Proposed changes to firearms licence applications in Tasmania will punish people who have ever sought mental health assistance and discourage others from even seeking help in the future, and may even prevent people who suffered learning disabilities or migraines from using guns.
Tasmania Police Firearms Services has released a draft of its proposed new firearms licence application forms, which include several questions relating to the applicant’s mental and physical health, including whether they have ever attended an appointment with a psychologist or psychiatrist, or ever had a neurological condition including autism, ADHD, insomnia, learning disabilities, migraines; or sensory disabilities “including sight or hearing impairment”.
If you have, “information will generally be required” from a medical specialist or GP to prove you are fit and proper to hold a firearms licence.
Firearms Services claim the questions are required “pursuant to Section 29 of the Act and [are] relevant to an assessment of a person’s suitability to be issued a firearms licence”.
Shooters Union has come out strongly against the changes, and its Tasmanian president, Phillip Bigg, says the mental health-related questions on the form are invasive, offensive, discriminatory, irrelevant to public safety, and not only add to the stigma around mental health in Tasmania, but will actively discourage people with challenges from seeking help.
“One of the questions is ‘have you ever attended an appointment with a psychologist or a psychiatrist’ – key word being ever,” he said.
“Someone who needed to talk to a professional years ago as a result of a toxic workplace, or being made redundant at a job, or losing a family member, will discover that thanks to seeking help, they are now going to have to jump through near-impossible hoops just so they can go clay target shooting.”
Tasmania Police have said they will not use mental health declarations as a reason to automatically deny firearms licences, but Mr Bigg said they were being “shamefully misleading” about the situation, glossing over the incredibly expensive and difficult-to-obtain sign-offs required from people who made a mental health-related declaration in their application.
“Anyone who ticks ‘yes’ to one of those questions has to go and get signed off by their GP or a mental health practitioner, the overwhelming majority of whom cannot or will not provide that sign-off either, for professional liability reasons or personal beliefs,” Mr Bigg said.
“The few who are willing and able to sign off on someone are not going to be cheap or available in the timeframes Firearms Services will demand a response within.”
Mr Bigg said primary producers would be especially hard-hit by the mental health-related questions, given the consequences for answering them honestly.
“Farmers and primary producers have significant mental health pressures and frequently struggle with seeking help for them,” he said.
“Tasmania Police have almost essentially just told them, ‘If you seek help, you’ll lose your gun licence’ – which effectively means they’ll lose their farm or business.
“No farmer, especially one who is struggling with poor crops or financial pressures, is going to seek professional help if it jeopardises their ability to make a living or keep their farm going.”
It is understood that none of the major shooting organisations were consulted about the proposed changes, and Mr Bigg said he believed the questions were very clearly part of an anti-shooting sports agenda from the Tasmanian Police Commissioner.
“It seems to me that yet again the police commissioner is trying to cover her backside to pre-emptively avoid criticism if something bad might happen at some indeterminate point in the future,” he said.
“The authorities don’t ask if you’ve ever been to a psychologist when you apply for a driver’s licence, and then insist you find one to sign off that you’re not going to intentionally drive into oncoming traffic if you tick ‘yes’.
“The government puts all these resources into telling us to seek help for mental health issues, that it’s ‘not weak to speak’, and to ask ‘Are you OK?’ then immediately turns around and effectively implies anyone who does these things is unstable and shouldn’t be near a gun, regardless of the issue.”
Mr Bigg said that adding insult to injury, the heavy-handed approach seemed to be tackling a problem that didn’t exist, given the extremely low rates of firearm misuse in Tasmania.
“Medical professionals are already required to report people who are a genuine danger to themselves or others to the authorities, and by all accounts take that responsibility extremely seriously,” Mr Bigg said.
“All this approach from Tasmania Police is doing is punishing law-abiding people, while doing nothing to prevent criminals – who ignore the gun laws anyway – from getting firearms.”
Feedback on the proposed application forms is open until November 21 via firearms.services@police.tas.gov.au.
0 Comments