Crackdown on "Sovereign Citizens" in W.A.

[onetrack]

The W.A. Govt and W.A. Police Force are finally cracking down on these moronic "Sovereign Citizens", who take all their cues from idiotic, moronic Americans, who pursue this dangerous ideological rubbish.

The initiative was taken up by the W.A. Police Commissioner, Col Blanch, who organised raids on people identifying as Sovereign Citizens, after the Dezi Freeman murders.

 

Blanch was obviously concerned some of these fruitcakes could follow on from Freemans attack, and put his men in danger. The aim was to find unregistered firearms and illegal ammunition, and improperly stored firearms.

The W.A. Police carried out 70 searches at different addresses across suburban Perth and regional towns, and cancelled or suspended 44 firearm licences. Officers also inspected 26 firearm storage units. Police seized 135 firearms in the raids.

 

Naturally, there was a loud response from the Sovereign Citizens local movement, and in something resembling a Monty Python farce, a bunch of so-called "Sovereign Citizen Sheriffs" attempted to arrest Col Blanch, claiming they didn't support him, didn't approve of his appointment, and claiming he had overstepped his authority. Naturally, they got short shrift from the W.A. Police, and the mob were threatened with arrest themselves, if they continued with their farcical move.

 

I think Blanch and Premier Roger Cook are on the right track to flush out the more dangerous members of this group, as some of are quite likely to be as dangerous as Freeman.

 

However, there is a real danger that the WAPOL move could harden the attitude of some of the more diehard members of this group and drive them underground and encourage to join criminal networks to acquire illegal firearms.

As always, it's a fine line they have to tread to ensure that the more dangerous individuals of these groups get a spotlight shone on them, as they hold the potential to inflame other members who would perhaps hold moderate views on "Govt tyranny".

 

https://www.watoday.com.au/national/western-australia/wa-police-targeted-self-described-sovereign-citizens-but-how-many-are-out-there-20251006-p5n0fc.html

[facthunter]

They want the Benefits without contributing. The TEST. How would it be it everyone did it?.. Every Country HAS rules and good ones have a process for changing them.  You can't JUST MAKE UP your own and expect to get away with it. Nev

[rgmwa]

I wonder how many of them are on social service and rely on Medicare and the public health, education and transport systems.

[nomadpete]

I don't think outlawing sov citz is smart. It only helps them confirm their beliefs.

 

Maybe if someone sets up a soverign citizen register, then they can be true to their belief. And we can cancel all priviliges that otherwise come to those who choose to live in accordance with accepted ground rules - such as laws of the country. Cancel all right to drive vehicles, access medicare and social security.

If they are not able to provide their own alternative set of rules to live by, then they are regressing back to tribal anarchy which has always ended badly. It currently doesn't work too well in the middle east.

[Marty_d]

While I agree that it's a good idea to remove their firearms, it would be interesting to see how a (real) legal challenge worked out.

As I understand it, one of the requirements for possessing a firearm is to be a "fit and proper person".

If that's the legal basis that the police are using, it does raise questions about how you determine that someone is UNFIT to possess a gun.

If the test is that you posted some shit online which makes you appear to be a sovereign citizen, where are the limits?

Anyone at some point can be critical of the government, I've done it myself on many occasions.  Do we want rights to be removed in that case?

As I said, I don't disagree with the action, I just hope that the police are using substantial proof before acting.

[nomadpete]

16 minutes ago, Marty_d said:

a good idea to remove their firearms,

I expect that the WA police are using standard gun laws to address dodgy gun ownership.

 

At present, claims of soverign citizenship are not a recognised legal status, so I expect would be irrelevant. 

[onetrack]

Pete, they don't care about "State issued" drivers licences, they insist they're not legal anyway, claiming the Govt has no power to issues licences. They also try to drive around without vehicle registration - which rarely works out well for them.

 

Marty, the relevant (and current) W.A. Firearms legislation mentions "fit and proper person" no less than 71 times in the Act. There are many reasons why a person can be rejected from holding a firearms licence, and determined to not be a "fit and proper person". Criminal history, a tendency to violence, health issues (both mental and physical), criminal gang associations, posing a threat to public safety (as determined by speech, writings and behaviour, obviously), are just some of the things taken into account.

 

The only part that concerns me, of the defining of whether a person is "fit and proper", AFAICS, is that total power to make that far-reaching decision, is vested in just one man - the W.A. Commissioner of Police.

 

I don't believe this is the fair and correct way to identify people as to whether they are "fit and proper" or not, I believe this decision should be decided by a panel, to reduce the chances of corruption or other influences affecting the decision being made by just one person. Numerous Police Commissioners have been found to be less than a "fit and proper" person for their job.

 

https://www.legislation.wa.gov.au/legislation/prod/filestore.nsf/FileURL/mrdoc_47461.pdf/$FILE/Firearms Act 2024 - [00-00-00].pdf?OpenElement

 

Edited yesterday at 09:20 AM by onetrack

[red750]

Apologies for thread drift, but just clicked on an SBS program on Skandanavia, and it said that Finland's gun ownership was just below USA, and there are 900,000 reservists in a country with a popultaion less than the UK and national service was compulsory. They are ready to defend themselves.

[old man emu]

5 hours ago, onetrack said:

cancelled or suspended 44 firearm licences. Officers also inspected 26 firearm storage units. Police seized 135 firearms in the raids.

There's lies. Damned lies, and there are statistics. Those figures look like misinterpretation of statistics.

 

For example, 135 firearms were seized. If they were unregistered firearms (most likely), then possession leads to action being taken on the status of the fireams licence. So that woul abccount for many of the 44 licences. Similarly, improper storage could also result in cancellation/suspension. There is no reported data on the number of "unfit person" cancellation/suspension matters.

 

I recently assisted in transporting five registered fireaarms to a gunsmith. I don't have a firearms licence, so, technically I committed an offence buy physically carrying the firearms to and from the car they were carried in. Since I was helping my older sister to carry the firearms to and fro, I suppose I could have used the "reasonable in the circumstances" defence.

 

An aside:

As my sister and I were driving from the gunsmith's with the firearms in the boot of the car, we were stopped for RBT. My sister was driving, and her licence was in her bag on the back seat. In a moment of confusion she told the constable , "My licence is in the boot." I yelled out, "Don't look in the boot!", which had the constable laughing. It would have been OK as my sister has a firearms licence and she had all the registration documents in the car with her. Also, each firearm was secured with a trigger guard lock.

[old man emu]

Question:

If Sovereign Citizens do not accept the system of government and laws created by those governments, how can they use the legal system based on those laws to seek redress for alleged wrongs?

[onetrack]

It's typical of their flawed logic, that they think that they can utilise the laws of an "illegal and tyrannical Govt", to bring down that Govt.

 

Their biggest single problem is they are all firearms worshippers, no getting away from that, they believe in the Power of the Gun, nothing else. Well, maybe God, too, but he comes a distant second to firearms.

[facthunter]

Where can YOU make your OWN rules and get away with it? (Excluding Trump in the Oval Office). It's a Basic condition of Civilised Society that ALL are bound by rules that Protect us from LAWLESSNESS and CHAOS and KEEP order so that Ordinary people can go about their Lawful business without FEAR. . IF they don't like it HERE Piss off to a better place. Good luck finding it. .  Nev

[Marty_d]

2 hours ago, old man emu said:

Question:

If Sovereign Citizens do not accept the system of government and laws created by those governments, how can they use the legal system based on those laws to seek redress for alleged wrongs?

There's no shortage of hypocrisy in their belief system.

Same as religious fundamentalists who reject science yet happily use all the things science has made possible, without seeing the irony.

[Litespeed]

Or the Brethren nut jobs insisting they can't vote but campaigning for the LNP

[Grumpy Old Nasho]

I'm half sovereign citizen. I don't vote anymore because I received nothing for the two years conscription I endured under duress. Onetrack also went through it, guns were shoved in our hands with the idea of killing people, if we were ordered to do so.

 

Instead of voting, I pay the fine and treat it as just another bill that must be paid like any other bill.

 

Another reason I don't vote is because compulsory third party motoring insurance has no provision for a substantial partial refund if you never make a claim over your entire motoring life. The tens of thousands of dollars I've paid in premiums will be lost if I never make a claim. That money will go to CEOs to contribute to their next Rolls Royce or Learjet.

 

You'd think they'd give me a gold watch or something for being a safe driver all my life, but guess what I'll get? a kick in the arse, like I got when I was discharged from conscription.

 

I can well understand where sovereign citizens are coming from, but I wouldn't go that far, I prefer to remain in the system to enable change, working on getting rid of inhuman politicians who think conscripts deserve nothing and wishing for us to all die off. We badly need a Bill-of-Rights, so we don't get kicked around and ripped off, under the guise of inadvertent tyrannical government policies and "mob" majority rule. 

