“The Firearms Act prohibits people owning firearms that ‘substantially duplicate’ the appearance of high-powered automatic weapons like machine guns and self-loading rifles used by the military,” dailytelegraph.com.au reports. Yup. If a rifle looks like an “assault rifle” — such as the gun above — it falls afoul of Australia’s Firearms Act. How stupid is that? Check this out . . .
Firearms manufacturer Michael Burrough said he has faced problems from the NSW Firearms Registry, which is part of the NSW Police Force, over the gun stocks his business produces.
His “tactical stocks” are black and aluminium, rather than the traditional wooden-type.
When attached to a rifle, the registry believes it falls foul of the appearance laws because it duplicates a military-style firearm, even though the gun’s firing speed is unchanged, he said.
Trying to steer clear of the concerns over weapons with a military appearance
Mr Burrough said a rifle coloured black which had been fitted with a custom stock and chassis — the body of the rifle — had been rejected by the registry. He then painted the gun red, white and blue, asking if it still appeared like a military weapon, but said it was again prohibited.
Red, white and blue? Someone invite that man to The Land of the Free (excluding New Jersey, New York, Maryland and a couple of other states)! Meanwhile, the cops aren’t bothered by Mr. Burrough’s bitching.
Some senior police are unapologetic, claiming a weapon pimped to look like a high-powered assault rifle [ED: pimped I tell you!] still appeared so similar to the real thing they couldn’t be told apart to the untrained eye or from a distance . . .
“There are no plans to make further changes to firearms laws,” a spokesman said.