The NSC has caught WAPol out again in its deceptive push to overhaul the state’s gun laws.

A few days ago, we revealed that the push to rewrite the Firearms Act is due to the police’s own incompetence in managing challenges in the state’s legal system.

WA Pol’s survey

Following the recent announcement of the overhaul by Police Minister, Paul Papalia, WA Police released a survey to a small range of firearm groups to gauge their responses to various changes that could be made to the state’s gun laws.

The article we published included screenshots from three of the questions that provided clear indications as to what the government was considering, including the significant proposal to limit then number of firearms that a licence holder can obtain.

One of the key questions, which you see here, is clearly being justified on the basis of restrictions that WA Police say exist in other states, namely Victoria and Tasmania.

However, the information provided is incorrect


The question claims that Victoria limits Category C firearm ownership to one. This is not the case.

There are many shooters who have 2, 3, or 4 Category C shotguns for different clay target shooting disciplines such as trap, skeet and sporting clays.

In other words, the limit simply does not exist.


The question claims that Tasmania limits Category H handguns to 2.  The only limitation on the number of Category H handguns is during graduated access.

After the first six months of being licensed, licensees can  have two handguns of a different calibre. After 12 months, there is no limit on how many handguns a licence holder can legally acquire.

This is careless work on the part of WAPol, especially as the question will mislead those it is intended for.

The proposal by WA to limit the number of firearms is also inconsistent with the National Firearms Agreement, which does not impose those limits. 

The only requirement under the NFA is the demonstration of genuine reason, which any legitimate shooter in WA will be able to provide.

It is another demonstration of why the WA registry is less than effective, and unable to back the claims it makes.

8 thoughts on “WA Registry’s deceptive survey

    • Saul says:

      I am in no instance bragging but I am heavily invested into firearms both recreational and sporting and to be honest I have spent over $50000 on Just accessories for hiking, storage, clothing, spotting, kestrel, range finders, ar500 targets, clothing, holsters, pouches, cases ect and that’s not counting a range of precision tools fitted with high end scopes/red dots and in some cases international postage when local firearms stores can’t supply. Training costs around $4000 not including ammunition, sighting in and testing ammunition costs in the thousands of dollars too. Club fees for pistols, membership fees, my point being there’s not much left in the tank as a single wage earner of a family, the job losses in this would be huge, my personal losses would be too. Being pretty much my life’s sport and recreation, activity time spent with my son is invaluable, my wife and daughter are now getting on board too. I’m hoping the meetings taking place without the so called government of this state call for action, politically, legally, industrial, constitutional and as a mass rally. Thanks for your support NSC. Joining soon

  1. Colin Philp says:

    If the McGowan Government is trying to “toughen up” gunlaws in WA, it makes you wonder if the tyranny is going to get a lot worse and he’s afraid of a possible reaction from the people.

    • David M says:

      I’m no longer in the loop I used to be in (I was character assassinated) or I could have answered your question in detail. I have no clue. But I quite agree, something’s up. I have just been sounded out, by the establishment, on whether I will show reconciliation, to what’s been done to me and so many others for decades, and co-operation in the face of a looming war. I said no.

      The UK is investigating 1500 deaths in the psychiatric wards. I have long had questions, and heard rumours (chardonnay socialist psychologists/psychiatrists who imagine they are getting socialism, and that no one sees what they do), but can’t prove. Question: did they oppose banning guns?

  2. lapua says:

    These want to be politically motivated fools are self seeking want to make a name for themselves on the expense of law abiding firearms owners purely politics with Fedgov election coming WA labour Gov in bed with communist China on so many fronts . WA has the country hardest firearms laws . Because of their miss management of the FAL
    Processing system even after spending $8M to improve it is a failure not to mention high rip off FAL fees and it goes on people.

  3. Michael says:

    No surprises that the WA has an image problem & needs to run an ad campaign to try to get people there – There needs to be a lot of fine print to that, e.g. “automatic recognition of licences & registrations” – shooters & boaters know that’s not true. Try to do anything involving freedom – fishing, shooting, hunting, & it is like trying to do so in a straight jacket.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *