Page 921 - Week 03 - Thursday, 14 March 1991
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
In summary, therefore, there is every opportunity, in our view, for the value of leftover ammunition to be recovered, if that is the owner's wish. Of course, the Bill allows 28 days for the owner to make arrangements for the ammunition's disposal. We recall that the concern of the National Committee on Violence was understood to be to limit the capacity for ammunition to fall into the hands of unlicensed persons and be used in unregistered firearms. This clause is part of the gradualism of this Act, which hopefully will slowly diminish the amount of live ammunition in general circulation.
Also, Mr Deputy Speaker, you raised the question of a possible conflict between clause 82 and clause 13(1)(b). You saw some conflict with the specific rule, in clause 82, that the weapon had to be kept "in a locked container or under such conditions as to prevent another person from having access to the weapon without the specific consent of the owner". We are, of course, indebted to Mr Stefaniak for assisting us to draft that clause; but the intention of clause 13(1)(b) is to enhance that clause. In other words, clause 13 will only give, in our view, a guideline to enhance the prescription in clause 82. We are only talking about a guideline in clause 13(1)(b). Those guidelines might be matters of interest to the Assembly and may be caught up under some of the subordinate laws. I would suggest to the Assembly that in reality the registrar is more likely to use the power only in relation to the security of a dealer's premises.
On the subject of crossbows, I am advised by my Law Office that there are only two or three competitive crossbow users in the Territory at this time. The Law Office has had discussions with the ACT and District Archery Council and, of course, I propose to provide a suitable exemption for competition crossbow users in the regulations. On that subject I must stress that the Assembly no doubt will pay close attention to the regulations, both at the drafting stage and when presented in the Assembly. I might add that crossbows are banned in New South Wales, according to my advice.
On the subject of soft body armour which, for definitional reasons, has been made to be a prohibited weapon, we are talking about bulletproof vests. I think the Chief Minister and I might recall that one of the options offered us at one more dangerous stage of our Government was that a vest might be made available to those of us threatened at public meetings. At that stage, sadly and regrettably, I think we were both under a certain threat. But, not to dwell on that and hopefully not to see that publicised, I might add that we would be able to issue an exemption to enable the wearing of bulletproof vests by non-police forces. They are simply prohibited under this legislation, and they are prohibited on the basis that they can be used as an adjunct to wrongdoing by persons who wish to escape the possibility of being apprehended.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .