Vreeker v Police

[2004] SASC 90

VREEKER V POLICE
[2004] SASC 90

Magistrates Appeal

1. GRAY  J:  This is an appeal against sentence.

2. On 10 June 2003 the appellant was charged with four counts of breaching the Firearms Act 1977 (SA). He was found by police to have in his possession a Mossberg pump action shotgun for which he did not have a licence. This constituted an offence under section 11(1) of the Act. The appellant was also found to have in his possession two shotguns for which he held a licence. However these shotguns and accompanying ammunition were not properly secured or stored. This resulted in the appellant being charged with two counts of failing to comply with a condition of his firearms licence pursuant to section 21 of the Act.[1]

   [1] The appellant was also found to have acquired two of the firearms without holding a permit granted by the Registrar under Division 1 of the Act.  This constituted an offence under section 14(1) of the Act, however this charge was later withdrawn. 

3. On 19 November 2003 the appellant pleaded guilty to the charges before a magistrate.  The appellant was unrepresented at the hearing.  No convictions were recorded and a good behaviour bond for 12 months was imposed.  The terms of the bond included a condition that the appellant be disqualified from holding or obtaining a firearms licence for three years to commence from November 2003.  Orders were made for the forfeiture of the firearms.

   Crown Allegations

4. It was the Crown case that the appellant’s conduct constituted serious breaches of the Firearms Act.  One of the firearms, the Mossberg shotgun, was a C class pump action 12 gauge shotgun.  The appellant said it was owned by a friend.  It was discovered in a gun safe in the appellant’s bedroom.  The appellant told police that he had possession of the Mossberg for about three years.  He did not hold a C class licence.

5. Two other firearms were also discovered in the appellant’s main bedroom.  They were a Mauser shotgun and a Bresia Arms shotgun.  These firearms were not stored in the safe.  An ammunition belt containing live ammunition was discovered lying over a chair in the same area of the bedroom.  A small amount of .22 ammunition was found on a dressing table in the bedroom.  The firearms were seized by police.

6. When interviewed by police, the appellant stated that he believed he had done nothing wrong and that he had possession of his friend’s firearm as the friend did not have a gun cabinet.

7. The appellant has a conviction for a prior firearms offence.  On 13 May 1997 he was convicted of one count of possessing firearms without a licence.  He was convicted and fined $200.

8. The Crown alleged that the appellant’s conduct displayed a high level of irresponsibility towards safe firearm handling.  Counsel for the Crown submitted that this was a serious case which in the ordinary course should have led to a conviction, licence disqualification and an order for forfeiture.

   Legislative Scheme