Freedom joins LDP in leading the way on pro-gun policies
THE FREEDOM PARTY is the latest party to release pro-gun policies, following the LDPs call to have the firearms registry removed from Victoria Police.
That means you’ve got two good options to vote for in the upper and lower houses.
As the third pro-gun party, we are waiting to see if the SFFP will also call on the removal of the registry from Victoria Police.
What Freedom has called for
Without taking anything away from the LDP which has been the top pro-gun performer in Parliament, the Freedom Party has released a policy document which also calls for;
- a freeze on the re-classification of firearms
- enabling access to semi-automatic firearms for primary;
- deregulating paintball and airsoft;
- providing the right to purchase firearms without further intervention once the person is licensed for that category of firearm;
- providing for handgun carry after a significant qualifying period of experience and membership;
- providing that the use of firearms is a reasonable defence against home invasions.
Major parties stay quiet on guns
The main parties – Labor and Coalition – are yet to release any substantive policies that will help firearm users outside some funding for what are essentially existing programs. That’s why they both remain stuck on one star ratings (out of five).
What this means
The latest announcements confirm our view that your best options to vote for are the LDP and Freedom Party. That’s because they are best positioned to support the shooting sports, and are the only ones who have come up with practical policies.
Check out our interview with the Freedom Party’s candidate for Melton, Tony Dobran.
Vote carefully – only vote “below-the-line”
When you vote for them in the upper house, do NOT vote “above the line”. Vote “below the line”. It is vital that you prevent your vote from being syphoned off in the much publicised ‘preference deals’ that have been struck with parties you would not support.
If you’re not sure how to do that, click here for our quick explanation and an example ballot paper on our website.
Voting below the line will take you barely 20 seconds to do, and will make sure your vote doesn’t get sucked up in those deals.
Seriously, why would we need concealed carry laws in Victoria? I’m all for protecting the rights of responsible shooters, but the idea that firearm ownership is a right rather than a privilege and that self defence should be a genuine reason sounds like they’re advocating for a model that’ll just attract attention from a lot of people who previously wouldnt have cared. I wouldnt support any of these policies.
Ok, you said what you don’t like about the policy – are there parts you do like?
Well, how come people could carry pre 1996 then? Why aren’t police ever questioned particularly with the way they treated Victorians with the harsh lockdowns? New Zealand police don’t carry guns. Those questions need to be answered first….
I support anyone that advocates for fair regulation around the responsible ownership and use of firearms. I had a quick chat with Tim Quilty at the Elmore Field Days a few weeks back and came away thinking that he’s the sort of guy I want representing my interests. Our sport/hobby/livelihood is, and probably always will be, under attack from groups, both minor and major, whose agenda is nothing less than the removal of firearms from private hands. They’re pretty unequivocal about that. Organisations like the NSC provide a moderate counter to that narrative. That’s why I joined. We should always be putting our best foot forward, and ensuring that our arguments and counter arguments are sensible, balanced, and factual. Many of those that oppose us are none of these things. It doesn’t mean no-one’s listening. There are plenty of politicians in our state, some of whom you’ve named, that are quite willing to jump behind any popular cause if they think it might win them a few votes. Six of the eleven firearms policy positions on the Freedom Party’s website I support. Some however, I don’t believe are either neccessary, or in our best interests.
Separate the laws about shooter licensing from the registration of individual firearms to licensed owners, they are separate concepts. Licensing shooters for legitimate purposes may prevent criminals having legal access, registration is merely a machinery for confiscation. Victoria got rid of registration in the 1970 review under the Hamer coalition government, Howard did the coalition no favours forcing it back. It has been an expensive and intrusive failure that has shown nothing useful over its implementation.
Even though there are some in the community that advocate for the removal of frearms from private ownership, I don’t agree that the current licensing regime is “merely a machinery for confiscation”. Do you have any facts to support that position? I’m more than happy that firearm ownership in this country is not considered a right. I don’t know about you but it makes me feel safer to know there are some checks and balances in place to ensure that guns aren’t readily accessible to people who shouldn’t have them. The subject of illegal firearms is a separate one that needs to be addressed separately by the appropriate authorities. .
Sounds awesome! Couldn’t help but think of Roy Orbison “You’re not alone….anymooooooore!”