Re - Licensing for individuals: Who is against it?

[G33]

I don't think anything should be renewed. No compromise

This!

Sent from my SpaceCraft using MindControl!

[MTTSS]

"[65] There is also no question that licencing is necessary, nor is the time limits described in the Act in contention. The regime of a finite licence is not questioned or opposed by SA Hunters."

[46] SA Hunter’s case is that the uncertainty and lack of proper procedure pertaining to the surrender of a firearm, together with the fact that if surrendered, there does not seem to be provision to surrender it for value, creates the possible violation of property rights. I refer back to the analysis of the Act earlier in the judgment, where the discrepancies and uncertainties were dealt with."

[45] I must state categorically that any right to the possession of a firearm must be considered with due regard to the legitimate limitations to such property rights as set out in the Act. A firearm may only be possessed if all the requirements of the Act are met and as far as property rights are limited because of that, such limitations are justifiable"


http://www.saflii.org/za/cases/ZAGPPHC/2017/299.html

Ok, as there is stunned silence, here's what to do: (We need to make it clear here so that people know what is going on, and so that they can understand why their support is urgently needed. There is also no harm in laying out the suggested approach here, GFSA is way ahead of us in any event on this one, and ultimately, hard facts cannot be disputed in any event.)

1. GOSA to raise public awareness on the issue and to request support (expressly so - the Court need to know how the actual users of the system feel about this - currently they don't) from its members and the rest of the community and then to engage the services of an Actuary who can advise on what information (data) is needed from CFR in terms of PAIA in order to perform the calculations along the lines as suggested in ZooKeeper's post above (thinking his rough calculations over, the problem is even more serious than we may have thought. Continuous re-licensing is the biggest disaster ever to happen.);

2. To lodge a PAIA application for the information a.s.a.p.;

3. To provide the Actuary with the data received from SAPS for his projections;

4. To make sure that the report from the Actuary and the petition that is signed by as many members of the community as possible finds its way to the Constitutional Court;

5. To brief a prominent SC to represent GOSA at the hearing and assist in the settling of court papers and advise and direct matters from here on.

I think that we can be confident that the system of re-licensing will be proven to be divorced from all reality and practicality and that this SYSTEM needs to be scrapped as such.

The question is, where will the community end up if this information and approach does NOT find its way to the Constitutional Court...? (and this is a bit of a rhetorical question)

[Stevin]

"[65] There is also no question that licencing is necessary, nor is the time limits described in the Act in contention. The regime of a finite licence is not questioned or opposed by SA Hunters."

[46] SA Hunter’s case is that the uncertainty and lack of proper procedure pertaining to the surrender of a firearm, together with the fact that if surrendered, there does not seem to be provision to surrender it for value, creates the possible violation of property rights. I refer back to the analysis of the Act earlier in the judgment, where the discrepancies and uncertainties were dealt with."

[45] I must state categorically that any right to the possession of a firearm must be considered with due regard to the legitimate limitations to such property rights as set out in the Act. A firearm may only be possessed if all the requirements of the Act are met and as far as property rights are limited because of that, such limitations are justifiable"


http://www.saflii.org/za/cases/ZAGPPHC/2017/299.html

I have serious issues with the first point in that post. Just for the fact that a pro gun organization is not contesting any part of the license or it's declared timelines. I've learnt that if you offer a finger, they take the whole arm.

Personally I think, any chance to challenge the FCA, especially from more than one angle should be taken... After all isn't that how the anti's do it?

[Tetelestai]

SA Hunters do love scoring an own goal don't they?

I'll add yet another voice that says SSP's post was on the money.

[Wanderin' Zero]

Renewals of licenses should be abolished. It is irrational and serves no purpose other than to cost the taxpayer excessive funds for no benefit.

If a person becomes a violent criminal during the course of his or her life, that criminal may have their licences revoked through the courts - but which must follow a rigorous process and not simply a fiat. So the FCA does nothing to add to that system whatsoever.

Just do the maths. For example, the CFR receives 100 000 apps a year for SD and 250 000 per year for S16 for 25 years. It should handle 350 000 apps per year, right?

My maths is terrible and I have probably underestimated this, but I work out that the CFR will begin life as an organisation handling 350 000 per year, but by year 25 will be handling 1 250 000 apps per year if the numbers stay constant. The longer it exists, the heavier the burden becomes until it will be unable to cope, which it probably already is.

Added to that, I have not heard a single crime being solved or prevented by the existence of the CFR. Certainly Canada's Long Gun registry has been abandoned as simply being a waste of money. We based our system on theirs. No surprises therefore the the results will be the same.

The Minister must state how many crimes were prevented or solved thanks to the CFR. But the CFR must have been central to the prevention or solution to the crime, not that it was used to check.

Personally I find the entire FCA and the registry deeply offensive, but it is what it is and even on its own self-appointed merits, its a complete failure.

Ah. But the stated purpose of the FCA itself (read the preamble) is to reduce firearm possession by the public. In other words, the objective is to move from 350,000 towards... Well, a very small number. In that world relicensing makes perfect sense. Y'know. Here today, gone tomorrow.

Sent from my SM-G935F using Tapatalk

[Zoo Keeper]

Ah. But the stated purpose of the FCA itself (read the preamble) is to reduce firearm possession by the public. In other words, the objective is to move from 350,000 towards... Well, a very small number. In that world relicensing makes perfect sense. Y'know. Here today, gone tomorrow.

