.au

Simon Munslow is a lawyer who has a lifelong interest in shooting, having acquired his first firearm at the age of nine, and has had an active interest in firearms law since writing a thesis on the topic over thirty years ago at University.
Simon Munslow practices extensively in Firearms Law matters throughout Australia.

He is a regular contributor to the Australian Sporting Shooter magazine’s website on Firearms law matters, has published articles on firearms reviews and firearms law, and occasionally is asked to comment in the broader media on firearms matters.

This article is written for general information only and does not constitute advice. 
He can assist you with:

Criminal law & Administrative law and in particular that related to Firearms

• All firearms, weapons and game charges
• Avoiding & setting aside Apprehended Violence Orders
• Possession of unregistered firearms
• Unsafe transportation & storage matters
• Applications for prohibited weapons
• License Appeals
• Freedom of Information / Government Public Access matters
• Importation & Customs problems
• Advices & opinions related to Firearms law matters

Read more at http://www.sportingshooter.com.au/latest/police-seizure-abuse-the-loose-cannon#iq2kiJvR6Pw57ZCw.99
http://www.sportingshooter.com.au/latest/police-seizure-abuse-the-loose-cannon

A Chance For a Future? By Ron Owen of Owen Guns.

A Chance For A Future??
We Have a Federal Election on May 18^th 2019. A chance to make a change of direction for our country. At the last Federal election 23 % of the voters chose to give their votes to independents and minor parties, it did not give us enough seats to make a real difference, but as the major baddies in the Federal Senate did not have a majority, it held them back from sending us further into the Abyss. This time due to even more dissatisfaction with major parties we should easily get 33%, that will shock them to the core. Don’t worry about Tweedle Dee or Tweedle Dummer winning, or losing they are just the same party with two names and two socialist policies.

Independent, or minor parties are a must, we need them as they can give us a voice in the halls of power. They can curtail the excesses of these socialist morons that curtail our Freedoms.
Apologist’s, or a Paranymph’s?Are our leaders Apologists, or Paranymph (it means, an ally; a supporter, or abettor)?
Yes I did have to look that one up, but is seems so appropriate for our slippery, eel like bottom feeders that inhabit the halls of power, in our country, which was ‘once, for one brief shining moment’ in the 1960s a ‘Camelot’ a nation to be proud of.
Why do our political leaders, say “Australia is the most successful multiculturalism society in the world, it’s one of our greatest achievements.” and the Victorian Government denies that they have a problem with Muslim Sudanese Gangs. The Victorian people know that they have a problem with these Gangs, Senator Fraser Anning speaks out about the problem and is called a racist for his efforts.

Tanya Plibersek, Labour Party Deputy Leader, would not have done a days Labour in her life.

In 2002, Eighty Eight Australians and another 100 were injured in the Bali Bombings by Islamic terrorists. Since then many other violent incidents have occurred inside Australia in the name of IS, namely the September 2014 Endeavour Hills stabbing, the December 2014, Lindt Café Siege, by Mad Monis, an Iranian “refugee” and Islamist, the October 2015 killing of police accountant Curtis Cheng by Farhad Jabour, an Iranian “refugee”, while shouting “Allah is the greatest“, the September 2016 Minto stabbing, the May 2017 Brighton Siege and the February 2018 Mill Park stabbing. During that time at least eight failed terrorist plots have been proven in court and a number of alleged plots are still before the courts.
The Somali-born Australian, known as Mohamed Khalif and also Hassan Shire, stabbed a man to death and injured two other men after his Holden Rodeo exploded in Bourke St, Melbourne, the attacker aged in his 30s, was also one of 300 “persons of interest” in Victoria, identified as posing a potential security risk and it is understood he had been watched by police. Somali-born Yacqub Khayre in June, 2017 murdered a worker at a Melbourne apartment block, held a woman hostage and shot three police after telling Channel 7: “This is for IS, this is for Al-Qaeda.”. Numan Haider, an Afghan “refugee” and IS recruit, stabbed two policemen in Melbourne. Mohammad Ali Baryalei, an Afghan “refugee”, became a recruiter and fighter for IS. Saney Edow Aweys, a Somalian “refugee”, plotted to attack the Holsworthy Army base. This list is not all of them by any means and many more are to come before the courts.
ASIO boss Duncan Lewis last year, criticised Pauline Hanson, followed his political masters and stated. “I have absolutely no evidence to suggest there is a connection between refugees and terrorism”.When Senator Fraser Anning, suggests a referendum on Islamic immigration, again he is called a racist.
How can we trust our politicians when they ignore reality and arrogantly lie to us all ?
The socialist propaganda wing ABC host Fran Kelly stated in 2015:
“I don’t know of links of people who have come in as refugees and then committed terrorist offences.”
Our mainstream media and politicians, constantly reiterate that we cannot blame all the followers of Islam for the crimes of just a few, yet have no hesitation in condemning millions of law abiding firearm owners for the crimes perpetuated by an illegal, unlicenced, unwanted, criminal invader who lives off our welfare.

It’s happening yet again, Premier of Victoria Daniel Andrews, announces that he will move to legislate any changes to the licencing of firearm owners that the Police Commissioner requests. The fact that the Premier is allowing unelected Police to write legislation, to allowing a self interested body, who have long been anti-gun, for advice is another part of the problem. As it is completely, contrary to the separation of powers doctrine given to parliament under the State’s Constitutions, as the enforcing part of government should never be the party to demand legislators to remove rights from the individuals who incidentally pay their wages.

Premier Daniel Andrews is quite aware that they have lost control of crime in Victoria but yet again believes the smart thing to do is to punish the innocent, as the media will love him for it. He really knows that the gangsters will take no notice of it anyway, they would support it as well, makes for better job security if everyone else is defenceless.
This all happens on the international scene as well, President Macron is still denying that the Notre Dame fire was intentional a Muslim Arson, even though IS has claimed responsibility and threatened to do it again. Macron also ignored these records.
•Fire at church of Saint-Sulpice, Paris. (17 March)
•Vandalism at church of Notre Dame des Enfants, Nîmes. (6 February)
•Vandalism at church of Notre Dame, Dijon. (9 February)
•Fire and vandalism at Lavaur Cathedral, Lavaur. (5 February)
•Repeated vandalism at churches in Yvelines. (25 January to 10 February)
Three acts of vandalism at the church of Saint Nicolas in Houilles. (25 January, 1 February, 3 February)
An act of vandalism at the church of Saint Nicolas in Maisons-Laffitte. (10 February)
and at Saint-etienne-du-rouvray, France, Knife-wielding attackers interrupted a French church service, forced the priest to his knees and slit his throat on Tuesday, a murder made even more shocking as one of the assailants was a known would-be jihadist under supposedly tight surveillance.
The men arrived during morning mass in Saint-Etienne-du-Rouvray, a working-class town near Rouen, northwest of Paris, where the 85-year-old parish priest, Father Jacques Hamel, was leading prayers.”They forced him to his knees and he tried to defend himself,” said Sister Danielle.

