Buying a Firearm in Australia

Jigsaw's Thoughts: New Rifle Purchase Process - Stage 3 complete!!!!:

I go to the letterbox this morning and remove the letters. I'm flicking through the various letters while walking back to the house and notice the distinctive colouring of my firearms licence through the envelope's window. And I think to myself "Firearms licence .. that isn't due for renewal until July." 

THEN I REALISE IT'S THE PAPERWORK FOR MY NEW RIFLE ...  Rip open envelope and there is the additional page (to add to my firearms licence) showing my new rifle and the co-licence for Shooting Buddy's !!!!! Woo hooooooooooooooooooo Now to go pick up guns ... not sure when I can get away ....

[Update: That's a new record - less than a month since the paperwork went in (April 17th) to piece of paper in hand!!! Makes me want to go buy something else to see if it will be even quicker!]

________________________________________

I'm delighted for "Jigsaw" because she got the paperwork allowing her to expand her firearms license in Australia to include a new rifle.

But I admit to heaving a heavy sigh when the implication of her joy sinks in.  Like many people in this tired, cynical world, her (national) government still insists that she jump through bureaucratic hoops, and wait for weeks for permission to buy a new firearm.

Note that this is described as an addition to her firearms license; which implies that she has already established her bona fides as a legitimate, non-felonious, sane citizen who presents no reason why she couldn't own firearms without constituting a 'danger to society'.

It takes a MONTH to review records to re-confirm that fact?  And she is demonstrably ecstatic that the 'permission'  has been 'granted'  "... in less than one month"?

I knew that many countries deliberately impose a bureaucratic "waiting period" before acknowledging a pre-established understanding that their citizens are not some kind of disaster waiting to happen.  I had not realized, however, that (either through bureaucratic lethargy, or an actual policy to establish a prima facia "waiting period") it could take so long that a single month processing time seems to be grounds for jubilation.

Here in America, we endured a period when "permission" to purchase a firearm took a week.  Now, it's an "instant background check" process, when all we need to do is to confirm that we are not a felon, or lunatic, to decide whether we were a risk to society.  I don't like having to establish that I'm not a menace to society, but I do understand the need to confirm that these two most dangerous kind of person is weeded out of the gun-owner category.

Still, it makes me grit my teeth every time I am run through the NICS system -- while at the same time I appreciate that the Idiot who lives next door is, by the very process which I deplore, prevented from possessing a firearm which he is demonstrably unable to handle safely because of his proven instability.

To have the process take a month or more before my right to own a firearm, and that in the light of the fact that I have proven myself a stable, honest citizen ... I find that to be onerous to the point of insult.

By extension, I'm appalled that this Australian Citizen of Good Repute must endure egregious delays EVERY time she decides to buy a new firearm.

There's something flawed in this process.  It's so badly flawed, that Australian citizens are pleased that it takes no longer than four or five weeks.  (Yes, yes, I know; it would be worse if she lived in Canada, and even worse if she were an English citizen.)

Most countries in the world have established terrible restrictions on their citizens, including Licensing and Registration.  Sadly, there are states in America which still (in defiance of the clear intent of our Constitutional Rights) impose similar ... or worse! ... limitations.

I look forward to the day when the Second Amendment in America is treated with the same respect as is the other 9 Amendments in the Bill of Rights:

1. Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.
2. A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed
3. No Soldier shall, in time of peace be quartered in any house, without the consent of the Owner, nor in time of war, but in a manner to be prescribed by law.
4. The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.
5. No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the Militia, when in actual service in time of War or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offence to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.
6. In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury of the State and district wherein the crime shall have been committed, which district shall have been previously ascertained by law, and to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation; to be confronted with the witnesses against him; to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor, and to have the Assistance of Counsel for his defence.
7. In suits at common law, where the value in controversy shall exceed twenty dollars, the right of trial by jury shall be preserved, and no fact tried by a jury, shall be otherwise re-examined in any court of the United States, than according to the rules of the common law.  
8. Excessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted.
9. The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.
10. The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.      

There are things that I do not .. approve of .. in my country.  But the Constitution, and the Bill of Rights, are not among these things.

When a government arbitrates against the rights of The People, against the (unfounded) rights of The Stated, then ANY bureaucratic obstacle which infringes upon the Rights of The People should be decided in favor of The People.

Our governments ... both American and Australian (and all others) should, in my opinion, always  decide in favor of The People.  They are our servants; not we, theirs.

Unfortunately, this is not always -- sometimes, not usually -- the case.

Most people who are free, and who understand &  appreciate the concept of Individual Freedom, might accept that although individuals are always flawed, governments are always more flawed.  Any governments which seems to work "flawlessly" are, in fact, elitist if not tyrannical.

“Whenever you have an efficient government you have a dictatorship. ”  
- Harry S. Truman

In fact (with respect to President Harry), in the case of restricting Firearms Ownership by imposing draconian bureaucratic impediments on the process .. you have the reverse; it's not just a dictatorship, it's a dictatorship by the un-elected.