[octave]

44 minutes ago, Grumpy Old Nasho said:

Another reason I don't vote is because compulsory third party motoring insurance has no provision for a substantial partial refund if you never make a claim over your entire motoring life. The tens of thousands of dollars I've paid in premiums will be lost if I never make a claim.

That is not how insurance works.   I assume you are talking about 3rd party injury insurance?   The premiums paid for insurance are enough to pay out for those injured, plus operating costs, plus a profit for the insurance company. The money you pay in premiums is at least partially expended on those who are injured on the road.  If you are injured, you will benefit.   If you accidentally injure someone on the road, the insurance should pay, instead of you being sued into oblivion for disabling another motorist or pedestrian.  I have never had a car accident and injured someone, but being a rational person, I understand that the possibility exists, no matter how careful I am. 

 

I can't fathom what insurance has to do with voting.

56 minutes ago, Grumpy Old Nasho said:

You'd think they'd give me a gold watch or something for being a safe driver all my life, but guess what I'll get? a kick in the arse, like I got when I was discharged from conscription.

You really do seem to have a persecution complex.

 

57 minutes ago, Grumpy Old Nasho said:

I prefer to remain in the system to enable change, working on getting rid of inhuman politicians

Ummm wouldn't remaining in the system entail being politically engaged?

 

58 minutes ago, Grumpy Old Nasho said:

inhuman politicians who think conscripts deserve nothing and wishing for us to all die off.

Which politicians?   The politicians who conscripted you are long gone.   I doubt you would find many politicians who are pro-conscription at this point.   There may well be the odd right-wing politician who, every few years, bangs on about bringing back conscription, but I suspect society would not be up for it.   

 

Conscription ended 53 years ago.  Perhaps it is time to somewhat let go of the past and concentrate on living a happy life.   I know of a few people on this forum who were also conscripted, but they don't appear to let it define them or link everything bad in their lives to it.

 

 

 

 

[red750]

2 hours ago, Grumpy Old Nasho said:

a kick in the arse, like I got when I was discharged from conscription.

What did you expect when you got back, a bronze statue in town, a house, a car? What about Finland, where EVERYONE must do compulsory conscription and become a reservist. Their attitude is "We'll look after ourselves and not rely on someone else to do it for us." They have a gun ownership similar to America.

 

Universal male conscription is in place, under which all mentally and physically capable men serve for 165, 255, or 347 days, from the year they turn 18 until the year they turn 29. Alternative non-military service for men and voluntary service for women is available.

 

Finland's official policy states that a wartime military strength of 280,000[1] personnel constitutes a sufficient deterrent. The army consists of a highly mobile field army backed up by local defence units. The army defends the national territory and its military strategy employs the use of the heavily forested terrain and numerous lakes to wear down an aggressor, instead of attempting to hold the attacking army on the frontier.Reserve personnel    870,000.

[facthunter]

Let Go of this or it will ruin your life. GON.  Plenty of US have been treated Unfairly. YOU are NOT Robinson Crusoe , Nev

[Jerry_Atrick]

Sadly, GON, it seems to already have claimed a big part of your llife. Life deals us blows at times. But we have to overcome them, dust ourselves down and move forward. Maybe save some of that money you pay in election fines (unless it is the same as it would cost you to get to where you need to vote) to get a little professional help (with an open mind); Often, not much is requied, but, speaking from expiernece, it can make a world of difference. You will never forget, but you can let go to the point it doesn't drive you. 

Edited 10 hours ago by Jerry_Atrick

[old man emu]

Regarding CTP insurance, we are lucky how it is applied in Australia. The insurance coverage applies to the vehicle, not the driver. In otherwords, if the owner of the vehicle paysthe CTP, then anyone who drives the vehicle is covered under teh vehicle's CTP policy. ( I don't know how that works if third party is injured by a stolen vehicle, but I think there would be a work-around in the legislation.)I was watchingsome traffic court  cases from Texas and it sewem that there, the individual has to be personally covered, not the vehicle.

[Grumpy Old Nasho]

I'll be losing about $30,000 by the time I hand in my license. I want a gold watch and a Fijian holiday.

[rgmwa]

If you hand your licence in now you’ll save heaps. 

[onetrack]

Quote

I'll be losing about $30,000 by the time I hand in my license.

How did you come to that figure?

 

The only place you get a gold watch and a Fijian holiday after a lifetime of work, is when you work for a large global corporation for 40 years.