Sent from my SM-G935F using Tapatalk

I agree, the purpose of the Act has nothing to do with facilitation but with confiscation. This is why the failed regimes in Canada etc are of great value. If the Act is detrimental to human rights and public health and safety, surely its purpose is irrational...?

[Zoo Keeper]

Ok, as there is stunned silence, here's what to do: (We need to make it clear here so that people know what is going on, and so that they can understand why their support is urgently needed. There is also no harm in laying out the suggested approach here, GFSA is way ahead of us in any event on this one, and ultimately, hard facts cannot be disputed in any event.)

1. GOSA to raise public awareness on the issue and to request support (expressly so - the Court need to know how the actual users of the system feel about this - currently they don't) from its members and the rest of the community and then to engage the services of an Actuary who can advise on what information (data) is needed from CFR in terms of PAIA in order to perform the calculations along the lines as suggested in ZooKeeper's post above (thinking his rough calculations over, the problem is even more serious than we may have thought. Continuous re-licensing is the biggest disaster ever to happen.);

2. To lodge a PAIA application for the information a.s.a.p.;

3. To provide the Actuary with the data received from SAPS for his projections;

4. To make sure that the report from the Actuary and the petition that is signed by as many members of the community as possible finds its way to the Constitutional Court;

5. To brief a prominent SC to represent GOSA at the hearing and assist in the settling of court papers and advise and direct matters from here on.

I think that we can be confident that the system of re-licensing will be proven to be divorced from all reality and practicality and that this SYSTEM needs to be scrapped as such.

The question is, where will the community end up if this information and approach does NOT find its way to the Constitutional Court...? (and this is a bit of a rhetorical question)

I agree with everything MTTSS says above.

What I would also like to point out is that it is time we took off the gloves. perhaps we need more of these

http://witsvuvuzela.com/2016/04/16/e...ti-gun-advert/

[MTTSS]

Ah. But the stated purpose of the FCA itself (read the preamble) is to reduce firearm possession by the public. In other words, the objective is to move from 350,000 towards... Well, a very small number. In that world relicensing makes perfect sense. Y'know. Here today, gone tomorrow.

Sent from my SM-G935F using Tapatalk

(English text signed by the President)(Assented to 4 April 2001)

It is hereby notified that the President has assented to the following Act, which is hereby published for general information:-

To establish a comprehensive and an effective system of firearms control; and to provide for matters connected therewith.

PREAMBLE

WHEREAS every person has the right to life and the right to security of the person, which includes, among other things, the right to be free from all forms of violence from either public or private sources;

AND WHEREAS the adequate protection of such rights is fundamental to the well-being and social and economic development of every person;

AND WHEREAS the increased availability and abuse of firearms and ammunition has contributed significantly to the high levels of violent crime in our society;

AND WHEREAS the Constitution places a duty on the State to respect, protect, promote and fulfil the rights in the Bill of Rights;

Chapter 1 : Introductory Provisions

2. Purpose of Act

The purpose of this Act is to—

(a)	enhance the constitutional rights to life and bodily integrity;

(b)	prevent the proliferation ofillegally possessed firearms and, by providing for the removal of those firearms from society and by improving control over legally possessed firearms, to prevent crime involving the use of firearms;

(c)	enable the State to remove illegally possessed firearms from society, to control the supply, possession, safe storage, transfer and use of firearms and to detect and punish the negligent or criminal use of firearms;

(d)	establish a comprehensive and effective system of firearm control and management; and

(e)	ensure the efficient monitoring and enforcement of legislation pertaining to the control of firearms.

https://www.acts.co.za/firearms-cont...purpose_of_act

I think our point here is that the unworkability / fundamental fatality of the relicensing scheme goes directly against the principles as stated in the FCA itself.

[MTTSS]

ZooKeeper will you be amenable to prepare a draft brief for the actuary setting out the background and some pointers in order to get his input on the exact nature and scope of the data that we should request from SAPS in the PAIA application?

[Wanderin' Zero]

Indeed – you are quite right. The point is well made.

(English text signed by the President)(Assented to 4 April 2001)

It is hereby notified that the President has assented to the following Act, which is hereby published for general information:-

To establish a comprehensive and an effective system of firearms control; and to provide for matters connected therewith.

PREAMBLE

WHEREAS every person has the right to life and the right to security of the person, which includes, among other things, the right to be free from all forms of violence from either public or private sources;

AND WHEREAS the adequate protection of such rights is fundamental to the well-being and social and economic development of every person;

AND WHEREAS the increased availability and abuse of firearms and ammunition has contributed significantly to the high levels of violent crime in our society;

AND WHEREAS the Constitution places a duty on the State to respect, protect, promote and fulfil the rights in the Bill of Rights;

Chapter 1 : Introductory Provisions

2. Purpose of Act


The purpose of this Act is to—

(a)	enhance the constitutional rights to life and bodily integrity;

(b)	prevent the proliferation ofillegally possessed firearms and, by providing for the removal of those firearms from society and by improving control over legally possessed firearms, to prevent crime involving the use of firearms;

(c)	enable the State to remove illegally possessed firearms from society, to control the supply, possession, safe storage, transfer and use of firearms and to detect and punish the negligent or criminal use of firearms;

(d)	establish a comprehensive and effective system of firearm control and management; and

(e)	ensure the efficient monitoring and enforcement of legislation pertaining to the control of firearms.

https://www.acts.co.za/firearms-cont...purpose_of_act

I think our point here is that the unworkability / fundamental fatality of the relicensing scheme goes directly against the principles as stated in the FCA itself.