The changes include a blanket ban on anyone subject to a restraining order, of any kind, using or possessing firearms while the order is in effect, and in some cases for a period afterwards.<\/p>\n
<\/p>\n
The reforms are designed to reduce the risk of firearms being used to perpetrate family and domestic violence. (ABC News: Sam Clark)<\/p>\n
Previously, WA Police officers could be exempted from those requirements when it came to work-issued firearms.<\/p>\n
Gun owners protest laws outside WA parliament<\/a><\/p>\n Frustrated WA gun owners have gathered in droves at Parliament House to support a crossbencher’s motion to scrap firearms regulations, but opposition from the Greens means it will not succeed.<\/p>\n But in a submission to a parliamentary inquiry into the controversial legislation, their <\/strong>union said a number of officers had become desk-bound since the changes took effect, because they are subject to restraining orders \u2014 including interim orders.<\/p>\n Interim orders are attended only by the person applying for the restraining order, and take effect as soon as they are served before the subject of the order has had a chance to defend the allegations.<\/p>\n In 2022-23, more than two-thirds of all restraining order applications were for family violence restraining orders.<\/p>\n Around a quarter were for violence restraining orders.<\/p>\n Believe victims: Advocate<\/p>\n The gun reforms have been backed by the head of the Centre for Women’s Safety and Wellbeing, Alison Evans, who said <\/strong>family violence restraining orders were granted when women and children’s lives were at risk and needed to be taken seriously.<\/p>\n “It’s not the responsibility of victim-survivors to fix a problem, if you like, in terms of resourcing for police on the ground,”<\/p><\/blockquote>\n she said. Alison Evans said anyone seeking an interim order required immediate protection. (ABC News: Keane Bourke)<\/p>\n Ms Evans said orders responded to real risks and those applying for them needed to be believed and protected.<\/p>\n “Victim-survivors have the best understanding of their own level of risk and the level of dangerousness of their partner or ex-partner,” she said.<\/p>\n “If a victim-survivor says she needs an interim order then she needs an interim order, and we must respond swiftly and make sure that that’s in place.”<\/p>\n ‘A punitive device’<\/p>\n In the union’s submission, President Dave Flaherty agreed on the importance of protecting victim-survivors of family and domestic violence but argued the new laws would be weaponised.<\/p>\n Dave Flaherty said police officers are subject to strict firearm control measures.<\/p>\n \u00a0 (ABC News: Keane Bourke)<\/p>\n “The proceedings can [and arguably have] been used as a punitive device by unscrupulous members of the community who are aware of the deleterious effect … an order can have an on police officers,” he wrote.<\/p>\n “The officers have no recourse to challenge the proceedings and the firearms prohibition until a final hearing on the order, which sometimes is more than 12 months after the issue of the interim order.”<\/p>\n Mr Flaherty said he was also concerned officers could be fired as a result of having a restraining order taken out against them, when they might not have been otherwise, because a final order is issued for two years.<\/p>\n Critically under-resourced<\/p>\n At the time the submission was written in early July, Mr Flaherty said he was aware of “numerous officers”, both male and female, who had been affected.<\/p>\n “Concerningly I’m aware that these problems have arisen frequently in regional, rural and remote areas \u2014 where operational and community demand are most acute and police are critically under-resourced,” he wrote.<\/p>\n<\/p>\n
<\/p>\n