Page 787 - Week 03 - Tuesday, 12 March 1991
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
have been misled. I will only put it that they have been misled. I could say that they were lied to, but I will say "misled".
Mr Speaker, the most common furphy that has been circulated in this Territory by, I believe, Mr Stevenson is this concern that a wife will commit an offence. If a person in this Territory is a licensed shooter and has a gun registered in his name and that gun is in his home, it has been put about that if the licensed shooter is at work and the gun remains at home the wife is in possession of the gun and, being unlicensed, commits an offence. Mr Speaker, that is nonsense.
Mr Duby: Claptrap.
MR CONNOLLY: Mr Duby, I would agree with you on one of these odd occasions; it is utter claptrap. Mr Stevenson is trying to say that one provision is a fundamental assault and will result in a spouse being found guilty of a criminal offence because if they happen to be in the house without the licensed spouse they are in possession of the gun. Interestingly enough, the provision in this legislation which makes it an offence to be in possession of a weapon unless you have a licence is in substance the same provision that has been in the Gun Licence Ordinance, now the Gun Licence Act, since 1937.
I am sure that the Attorney-General will be able to assure the house that since 1937 there has never been a prosecution of a wife for being in possession of a gun because the gun is in the premises when the licensed husband is out. That is not the meaning of being in possession. That is a silly furphy; a piece of scandalous fearmongering and irresponsible rumour mongering by Mr Stevenson. But that is a concern that is held by good and decent people in this Territory who have not had the advantage of going through this legislation and who tend to take on trust what they are told by a person who has the responsibility of being an elected member of this Assembly. It is a very sad day when elected members of this Assembly act in that fashion. I suppose it is in the nature of things that in political debate politicians will engage in a degree of puff and political rhetoric. That is a part of life that we all have to accept.
Mr Moore: Never.
MR CONNOLLY: Mr Moore, the independent by my side, says, "Never"; but I suspect that even he is guilty of this, on occasions. That is the ordinary course of political debate; but that is very different, Mr Speaker, from deliberately going out and raising fear in the community for, as I suggest, cheap partisan reasons. So, that concern that a spouse may be found guilty of an offence if they are unlicensed when their spouse has a licence and is not present in the house is utter claptrap and nonsense. Everyone that I have spoken to has been reassured by that; but, as I say, their fears were raised.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .