Page 905 - Week 03 - Thursday, 14 March 1991
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
Another potential problem is that clause 13(1)(b) may be contrary to clause 82(1). I am very happy with clause 82(1) relating to the safekeeping of dangerous weapons. In fact, I think the Attorney-General has taken that up directly as a result of representations I made to him. Indeed, the formal words I suggested have been included, and I am flattered by the Government Law Office's use of those words.
Section 82(1) is now a very sensible provision. It is not an onerous provision, but it is practical. It allows flexibility, but it still very much protects the community's interests and is not too onerous on any person holding a firearm. However, clause 13(1)(b) may enable the registrar, by notice in a gazette, to determine guidelines for the security of weapons in premises. It is up to the registrar, and I think in practice there will be no difficulty here.
If that clause is read in conjunction with clause 82 there is no problem, but if it can have some civil application there is potential for a problem. That concern was put to me by several people. In practice it may not be a problem, but the committee may well look at it if it becomes a problem. I have a couple of other points, Mr Temporary Deputy Speaker, and in view of the quorum I wonder whether I can have an extension for two minutes. (Extension of time granted)
I am delighted to see that the Attorney-General has taken notice of a point I and a number of others raised with him recently relating to crossbows. They are a prohibited weapon under schedule 3, item 14, but we have a problem in that I do not think crossbows have ever been used in any sort of crime in the Territory. They are a sporting weapon, and in fact we have an international crossbow champion living in Canberra.
The Attorney-General has advised me that he will be giving persons who legitimately have crossbows an exemption, and he has the power to do that. That is certainly a very proper way of ensuring that that anomaly is taken up. I do not know how many people compete in crossbow shooting in the Territory, but it might be sensible if crossbows were moved from prohibited weapons to dangerous weapons and treated in the same way as weapons used in competitions, for example, various types of rifles, that are allowed under this Act.
Another person mentioned to me the possibility of a problem with soft body armour, referred to in item 2. It is a purely protective form of armour, and there was a query about why it was prohibited. I have drawn that to the Attorney's attention. There may be good reasons for it.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .