As many readers will already be aware, the WA Labor government is currently attempting to make sweeping changes to Western Australia’s gun laws through their Firearms Bill 2024. The bill has already passed the Legislative Assembly and it is now in the Legislative Council.

Throughout the entire process of formulating this bill, Labor has made it explicit that its intent is to make life significantly harder for licensed firearms owners. This is despite there being very little gun crime in WA; although there are worsening levels of youth and gang-related crime that don’t involve firearms. Western Australia also already has the toughest gun laws in the country. To that end, WA is the only state in Australia that has a wildly different framework for the regulation of firearms, with all of the other states and territories having broadly uniform regulations.

The Cook government’s bill will double down on this incongruence, adding a number of draconian measures for questionable reasons. For example, the new Firearms Act (if signed into law) will require license applicants to fill out a mandatory health questionnaire. This will include asking license applicants if they have (among other things) diabetes, a heart condition, a physical injury, a sleeping disorder, or arthritis. These questions will almost certainly discriminate against the elderly, people with disabilities, and people with chronic illnesses. It’s unclear why any of the above conditions would make someone unfit to hold a firearms license, and it will almost certainly open the WA government up to disability and age discrimination lawsuits.

However, what is arguably the most serious aspect of the Firearms Bill is the effect that it will have on civil liberties and basic human rights in Western Australia. Whilst the bill will obviously make life harder for licensed firearms owners, dissecting the bill further reveals some truly dark aspects that will set an extremely authoritarian, anti-freedom precedent in WA.

Section 150 of the Firearms Bill gives the Commissioner the power to deny a firearms license application or renewal based on (but not limited to) the following:

(a) the person’s conduct and behaviour;

(b) the person’s physical and mental health;

(c) the person’s views, opinions and attitudes;

(d) the person’s way of living or domestic circumstances;

(e) whether the person is of good repute, having regard to the person’s character, honesty and integrity.

Aside from being extremely vague and concentrating a significant amount of power in the hands of the Commissioner, this section of the bill explicitly grants the government the power to deny a firearms license application based on someone’s ‘views, opinions, and attitudes’. This is a shocking clause that will have a strangulating effect on freedom of expression for those holding a firearms license (or future applicants). Espouse a viewpoint that the government doesn’t like? Attend a peaceful protest against a government policy? This bill will give the government the power to cancel your firearms license/reject your application.

There is another clause in the bill that should terrify anyone who values their basic human rights. Section 368 makes it an offence to refuse to answer any question asked by a police officer under the Firearms Act. This is a shocking violation of the common law right to silence. It appears that the bill does not tie this clause to questions directed to a firearm owner. Any member of the public can be asked any question related to the Firearms Act, and can be charged with an offence if they don’t answer.

Both of these clauses will set a terrifying precedent of denying people certain freedoms and liberties based on their views and attitudes, as well as stripping away the right to silence. It would be naïve to think that these clauses will only be used for the regulation of firearms. In the future, people may be denied a position in a public sector job for having the wrong views or attitudes, or may be forced to dob in someone they know for having the wrong opinions, unless they want to be charged with failing to answer an officer’s question.

This anti-freedom, anti-Australian legislation has serious consequences. It is a bill that compromises common law rights and liberties that we all take for granted. Revoking rights such as the right to remain silent, freedom of speech and others should be a matter of concern not just for firearms owners, but for all West Australians.