Crash at Aratula..anyone heard anything yet?

[Kyle Communications]

Strictly speaking no you dont. BUT you do have to be able to shoot on a property owned by someone who gives you permission and or own that property and you are restricted in what type of guns you have. So there are other rules governing this other than SSAA. I have a gun licence and its only A & B you used to be able to have a class C semiauto but not anymore. Its the first 2 if you want a C class firearm then you MUST supply a letter from the local council to prove you have vermin or animals that require control by that type of weapon or a specific need to own such a weapon. Handguns you MUST be a member of a sporting shooter style club.

 

Ambulance chasers have wrecked almost everything.

 

Not really on topic of this thread though.

 

I just had to cover the clearing of a roadway area that was NOT accessable by the current open road with a 20 mill insurance so I could clear trees it was a add on to my existing 10 millthat my farm has to have...its all nuts now

[M61A1]

You don't need to be a member of SSAA to own or shoot a firearm.

You are right, KC has spelled it out better....the point being that the member numbers are only high due to legal requirements.

[spacesailor]

NZ compo law is great

BUT NOT FOR the Victims of negligence.

Three weeks payed by your employer AT lowest wage.six weeks by the government.

THEN

Your on the dole

Not long to recover from having a cast iron machine, without a Guage, filling with nitridgon for cooling,

Explode,

when told to tap it with a hammer to check if frozen or put more nitridgon in.

NO BLOODY COMPO FOR THAT,

spacesailor

[M61A1]

As far as the "self policing" goes....I have seen it in industry and in clubs. A gliding club I know of is a good example. They have made more rules at club level than CASA requires so that their Ops manual exceeds the requirements. Then if there's an incident they make some more rules to be seen to have done something to prevent another incident. Insurers also add their own requirements or add incentives for cheaper policies if certain rules are applied.

The result.....incidents still occur and a good portion of the membership gives it up because they can have more fun doing something else with less hassle.

[turboplanner]

Strictly speaking no you dont. BUT you do have to be able to shoot on a property owned by someone who gives you permission and or own that property and you are restricted in what type of guns you have. So there are other rules governing this other than SSAA. I have a gun licence and its only A & B you used to be able to have a class C semiauto but not anymore. Its the first 2 if you want a C class firearm then you MUST supply a letter from the local council to prove you have vermin or animals that require control by that type of weapon or a specific need to own such a weapon. Handguns you MUST be a member of a sporting shooter style club.

 

Ambulance chasers have wrecked almost everything.

 

Not really on topic of this thread though.

 

I just had to cover the clearing of a roadway area that was NOT accessable by the current open road with a 20 mill insurance so I could clear trees it was a add on to my existing 10 millthat my farm has to have...its all nuts now

[Hunsta]

Can I just clear a few Rules about firearm ownership here. Even though this is an aviation forum.

For a standard firearms licence. Minimum is to be a member of a registered shooting club. That can be SSAA or any other registered shooting club. This gives you an SC1 ( Shooting club 1) this gives the average joe reason 1. For a Cat A or B firearm To hunt on private property. One needs a RE1 (Rec hunting). This also used to require a permission to hunt letter. With all the various criteria. However that has been superseded by being in a registered club as SSAA and most registered clubs have access to properties. Thus negating the need for a PTH letter.

There is a few small differences in the ruls depending on state. And also if your a prim prod. Or have the use of specialty firearms for business.

Just thought Id clear that up a bit.

Now back to the "my knowledge is better than your knowledge" debate

Edited February 11, 2020 by Hunsta

[turboplanner]

You are right, KC has spelled it out better....the point being that the member numbers are only high due to legal requirements.

KC talked aboutr gun licences:

You to not have to be a member of SSAA to have a gun licence.

When you apply for one you have to declare a reason for owning a firearm.

If you want to shoot on privately owned land you need to supply written permission from the owner; The example KC gave fits into that category. You can type up a proforma, and get it signed by the farm owner, and you're free to go shooting.

If you want a gun licence for your farm you have to provide documentation of the farm layout and show ownership, then you're free to go.

If you want to shoot vermin on public land you buy a licence and confirm that on your application and you're free to go. The licence might have some conditions such as a closed season etc.

If you want to shoot ducks it's a little more complicated; you have to pass a waterbird identification test and know the protected species, and you have to buy a duck licence, then you're free to go.

If you want to buy a hand gun, you need to be a member of a pistol club to apply and there are special rules as to where and when you can use it.

If you want to buy a semi-automatic, it's the same as a hand gun - these guns are not out on the street.

And, for me, unbelievably, when the new gun laws came in I found you could apply to buy a machine gun under the same conditions as a hand gun.

 

NONE of these categories require membership of SSAA, so let's not try to distort things.

 

[What I've quoted applies in Victoria; check your State regulation to see if there are any changes there.]

[M61A1]

Can I just clear a few Rules about firearm ownership here. Even though this is an aviation forum.

For a standard firearms licence. Minimum is to be a member of a registered shooting club. That can be SSAA or any other registered shooting club. This gives you an SC1 ( Shooting club 1) this gives the average joe reason 1. To hunt on private property. One needs a RE1 (Rec hunting). This also used to require a permission to hunt letter. With all the various criteria. However that has been superseded by being in a registered club as SSAA and most registered clubs have access to properties. Thus negating the need for a PTH letter.

There is a few small differences in the ruls depending on state. And also if your a prim prod. Or have the use of specialty firearms for business.

Just thought Id clear that up a bit.

Now back to the "my knowledge is better than your knowledge" debate

The reason it came up was the claim that the club had good numbers. I would suggest that it's numbers would not be nearly as good if being in the club was not a necessity for many firearm owners. I suspect the same would be true of recreational pilots and RAA.

 

Copy and paste from the SSAA site.

You will need a genuine reason to obtain a Category A & B Firearms Licence. If you become a Member of S.S.A.A. you can then list your genuine reason as Sports & Target Shooting and Recreation & Hunting, as we are an approved body prescribed under the law.

 

While what I said about SSAA and licences was inaccurate, once again, you've completely missed the point Turbo.

[turboplanner]

I just had to cover the clearing of a roadway area that was NOT accessable by the current open road with a 20 mill insurance so I could clear trees it was a add on to my existing 10 millthat my farm has to have...its all nuts now

Normally your property insurance covers that; most insurance covers are shifting from $10 to $20 million, probably because the cost of a quadriplegic accident is now usually over $10 million. If it's the Council that made you cover the land being cleared, it may be becaise the new roadway area may be deemed to be public access. Public access is where there is no front gate and members of the public can walk or drive in.

[turboplanner]

The fear of litigation in Australia (originally imported from the USA) has spawned a huge public risk insurance industry.

 

Our public liability didn't come from the USA, it is based on the Scottish precedent Donoghue v Stevenson (1932), just like NZ and I think Canada. The UK basis is a combination of Caparo Industries PLL v Dickman (1990) and Donoghue v Stevenson.

 

The USA is a collection of 50 Sovereign States which make their own laws, often copying each other, so there are probably more than 10 different precedents over there.

 

What did come from the USA was Product Liability started by Ralph Nader with his campaign on the Chev Corvair rear suspension, the Ford Pinto fuel tanks catching fire and the Chev Blazer side tanks allegedly catching fire. These were good money spinners until General Motors found the Chevy Blazer with the explosive fail points and igniters in a wreckers yard. As far as I know, a case hasn't been run in Australia yet.

 

We are now constantly told that 10 million is not enough so the standard is now 20 million and likely to go to 50 million in the future.

The principle of public liability is that if someone is negligent and this results in an accident which kills someone aged say 25, he is responsible to replace the income that person would have earned to support his family for the 40 years to retirement, and in the case of someone becoming a quadriplegic, to rebuild the house to allow a quadriplegic to move around on a trolly, crane above bath, winches/stairlifts etc, 24 hour nursing, 24/7 oxygen, a special transport vehicle 24/7 nursing, and medical for 40 years.

