Friday 16^th July 1999

The State Government says it is too hard to automatically take guns away from people who are convicted of crimes of violence.

Democrats Shadow Attorney-General, Ian Gilfillan has put forward an amendment to the Firearms Act under which:

1. anyone convicted of an intentional act of violence in the past five years would be ineligible to obtain a firearms licence, and
2. anyone convicted of an intentional act of violence would automatically lose their firearms licence and have their guns confiscated.

The amendment complies with the minimum recommendations of all Australian Police Ministers, after the 1996 Port Arthur massacre. It has the support of the Australian Medical Association (SA branch) and the Victim Support Service.

But the Attorney-General has told Parliament (Hansard, 7 July, p1596) it is too difficult to distinguish between "intentional" violence and "reckless" violence.

"That is a pathetic excuse," Mr Gilfillan says. "Parliament can easily insert the words ‘or reckless’ into my Bill to cover both types of criminals. It seems the Government would rather have criminals continue to have access to guns after their convictions."

Under present laws, violent criminals can keep their guns, unless the Registrar of Firearms takes the initiative to have them taken away, (Firearms Act, s20) or unless a Court makes a discretionary order. (s34A) The Registrar cannot act on the matter without the support of the Firearms Consultative Committee. The six-member committee contains three representatives of shooters groups.

"SA’s current laws clearly fall short of the recommendations of the 1996 Police Minister’s conference, which states that licences should be refused/cancelled when there is ANY conviction for an offence involving violence within the past five years."

"The Government supports the status quo, under which at least some convicted violent criminals (either reckless or intentional) can keep their guns," Mr Gilfillan says.