In 2018 over a 1000 French churches were burnt and vandalised. Yet again the real cause is ignored. French authorities consider the blaze an accident – despite the fact that there has been a major surge of incidents where churches have been destroyed or vandalized by hostile Muslims. “Nearly 2,000 Christian houses of worship in France have been desecrated in the past two years, according to police, [while] in Germany, there were four such incidents in March,”. “Some French politicians have attributed the church desecrations, averaging more than two a day to ‘militant secularism’ instead of admitting that it is ‘militant islamic’s.
Continental Cover up?However, political correctness across the Atlantic has made reporting on Islamic attacks against Christian buildings and monuments taboo, and when Islamic adherents are exposed, their crimes are often excused.”[In almost all attacks across Europe], authorities and media obscure the identity of the vandals,” Raymond Ibrahim, a senior fellow the Gatestone Institute pointed out. “In those rare instances when the Muslim, or ‘migrant’, identity of the destroyers is leaked, the church or cemetery desecrates are then presented as suffering from mental health issues.”
A common fear to expose the attacks at face value has been like an epidemic for some time, as European publications have stressed. “Hardly anyone writes and speaks about the increasing attacks on Christian symbols,” Germany’s PI News explained in its analysis of church attacks, noting how authorities stop at nothing to avoid putting the blame on Muslim migrants. “There is an eloquent silence in both France and Germany about the scandal of the desecrations and the religion of the perpetrators.”
It has reportedly gotten so bad that local authorities where the attacks are staged risk serious consequences if they blame Muslims for the crimes,”It is not the perpetrators who are in danger of being ostracized, but those who dare to associate the desecration of Christian symbols with Islamic immigrants,” the German website explained. “They are accused of hatred, hate speech and racism.” But the numbers don’t lie, and there is no denying the fact that as the number of Muslim migrants has increased, so has the number of attacks on Christian monuments and houses of worship. Figures released by French police showed that 875 of France’s 42,258 churches were vandalized last year, [and] a further 129 churches reported thefts from the premises,”.
Are these politicians ‘Apologist’s, or ‘Paranymph’s?
Why will they not admit that Islamic forces want to destroy us. Todays News, is that at least 351 people have been killed and over 450 wounded in a series of Easter Sunday explosions targeting churches and hotels in Sri Lanka. “A bomb attack to our church, please come and help if your family members are there,” read a post in English on the Facebook page of the St Sebastian’s Church at Katuwapitiya in Negombo.
Sri Lanka’s police chief made a nationwide alert ten days before, stating that suicide bombers planned to hit “prominent churches”. A foreign intelligence agency has reported that the NTJ (National Thowheeth Jama’ath) is planning to carry out suicide attacks targeting prominent churches,” said the alert. The NTJ is a radical Muslim group in Sri Lanka that came to notice last year when it was linked to the vandalization of Buddhist monuments”.
When will our political leaders admit that a state of War has been Declared on us all. That is what a Jihad is, we need to act to Defend our Country, our families and our way of life, or at least make it so we are free to do so.
The Modern Day Black Shirts, not in just Germany but Worldwide.
Now the shades of night are descending on the previous centuries of freedom. The freedoms we took for granted as citizens of a Constitutional Monarchy, such as freedom of speech, freedom of religion, and freedom of conscience are being stripped away by appeasers who insist we all have to believe, and behave in the same way. We are not allowed to take issue in our thinking, speaking or writing, without bringing the powers of the State and media against us. Unless, of course if we are protesting Islamics, homosexuals, or Antifa they are the chosen ones they can do as they wish and insult anyone who opposes them.

The Anti Discrimination Commission Seeking Complainers. The State pays for everything for the Complainer and the victim has to pay their own costs plus the other sides if they give up, or lose.

Anyone who dares overstep the new decrees of so called modernism face instant vindictive vilification. It’s not only Islam that’s off limits. Add to that topics such as pro human rights, the right to life, the right to own property (firearms) the right to be pro family, or criticise Global warmers. Freedom of speech against any of these new “Holy Cows” is now closed by despotic rules, and people like Israel Folau, Bernard Gaynor, Dr Peter Ridd, Senator Fraser Anning, Kathy Clubb and myself have been heavily penalised by the State Courts and Media minions.
Now people who remind others of any of the sensible Biblical rules, like Israel Folau, and Bernard Gaynor become pariahs who are attacked and stripped of their jobs, and privileges in order to silence them. Good people are now branded as “hatemongers” and their enemies spew hatred and bile at them to close what they have to say down, they use the media to isolate them and their families.

As an Atheist I’m included too, but I can handle that, and believe that he has every right to express his beliefs and opinions.

I believe this treatment is part of a covert war being waged on our culture by people who hate us and wish to destroy our Western civilisation.
These people are not Muslims, but they are the Paranymph’s, the supporters, they are anti-Christian and anti freedom. They control the press, the TV, the largest internet companies, the schools and the universities. Anyone who stands up against these huge institutions face an onslaught of slander and bile, not just personally but on their families as well.
Dr Peter Ridd, a professor of physics at James Cook University, was sacked by the university for questioning the climate change science around the Great Barrier Reef.

Dr Peter Ridd wondering where the $500 million will be spent on a healthy reef.

Lawyers acting for sacked James Cook University professor Peter Ridd say the university sought to turn its disciplinary process into a “star chamber” after he publicly criticised the institution and one of its star scientists over claims about the impact global warming had on the Great Barrier Reef. Professor Ridd, who worked at the university for 40 years, has challenged the dismissal in the Federal Court, Professor Ridd said the images of bleached coral reefs near Stone Island, off the coast of Bowen in north Queensland, were misleading because they showed poorly affected corals, which were selected over nearby healthy coral and used to show “broad scale decline” of reef health. Field technicians working for Professor Ridd took photos in the same vicinity as the bleaching pictures supplied by the university and GBRMPA which showed “spectacular coral living there”.
Professor Ridd told the journalist in the email that the use of the pictures was “a dramatic example of how scientific organisations are happy to spin a story for their own purposes”. He also said his colleague Professor Terry Hughes, the head of JCU’s Centre of Excellence for Coral Reef Studies, would “wriggle and squirm” when asked to explain the discrepancies in the images.
Its amazing what Universities will stoop to get a slice of the next $500 million dollars to save the Reef. https://ipa.org.au/…/peter-ridd-wins-biggest-victory-on-fre…
How many of us have had the courage to stand and say what is right and what is wrong without flinching from the baying mob of self-righteous socialists.

Senator Fraser Anning and his wife Fiona visiting the Owen Gun Trust Firearm Museum. He is Brave Enough.

Fraser Anning Firearm Policy
Where do we find leaders who have the courage to insist that a man is actually a man and a woman is a woman? Which public figure has refused to accept that it is OK to kill a baby just moments before birth? Who has been prepared to risk their career and their reputation to stand up for what they know in their heart to be right, no matter what the cost?
Diversity, has been changed from a shield of protection into a sword of silence.
What is it All About, Do you ever wonder what the end game objective is?
Know your Enemy.Do you all remember the arrogance of Rebecca Peters the leading light for Gun Control Australia, well after she received international awards for Human Rights, (what a demonic joke) she returned to her old boss George Soros who then elevated her to one of his funded Associations IANSA, International Action Network on Small Arms which states it represent over 800 gun control organizations in 120 countries and has Special Consultative Status with the Economic and Social Council of the United Nations. They are the official coordinator of civil society participation in UN meetings on small arms. Rebecca Peters as one of its leading figures worked in New York at the U. N. IANSA’s besides the organisation being funded by the Soros Foundation has been supported by funders including the Governments of Belgium, Sweden and Norway, as well as the Ford Foundation, Rockefeller Foundation, Compton Foundation, Ploughshares Fund, John D. and Catherine T. MacArthur Foundation, Samuel Rubin Foundation UNICEF, and Christian Aid.
Rebecca Peters also works for the Open Society Institute, a private foundation funded by George Soros. Director of the International Action Network on Small Arms (IANSA) from 2002 to 2010. As of April 2012, Peters was listed on the IANSA board of directors, Ms Peters is now a Senior Fellow at the Open Society Institute, the private foundation funded by George Soros. For the past two years she directed the foundation’s grants program. Rebecca Peters is also a member of the leaders of the UMUT FOUNDATION. Islamic society based in Istanbul, Turkey, devoted to Individual Disarmament.
Web Archive Umut Foundation
Conspiracy’s are Not Theories, They are Politics and Business.You might wonder where this is all going, what is the connection between Gun Control Australia, The UN, Open Society, IANSA and George Soros, why is he involved. George Soros makes his billions of dollars by currency manipulation. I believe its like buying “short” and if the currency of a country goes up, he loses and has to pay in, but if the countries currency declines he becomes fabulously even more richer. The Crash of the Pound in 1992 netted him an extra Billion, he followed it up with the Asian Crash of the Thia and Malaysian currency crash. He has invested, over the last few years 32 Billion dollars, just in the Open Society Association and through them to other smaller associations he supports mass migration, anything goes politics, gun control, abortion, legalising drugs, and strangely even for an atheist whose Father was an atheist Jew he supports Islamic immigration to almost every western country. Many will ask Why, but if you think about it, what better way to wreck a countries economy, mass migration, George works on causing maximum disruption, illegal, or legal invasion its just the same to George Soros as he knows welfare costs are killing Great Britain, why does he oppose Brexit and put billions into the Remain campaign, well a hard Brexit will put up the customs barriers and free migration from Africa will stop. Same to with the USA he supported the Brazilian and Venezuelan socialists, supported the Gun Control campaigns knowing that their economies would go down the tubes and that would send millions of economical refugees into the USA. That’s why he supported Obama and Hilary Clinton. Democrats who like every other bought and paid for politician supports open borders. Trump has been beating him and reviving the US industry and restricted the flow, the US currency climbs and George Short Market gambles look like going bad. So as well as spending billions getting Trump un elected, George will work on sending other economies broke to keep his coffers climbing.
Mass Migration, Invasion by Persuasion, is the ‘New Normal’.
Secret internal reports and memos by one of George Soros’s left-wing front groups reveals the socialist billionaire’s subversive reach within the last Obama administration, the United Nations, and the governing structures of the European Union, especially as it relates to the manufactured refugee/migration crisis. Among the many noteworthy points made by Soros activists in one report is the assertion that the migrant/refugee tsunami that has already swamped Europe with 1-2 million Muslim migrants should be accepted as “the new normal.” This is not surprising, but it is alarming. It is not surprising because for many years Soros and his minions have been in the vanguard of the Open Borders/Migration Lobby. It is alarming because the radical “migration rights” agenda of the Soros network is being translated into official government policy, nationally and globally. A May 12, 2016 report of the International Migration Institute (IMI), an official project of Soros’s ‘Open Society Foundations’ (OSF), provides an important window to view the working relationships among the IMI refugee activists and their allies inside Obama’s administration and the United Nations. The nine-page report, by top IMI staffers Anna Crowley and Kate Rosin, entitled “Migration Governance and Enforcement Portfolio Review,” is one of many Soros/OSF documents released by DCLeaks.com, which describes itself as a project “launched by the American hacktivists” who “believe U.S. citizens have the right to know how domestic and foreign policies of the United States are shaped and who the real policy maker is.”Quite clearly, when it comes to migrant/refugee policy, Soros and his fellow globalists are the real policy makers. Soros staffers Crowley and Rosin call for “accepting the current crisis as the new normal and moving beyond the need to react.”

Their report also provides revealing details on the Soros/IMI/OSF relationship to Goldman Sachs titan Peter Sutherland, the UN’s top globalist agent in charge of designing and implementing the UN’s chaos-producing migration programs. The Columbia Global Policy Initiative (CGPI), which hosts the secretariat for Peter Sutherland, the UN Secretary General’s Special Representative on International Migration, has been able to take advantage of momentum created by the current crisis to shape conversations about rethinking migration governance,” write Crowley and Rosin in the leaked report. The Soros staffers continue, noting the key role played by their IMI “think tank”: “IMI provided project support for the drafting of The Sutherland Report, which aims to set the stage for institutional reforms to global migration governance, and to break new ground on protections for migrants outside the asylum system.”
Australia is one of the countries that George is working on. He knows that our economy is precarious, he knows that with some small (to him) investment he can manipulate and then capitalise from our countries loss.
Funding political parties in Australia as he does openly in other countries would be embarrassing and counter productive, so besides the Open Society funding of Gun Control Australia with its five members, George moves money into “GetUp! and their Union affiliates have received overseas donations worth millions of dollars from a whole range of George Soros funded smaller groups.
Because ‘Get Up’ is not a registered political party but a third party organisation, ‘GetUp’ only has to declare to the Australian Electoral Commission (AEC) those funds that have been particularly spent on “certain political activities”. So while ‘GetUp’s’ 2017-18 Annual Report revealed that 84.5% of their annual expenditure was “related to campaigns”, only 7.3% of their total expenditure was reported to the Australian Electoral Commission! So exactly where does the other 77.4% of their annual expenditure come from? The income to pay for it comes from a multi breasted beast, its sucked and syphoned though many other bank accounts but Soros is behind them all.
Source: GetUp Annual Report, 2017-2018, Page 21

Declared donations to the Australian Electoral Commission this is the 7.3 % include:
•$63,693 from the Geneva-based Oak Foundation,
•$42,960 from German activist group Campact, and
•two separate donations of $99,985 and $95,633 from the US-based Avaaz Foundation. (Source: AEC Returns 2016-2017, 2014-15, 2013-14)
Avaaz is a U.S.-based nonprofit organization launched in January 2007 that promotes global activism on issues such as climate change, human rights, animal rights, corruption, poverty, and conflict.
•Co-founder Ricken Patel also serves on the advisory board of lobby group J Street.
•Fadi Quran, senior campaigner at Avaaz, is also an Al-Shabaka Policy Member and former UN Advocacy Officer with Al-Haq.
The UK based newspaper The Guardian considers it “the globe’s largest and most powerful online activist network”. Avaaz was co-founded in 2007 by “Res Publica, a global Anti-Israel Activities civic advocacy group, and MoveOn.Org” The former received grants totaling $250,000 from the Soros Open Society Institute in 2008. The latter received a $1.46 million grant from George Soros in 2004. As usual, pretending to be a “people’s organization” AVAAZ is not shy about begging for money. AVAAZ is in the same corral as arch-phoney MoveOn.org, also funded by Soros, and operating under the umbrella of Res Publica.
Mind manipulation is a thriving industry in every country in the Western World. Soros intervenes in elections both in the US, and Australia. In the US he spent $42 million at the High Court of America to ensure that “non political” groups were able to give political donations and agitate for change but not have their donations scrutinised by the various electoral commissions.
In 2013 Soros bought into Australia’s Channel 9 network, Billionaire investor George Soros is understood to have bought $6 million to $8 million of shares in Nine Entertainment.
Move On, GetUp, and Emily’s List have received enormous support from Soros because these are the change agents for elections, in both Australia and the US that can operate outside of Governmental control.
GetUp are also foundation members of the Online Progressive Engagement Network (OPEN). OPEN is an international network that provides a range of services to activist organisations around the world – a sort of incubator and training hub to create and fund even more far-left activism.The Managing Director of OPEN is none other than GetUp’s current Chairman Phil Ireland, while the other Directors are from India, the US, the UK and Germany. Source: The OPEN network website
Bizarrely, ‘GetUp’ has received two separate payments of about 41,000 euros ($65,389) in 2015 and 2016 from Campact, a German organisation as “funds held on trust” in membership fees for the Online Progressive Engagement Network (OPEN).
A ‘GetUp’ spokeperson explained to SBS News in February 2018 that “(Funds held on trust) are generally used to save on bank transaction fees and foreign exchange fluctuations, or to shift the burden of administering those funds. Almost half of sizeable donations gifted to activist group GetUp in the past year came from overseas, the other half would come through Unions who also received the funds from overseas.
Further evidence of foreign influence was revealed recently in a Wikileaks exposure of the emails of Hilary Clinton’s former campaign Chairman John Podesta (who founded the Centre for American Progress). The emails showed that the foreign Sandler Foundation was orchestrating and funding opposition to the Australian Coal Industry through the Sunrise Project.
A congratulatory email from the Sunrise Project’s Executive Director John Hepburn (former head of Greenpeace) credited ‘GetUp’, 350.org, Greenpeace, Australian Youth Climate Coalition, Market Forces and the Mackay Conservation Group as working together to block the Adani Mine, with funding from foreign interests.
Source: Campaign against Australian coal – trail leads to John Podesta
So the future development of Australia’s economy, in this case our vast natural resources, is being decided by foreign organisations, not Australian voters.
So exactly what services are ‘GetUp’ providing to other foreign members of OPEN, and vice versa? Speaking of services, local ‘GetUp’ Board member Daniel Stone’s digital campaign company Principle Co lists US-based ‘GetUp’ funder Avaaz as a client, along with the Labor Party, the ACTU, The Australian Youth Climate Coalition, and the Maritime Union.
The Principleco website lists the same foundations as ‘Get UP’, Move On, Open and AVAAZ. They all seem to spend there activities and finances in one another’s company.
Many of ‘GetUp’s affiliates, those organisations that they support and who support them in their activities, also receive funding from a range of overseas sources. Just a few of the local activist organisations with links to ‘GetUp’ include: The Sunrise Project, Beyond Zero Emissions, Environment Victoria, 350.org, Australian Youth Climate Coalition, Markets for Change, Colour Code, Climate for Change, Centre for Australian Progress, Prosper Australia, Future Super, Animals Australia, Seed Indigenous Youth Climate Network, Cool Australia, The Change Agency, Citizens Climate Lobby, Climate Action Network Australia, Greenpeace, Lock the Gate, Nature Conservation Foundation, Friends of the Earth, Tipping Point, Stop Adani, CoalSwarm, Voices for Indi, Voices of Warringah, Per Capita, The Tally Room, Farmers for Climate Action; and Principle Co.

That makes it almost impossible for any government body to check where the money is coming from, not that any government or major media organisation will be directed to look into these organisations as they will be bought the same way.
‘GetUp’s campaigns aren’t actually about saving the planet, they’re ultimately about making money so they can further their left-wing agenda. ‘GetUp’ has so far received huge kickbacks amounting to $2 million from NZ-based online energy retailer Powershop. GetUp created an online “Better Power” campaign on energy and encouraged people to sign with Powershop – who they claim is a “100% renewable energy generator“.
GetUp gets a payment every time they convinced someone (usually one of their well-meaning followers) to switch to Powershop. The problem is Powershop, wholly owned by New Zealand firm Meridian Energy, (which is 51% owned by the NZ government!) only owns a few wind farms. It was revealed they actually buy electricity from the national power grid in the same way as other Australian retailers. The bulk of Powershop’s electricity, often all of it, is sourced from coal-fired power stations. They offer the feel-good factor for consumers by also buying UN-accredited certified emission reduction certificates. But they still very much rely on coal-fired power for supply! GetUp, of course, fail to mention that. But they take the kickbacks and use them to campaign against Powershop’s Australian retail competitors’ use of “dirty coal”, and drive more Australians to a NZ owned company!
Source: The Australian Newspaper – ‘GetUp! pockets $2m with a ‘dirty’ deal GetUps role in our elections is excessive yet, because its not a registered political party it does not come under the charge of the Australian Electoral Commission (AEC).
(Abetz, Minister for State, in 2005 asked to have GetUp investigated by the AEC and the ACCC but that request was turned down due to “insufficient grounds”.)
We used to revere Faith, Mercy, Charity and Justice but now due to academic robotical protégées who identify themselves as warriors who wield swords to impose a new moral order that demands total acceptance and compliance from everyone. Old taboos have become the new normal. There seemingly can be and will be no exceptions. At stake is the genuine and vibrant diversity of a healthy democracy where differences are accepted and tolerated. But dusk is descending. A new tyranny of intolerance is being imposed. And we should beware of those who tell us we are mistaken and deluded. If we don’t stand up for ourselves now, they will be coming for you next. DANGEROUS TIMES FOR EVERYBODY.

