WA Police officers are being taken off the beat because new firearms laws mean they can’t carry a gun if they’re subject to a restraining order, their union says.
Sweeping changes to the state’s laws are being introduced to make them what the government describes as the toughest in the nation, with family and domestic violence presented as a key justification following the shooting of mother and daughter Jennifer and Gretl Petelczyc in Floreat last year.
The changes include a blanket ban on anyone subject to a restraining order, of any kind, using or possessing firearms while the order is in effect, and in some cases for a period afterwards.
The reforms are designed to reduce the risk of firearms being used to perpetrate family and domestic violence. (ABC News: Sam Clark)
Previously, WA Police officers could be exempted from those requirements when it came to work-issued firearms.
Gun owners protest laws outside WA parliament
But in a submission to a parliamentary inquiry into the controversial legislation, their union said a number of officers had become desk-bound since the changes took effect, because they are subject to restraining orders — including interim orders.
Interim orders are attended only by the person applying for the restraining order, and take effect as soon as they are served before the subject of the order has had a chance to defend the allegations.
In 2022-23, more than two-thirds of all restraining order applications were for family violence restraining orders.
Around a quarter were for violence restraining orders.
The gun reforms have been backed by the head of the Centre for Women’s Safety and Wellbeing, Alison Evans, who said family violence restraining orders were granted when women and children’s lives were at risk and needed to be taken seriously.
“It’s not the responsibility of victim-survivors to fix a problem, if you like, in terms of resourcing for police on the ground,” she said.
Alison Evans said anyone seeking an interim order required immediate protection. (ABC News: Keane Bourke)
Ms Evans said orders responded to real risks and those applying for them needed to be believed and protected.
“If a victim-survivor says she needs an interim order, then she needs an interim order, and we must respond swiftly and make sure that that’s in place.”
‘A punitive device’
In the union’s submission, President Dave Flaherty agreed on the importance of protecting victim-survivors of family and domestic violence but argued the new laws would be weaponised.
Dave Flaherty said police officers are subject to strict firearm control measures.
 (ABC News: Keane Bourke)
He said the process could be used as a punitive device against police by “unscrupulous members of the community”.
“The officers have no recourse to challenge the proceedings and the firearms prohibition until a final hearing on the order, which sometimes is more than 12 months after the issue of the interim order.”
Mr Flaherty said he was also concerned officers could be fired as a result of having a restraining order taken out against them.
WA’s new firearms laws explained
At the time the submission was written in early July, Mr Flaherty said he was aware of “numerous officers”, both male and female, who had been affected.
“Concerningly, I’m aware that these problems have arisen frequently in regional, rural and remote areas — where operational and community demand are most acute and police are critically under-resourced,” he wrote.
“The union is not aware of a single case in which a firearm owned by [WA Police] has been used or threatened to be used by a police officer in circumstances outside of an officer’s lawful duties.”
Commissioner supports changes
Asked about the law change on Wednesday, Commissioner Col Blanch said he supported the changes to the law passed by parliament.
Col Blanch says officers subject to an interim restraining order will have an opportunity to defend themselves. (ABC News: Keane Bourke)
“The government has made laws to say this is all about public safety, protecting people in family violence situations, and I think it’s correct,” he told ABC Radio Perth.
“Now it will impact on those police officers going through that process, just like it will impact anyone else that has a licensed firearm for their employment.”
Commissioner Blanch rejected the union’s concerns about restraining orders being weaponised, saying officers would be stood aside while an interim order was on foot, and then had the opportunity to defend themselves before a final order was granted.
He said he was aware of three officers who were off duty as a result of restraining orders being taken out against them, but the union said it had heard from at least 15 officers in that position.
A state government spokesperson said all submissions would be fully considered as part of the parliamentary inquiry, which is due to report in mid-October.
A WA Police spokesperson said officers are subject to the same laws as everyone else. (ABC News: Kenith Png)
“The nation-leading reforms are designed to take guns out of the hands of serious offenders and reduce the risk of harm by preventing individuals with restraining orders from possessing or using firearms,” they said in a statement.
Mr Flaherty said one solution would be to allow the police commissioner discretion when an officer is handed a restraining order.
“If there are allegations made against a police officer, WA Police look into them in great detail,” he said.
“The commissioner would be well-placed to know if the officer is a risk or not.
“If there is a genuine need for a violence restraining order because of the adverse conduct of a police officer, you’d probably find they wouldn’t stay a police officer very long anyway.”
Loading