Lawmakers in New South Wales are giving their constituents (or maybe “subjects” is a better word) the gift of authoritarianism this Christmas.
In response to the Bondi Beach shootings on the first day of Hanukkah, the New South Wales parliament adopted several new laws early on Christmas Eve that are aimed at curbing both gun ownership and the freedom of expression.
The legislation passed this week has three key pillars: creating an offence for displaying terrorist symbols such as the IS flag; significant restrictions on firearm possession; and allowing the police commissioner to prevent protests occurring for up to three months after a terrorism incident.
Under the new laws, most license holders will be able to own a maximum of four guns. Farmers and recreational shooters will be able to own up to 10 guns. Those limits will come into effect from Wednesday, Minns said, but gun owners will not be required to hand back their firearms until the government’s buyback scheme is operating next year.
Oh, how generous of the government to let legal gun owners hang on to their firearms for a few more months. All hail Australia’s benevolent leaders! Lord knows you can’t protest them if you’re a New South Wales resident. The new law has taken care of that possibility by giving the police the power to silence any dissenting gun owners and stop them from gathering together to protest the new lmits on gun ownership.
New South Wales Premier Chris Minns expressed his confidence that the coming crackdown on guns and speech will be upheld by the courts, and sadly, he’s probably correct. The right to keep and bear arms doesn’t exist in Australian law, and freedom of speech isn’t protected by its constitution either. Instead, courts have recognized an “implied” right of political communication that comes with plenty of limitations. If the courts deem a law “reasonably appropriate and adapted to serving a legitimate end in a manner which is compatible with Australia’s system of representative and responsible government,” then political speech takes a back seat to the interests of politicians and the government.
The anti-federalists of the founding generation gave us a true gift when they demanded our own Constitution contain a Bill of Rights. As the preamble states:
The Conventions of a number of the States, having at the time of their adopting the Constitution, expressed a desire, in order to prevent misconstruction or abuse of its powers, that further declaratory and restrictive clauses should be added: And as extending the ground of public confidence in the Government, will best ensure the beneficent ends of its institution.
Those restrictive clauses imposed restrictions on the federal government, not We the People. And though the enumerated rights protected by that document don’t aways guarantee public confidence in the government, for nearly 250 years they have helped ensure that individual freedom and personal liberty are inherent features of our republic. The Bill of Rights probably won’t be under too many trees this Christmas (unless someone’s getting a copy of the Constitution as a present), but its protections continue to be a precious gift to Americans that are the envy of billions of others across the globe.
Editor’s Note: Christmas is coming a little early here at Bearing Arms!
For a limited time, use the promo code MERRY74 for 74% off a VIP, VIP Gold, or VIP Platinum membership when you sign up! It’s our way of saying thanks for your support in our mission to bring you the latest Second Amendment news, information, and informed opinion from across the country.
Read the full article here