There is no Spring without Winter, without Mistakes there is no Learning. There is no Life without Death, without Doubts there is no Faith. There is no Peace without War, without Fear there is no Courage. For without Mistakes, Doubts and Fears there are no pathways to Wisdom.Ron Owen.
Any Inquiries on any products phone 07 54824099 or 07 54825070 or email owenguns@spiderweb.com.au

"The Gun Is Civilization" By Maj. L. Caudill USMC (Ret)

Possessing any object specifically for the purpose of self-defence, lethal or non-lethal, is a criminal offence in Australia!!! There are many women, raped and/or murdered, who would have been liable to prosecution had they been carrying anything that might have saved them.

https://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/news/opinion/an-assault-on-our-right-to-selfprotection/news-story/f743f8b76f21a586a6efb2396c9b2f8d

"The Gun Is Civilization"
By Maj. L. Caudill USMC (Ret) 

Human beings only have two ways to deal with one another: reason and force. If you want me to do something for you, you have a choice of either convincing me via argument, or force me to do your bidding under threat of force. Every human interaction falls into one of those two categories, without exception. Reason or force, that’s it.

In a truly moral and civilized society, people exclusively interact through persuasion. Force has no place as a valid method of social interaction, and the only thing that removes force from the menu is the personal firearm, as paradoxical as it may sound to some.

When I carry a gun, you cannot deal with me by force. You have to use reason and try to persuade me, because I have a way to negate your threat or employment of force. The gun is the only personal weapon that puts a 100-pound woman on equal footing with a 220-pound mugger, a 75-year old retiree on equal footing with a 19-year old gangbanger, and a single gay guy on equal footing with a carload of drunk guys with baseball bats. The gun removes the disparity in physical strength, size, or numbers between a potential attacker and a defender.

There are plenty of people who consider the gun as the source of bad force equations. These are the people who think that we’d be more civilized if all guns were removed from society, because a firearm makes it easier for a mugger to do his job. That, of course, is only true if the mugger’s potential victims are mostly disarmed either by choice or by legislative fiat–it has no validity when most of a mugger’s potential marks are armed. People who argue for the banning of arms ask for automatic rule by the young, the strong, and the many, and that’s the exact opposite of a civilized society. A mugger, even an armed one, can only make a successful living in a society where the state has granted him a force monopoly.

Then there’s the argument that the gun makes confrontations lethal that otherwise would only result in injury. This argument is fallacious in several ways. Without guns involved, confrontations are won by the physically superior party inflicting overwhelming injury on the loser. People who think that fists, bats, sticks, or stones don’t constitute lethal force watch too much TV, where people take beatings and come out of it with a bloody lip at worst. The fact that the gun makes lethal force easier works solely in favor of the weaker defender, not the stronger attacker. If both are armed, the field is level. The gun is the only weapon that’s as lethal in the hands of an octogenarian as it is in the hands of a weightlifter. It simply wouldn’t work as well as a force equalizer if it wasn’t both lethal and easily employable.

When I carry a gun, I don’t do so because I am looking for a fight, but because I’m looking to be left alone. The gun at my side means that I cannot be forced, only persuaded. I don’t carry it because I’m afraid, but because it enables me to be unafraid. It doesn’t limit the actions of those who would interact with me through reason, only the actions of those who would do so by force. It removes force from the equation…and that’s why carrying a gun is a civilized act.

By Maj. L. Caudill USMC (Ret.)