Last time I checked a typical quadriplegic award was around $12 million with about $1.5 million legal costs each side the person who breached his duty of care usually pays both legals, so the plaintiff finishes up with $12 million, and the defendant is out of pocket for $15 million.

 

In some activities, such as a football club running a sausage sizzle at Bunnings, worst expectation might be someone gets food poisoning on a hot day or someone gets burnt by a gas bottle. There are literally tens of thousands of these activities, and PL doesn't appear to be a problem here.

 

Even the RAA operations over the last few years appears to be handling the PL Insurance/costs quite well when you consider the biggest fights have been about magazine cost.

 

Event insurance costs are through the roof now. Try & run an airshow and the so called safely requirements and costs associated with insurance usually mean the event gets pulled.

Insurance is a balanced game, the insurer lays off odds against the known risk, so it's usually very fair. When that risk isn't known, such as when a small group of people decide to run an airshow, I'd suggest the insurer would be heavily loading the premium, because he has no history to work on, so an even different to an airshow might be more affordable. On the other hand, if you do put on a spectacular show and you promote it correctly and you manage the risk well, you might cover that high premium cost, I can recall a small country speedway which had a top attendance of 200 people, with usually about 150. They could just afford the $1000.00 PL insurance premium. Along cam a promoter, hired the track for the night, put on a big championship, advertised the hell out of it, and pulled in 6,000 spectators for the night. If you run an aviation event, you're not in aviation, you're in show business.

 

Another thing that NZ got right was when the Accident Compensation Commission was set up back in the 70s. It covers compulsory insurance cover for personal injury to everyone in NZ whether a citizen, resident or visitor. The right to sue was removed. It is paid for by a levy on employers & car regos. Sports groups get it for free. The scheme has its detractors but it has kept everything sensible. Car rego in NZ costs about $109.00 a year (recently increased from $80.00) including the ACC levy. Here the CTP is often 2 to 3 times the rego fee due to the costs associated with massive claims. If we had a similar system here, all that PL BS would disappear.

It would be interesting to see what compensation a Quadriplegic gets in NZ, and what penalty a negligent party gets for the same Quadriplegic accident above. I'm not sure what Spacesailor is saying but he seems to be indicating he's not happy.

[Kyle Communications]

Normally your property insurance covers that; most insurance covers are shifting from $10 to $20 million, probably because the cost of a quadriplegic accident is now usually over $10 million. If it's the Council that made you cover the land being cleared, it may be becaise the new roadway area may be deemed to be public access. Public access is where there is no front gate and members of the public can walk or drive in.

The council just wanted to cover their bum because of a crap neighbour whinging about it. The road has NO public access until it is finished as it is totally fenced off. That fence will be removed when we decide to open the road...which of course when it is finished. Public indemnity for my farn is 10m at this stage and the insurance doesnt have any plans...yet to raise it as its just a cattle grazing block..that doesnt have any cattle on it at this time .

 

Hunsta has put it perfectly although from my side its the primary producer side.. but I do have some mates who have permission to use my property for "hunting"... who would want to shoot ducks? They dont do any harm..got plenty of rabbits..not hares...rabbits ...and feral pigs and a few wild dogs..they are nasty and cunning. I havent managed to get any of them yet at my place

[FlyBoy1960]

You are all "pissing in the wind" and all have wet shoes

 

Is there a way i can block this thread never to be seen again in this new system, That option seems to be gone

[turboplanner]

.

[turboplanner]

The council just wanted to cover their bum because of a crap neighbour whinging about it. The road has NO public access until it is finished as it is totally fenced off. That fence will be removed when we decide to open the road...which of course when it is finished. Public indemnity for my farn is 10m at this stage and the insurance doesnt have any plans...yet to raise it as its just a cattle grazing block..that doesnt have any cattle on it at this time .

In Victoria, if it was fenced off it wouldn't qualify as public access. Even if you have an entrance to your property, and a closed gate it wouldn't qualify as public access, but the mistake people make in Victoria is to leave the gate open which makes it public access and leaves the owner open to public liablity anywhere someone can freely walk or drive. I can sympathise with you if there is a neighbour involved; that get's complicated.

 

Hunsta has put it perfectly although from my side its the primary producer side.. but I do have some mates who have permission to use my property for "hunting"... who would want to shoot ducks? They dont do any harm..got plenty of rabbits..not hares...rabbits ...and feral pigs and a few wild dogs..they are nasty and cunning. I havent managed to get any of them yet at my place

What M was angling for was to show that SSAA wouldn't be big/successful etc without it being necessary to become a member, and the clauses he quoted are in Qld and Vic Branches suggesting SSAA provides a "reason" for owning a firearm, but when you actually renew in Victoria you have to provide more information. I just renewed by licences six months ago, and the questions are progressive. I went for the "Primary Producer" reason and that progressed to supplying information on ownership of "the property to be used". That covered by home property, but if I was caught shooting on properties I leased I would be committing a firearms offence, so I went a different route. Haven't worked out a solution to the PP on casually leased land yet.

[turboplanner]

You are all "pissing in the wind" and all have wet shoes

 

Is there a way i can block this thread never to be seen again in this new system, That option seems to be gone

Since your "all have wet shoes" comment refers to us all being drunk or on drugs, perhaps you could explain how you came to that conclusion?

[turboplanner]

The council just wanted to cover their bum because of a crap neighbour whinging about it.

Just remembered; in Victoria and possibly Qld there is a thing called a "Revenge Strip" which is pulled out now and again if it suits situations like this, where, if there is no minimum subdivision size, a landowner applies for subdivision of his property by subdividing about a metre x the needed length from is property. That metre becomes a property with rights like the primary one. If that's of any use I'll see if I can find a reference.

[M61A1]

Since your "all have wet shoes" comment refers to us all being drunk or on drugs, perhaps you could explain how you came to that conclusion?

You really do need to get out in the real world Turbo.

https://idioms.thefreedictionary.com/piss+in+the+wind

Wet shoes would be the result of pissing in the wind, not drunkenness or drugs.

He’s right in that it’s futile thinking that we can change the stupid way stuff is done in this country, but the progression of stupidity can be slowed by not doing things that you don’t have to.

If youmake your own restrictive rules without being forced to then you are to blame when it becomes the norm or law.

[M61A1]

Just remembered; in Victoria and possibly Qld there is a thing called a "Revenge Strip" which is pulled out now and again if it suits situations like this, where, if there is no minimum subdivision size, a landowner applies for subdivision of his property by subdividing about a metre x the needed length from is property. That metre becomes a property with rights like the primary one. If that's of any use I'll see if I can find a reference.

A lot of council in Qld have minimum sizes for subdivision in certain zones. Around here the council won’t let you subdivide a rural property in lots less than 100 acres/40 hectares.

[turboplanner]

Wet shoes would be the result of pissing in the wind, not drunkenness or drugs

Look up the definition of “wet shoes”

[FlyBoy1960]

Since your "all have wet shoes" comment refers to us all being drunk or on drugs, perhaps you could explain how you came to that conclusion?

 

Google it, your an expert at everything else BLOCK

[turboplanner]

Google it, your an expert at everything else BLOCK

Yep, it’s druggie jargon.

[Scotty 1]

Yep, I looked it up, best I came up with was "Wet Shoes Porn Video "

[rankamateur]

If you piss in the wind, Aim down wind or you will get wet shoes when the wind speed exceeds the velocity of your stream. Haven't any of you been fishing at sea?

[kgwilson]

That could be defined as "Pissing with the wind" I would think & your shoes will stay dry. How did we get here from a Crash at Aratula? I'm just happy that OTTO is home and recovering. I'd like to see him come back & visit us once everything is fixed.

[Litespeed]

Also do not eat the yellow snow.