New South Wales police (courtesy dailymail.co.uk)

“Police forces across the nation stand to be granted extraordinary powers to tackle gun crime, ­including the ability to search suspects without a court warrant, amid rising concerns over the links between organised crime and terrorism,” theaustralian.com.au reports. “Other states and territories are now considering or drafting laws comparable to those introduced in NSW allowing officers to search anyone subject to an existing firearms prohibition order without obtaining a court warrant.” A quick note about “firearms prohibition orders” from a New South Wales Ombudsman report on their use . . .

Since 1973, the [New South Wales] Commissioner of Police has had the power to make an FPO against any person who, in his or her opinion, is not to, in the public interest, possess firearms (the FPO subject). The effect of an FPO is to prohibit a person from possessing or using a firearm and to prohibit others from selling or giving a firearm to the FPO subject.

The Commissioner of Police in NSW – the Australian state that recently made it a crime to keep or transmit electronic blueprints for 3D printed guns – has the personal power to prohibit any citizen from keeping or bearing arms, without any judicial oversight. That couldn’t happen here, could it?

Back in 2011, Republican Peter King of New York introduced the Denying Firearms and Explosives to Dangerous Terrorists Act. Under the Act’s powers, the Attorney General can ban anyone on an administration “terrorist watch list” from possessing a firearm. Specifically, anyone . . .

known (or appropriately suspected) to be or have been engaged in conduct constituting, in preparation for, in aid of, or related to terrorism, or providing material support thereof, and the Attorney General has a reasonable belief that the prospective transferee may use a firearm in connection with terrorism.

King’s bill – which the Dems have resurrected – frees the government from any obligation to provide the courts with information on their suspicions should someone “inappropriately suspected” of terrorism sue Uncle Sam to restore their natural, civil and Constitutionally protected right to keep and bear arms.

Back in the Land Down Under, the theaustralian.com.au reports that “More than 1000 people, houses and cars have been searched for guns or gun parts since the NSW laws came into effect in November 2013, with the majority of those people targeted by police linked to organized crime.” How reassuring is that? How reassuring is this:

Australia is widely seen as having some of the most comprehensive gun laws of any country, although the most recent estimate by the Australian Crime Commission suggests there are more than 250,000 rifles and 10,000 handguns on the illicit market nationwide.

Bottom line: despite the President’s post-Umpqua Community College spree killing enthusiasm for Australian gun confiscation/gun control laws, they don’t work. Unless your goal is to establish a police state. And then they work a treat, mate.

39 Responses to Australia Set to Expand Warrantless Searches for Guns

  1. The Aussies and the Brits can truly choke on their own venom and contempt that they have for their people.

    Power for us, none for you.

    We, as the true citizenry, should be air dropping in those old liberators-45s or just a frig load of hi points, bersas, or Rugers or even S&Ws!

  2. Peter Fing King really needs a fence rail with tar/feathers. Despicable POS us just a loose cannon but seems to land on the wrong side of every major issue that appears in DC.

    • He’s terrible. I feel bad for people in his district. What’s the alternative? A Democrat who hates guns and freedom even more? Entering the voting booth during his reelection years is probably a lot like being on the edge of a cliff and being too terrified to jump, but even more terrified to turn around and go back.

    • My apologies to you all. He represents my district. The same counties with the highest unSAFE registrations. I had no choice but to skip Congressional Rep on the last ballot.

      • Trust me… Its better to have an honest antigun democrat politician than a lying “pro-gun” republican politician… *cough* chris christy *cough* …… Obamas the best thing to happen to the 2nd amendment in a long while. The RINOs will slit our throats and take our guns while we sleep.

  3. Any government which can define its own limits is a police state. Some may be worse than others, but they are all out of control in every sense.

    • Indeed, if the individual has no power and rights, then why don’t we just make it law that the state can do anything it wants, and that’s that. Do away with pesky judges and trials and the whole lot.

      There is no individual right more important than that of self defense, and the right to keep and bear arms facilitates this more than anything else. A state that disallows this right, while allowing it to the criminals (who will have firearms or other means of inflicting deadly force that is best met with firearms) is an evil thing.

      Thank god for our founding fathers, and the anti federalists!

      • Hi Guy’s,
        I am an Aussie firearm collector, and to be able to collect early military firearms, I have to jump through hoops to keep my license, and then more hoops, when my safe keeping is inspected. Here in Aus, if I owned a business, and a crim decided to front me with a knife to rob me, and I happen to shoot the dick, then I am arrested, and charged with intent, or murder. If a cop shoots an unarmed civilian, there is an internal investigation, if it goes to court, the cop faces a judge, and a police prosecutor, they all shake hands, and the cop walks free. i LIVE IN A FREE WORLD, LIKE FREAKIN HELL I DO !!!

    • Every time the terrs get a knee-jerk fascist/statist reaction like this they have won the battle. There entire strategy is not to invade and conquer (although the invasion is going on anyway because you need boots on the ground to occupy after victory), but to erode into suicidal non-existence the forms of governments and societies they detest. Good job, Australia, UK, and EU for just capitulating right off the mark.

  4. “Police forces across the nation stand to be granted extraordinary powers to tackle gun crime,”

    Are they actually inferring that an outright gun ban didn’t solve “gun crime”???!!!!?????!?????!???…

    This is my shocked face ?

    • Fantastic point bob H … the fact that Australia’s police forces claim to need “extraordinary powers to tackle gun crime” is de facto proof that their gun bans did not work.

      Talk about doubling down, sheesh.

      By the way this is the problem with progressive philosophy. Their efforts to achieve their alleged goals never work. Rather than admitting that their goals and efforts are flawed, they claim to need even more of whatever they were trying to do to accomplish their goals. And when even more doesn’t work, they claim to need still more.

      • Actually this probably went according to plan.

        Disarm normal citizens which doesn’t affect terrorists a criminals and then bypass the courts and basic rights with police state powers.

    • Bob H “Are they actually inferring that an outright gun ban didn’t solve “gun crime”???!!!!?????!?????!???…”
      Yeah, a “gun ban”…..that has resulted in more legally held firearms here in Australia now, than before 1996 when it started.
      Most Aussie shooters went out and bought more, still legal, firearms with the money they got for selling their ‘restricted” firearms back to .Gov.
      Truth of the matter is……..going by the same statistics…..neither taking firearms away, OR ADDING MORE, has changed the crime figures in any effective statistical way in Australia, Ed Chanel’s fake email not withstanding.

      Something which the NRA and pro gun folks never mention, when they push the line that more guns= more safety.

      • From what I understand, it depends. Generally, att best, more guns = less crime, at worst, more guns = no change in crime.

      • It’s not merely the registration, ban and forced buy back of most kinds of weapons, but particularly the moratorium on handguns and any kind of lawful carry. That basically means armed self defense outside the home where almost all crime occurs is for all intensive purposes prohibited. That’s why they have had by your own admission no effect on crime, because gun laws aren’t for criminals, they are for the proletariat.

        • They (government) have succeeded in one thing… We’re warrant less police raids common place in the outback pre ban? I thought not.

  5. Any Canadians here. Is it true that Canada had a conservative government for the last ten years? I’m wondering how that worked out for gun freedom in Canada.

    • In Canada with a conservative government we were able to rid the confiscation list ( registry ) and made a few other small gains. The big thing was we were left alone for 10 years.

      I am very afraid of what our new liberal gov may do to us .

    • As Canuck noted, the Long Gun Registry has been abolished, along with several other improvements. The new Liberal government wants to roll back some of the improvements, but they’re staying away from a new registry (as they got burned pretty badly by the reaction and cost overrun last time).

      It’s a good sign that even if things can get bad, they can get better with effort. It’s also a cautionary tale that no gain is permanent and all pro-freedom people must work hard to maintain it.

  6. Perfect example: anti gun people act like its just about the objects, guns, and that pro gun people love the objects, but it’s not just about the objects*. There’s also the issue of the nightmare police state we’d be living in if the objects were to be more highly controlled. It would be nightmarish both practically (ie more people locked up and more power to jackboots to enforce) and philosophically (idea that the state can and should do this to the lowly individual).

    *I was pro gun for 10 years without having fired a shot.

  7. Um, ok, points about AU gun policy silliness n ineffectiveness all correct.

    Yet, um, this exercise is to deal with guns and “organized crime” it says. So, lawful, permitted owners should be exempt… being that they bothered to get permitted n etc. Not criminal and not sneaking around.

    Im sure that’s in the law. If not, offer the amendment: “… except for known lawful gun owners, determined by a quick check vs the permit registry.”

    Really, demand that all the permitting n registration be a “so leave me alone” indicator n watch the grabbers freak out.

  8. The Commissioner of Police in NSW – the Australian state that recently made it a crime to keep or transmit electronic blueprints for 3D printed guns – has the personal power to prohibit any citizen from keeping or bearing arms, without any judicial oversight. That couldn’t happen here, could it? Terror Watchlist.
    Harry Reid is loving it.

  9. Bloody shame the Aboriginals seem to prefer booze to Wahhabism. How many “Syrian” refugees is Oz getting? Sound like they could use a bunch.

  10. Just their a-hole neighbors needing jobs getting uppity.
    That’s why you don’t let your a-hole neighbors pick who gets to be your neighbors outside of current standard immigration policies, because this sh_t only compounds itself.
    FUAUSTRALIA, when we come to fix you our hand won’t be light.

Leave a Reply

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