‘Misled’ and ‘irrelevant’? Farmers, shooters and gun advocatesclash over NSW cap

Farmers and firearm organisations have reacted angrily to NSW’s new firearms cap, warning that rushed changes made in Sydney risk undermining pest control and farm safety across New England and the North West. 

Under the law passed this week, most licence holders will be limited to four registered firearms, while primary producers and some professional shooters will be able to hold up to 10. The reforms are designed to tackle cases where individuals have amassed dozens or even hundreds of guns, and to close loopholes highlighted by the Bondi attack. 

Data released by NSW Police earlier this month shows more than 50 licence holders across the state own over 100 firearms each, with several holding close to 300. Tamworth’s 2340 postcode (covering the city and surrounding districts) has more than 18,000 registered firearms, the highest count for any postcode in NSW. 

In the New England and North West SA4 region, where agriculture dominates the economy and pest animals like pigs, foxes and deer are routine problems, farmers argue that raw numbers of guns tell only part of the story. 

‘Farmers have been misled’ 

NSW Farmers president Xavier Martin accused the government of ignoring farm realities as it rushed the legislation through parliament. 

“Farmers have been misled by the NSW Government” Mr Martin said, arguing that the law offered “generous capping exemptions for recreational shooters” but gave far less thought to primary producers who rely on firearms for pest management and animal welfare. 

The association has highlighted the way firearms are shared across family businesses, multi‑property operations and mixed enterprises. A contractor based in Gunnedah or Narrabri, for example, might legitimately hold different rifles and shotguns for crop protection, dogging, aerial culling support and humane destruction of livestock. 

The concern is not just the headline cap but how exemptions and transitional rules are written. NSW Farmers says it sought detailed briefings and was left frustrated by what it describes as limited engagement on a “critical issue for farmers”. 

Shooters say cap would not have stopped Bondi

Gun‑rights organisations have also taken aim at the reforms. Tom Kenyon, chief executive of the Sporting Shooters’ Association of Australia, told the ABC that simply limiting how many guns someone can lawfully own misses the point. 

“[Firearm] limits are irrelevant” he said, arguing that none of the changes proposed by the NSW Government would have prevented the Bondi terror attack. 

Mr Kenyon said shooters were particularly frustrated by what they see as minimal consultation with firearm associations and clubs before the package was unveiled. 

“We are not unaware of the urgency of the situation” he told the ABC but added that it was “very difficult to accept” the government was negotiating in good faith when key stakeholders found out about specifics via the media. 

The Sporting Shooters’ Association and other gun‑lobby groups are now mobilising members across NSW, including in the New England and North West, to campaign for amendments and to contest any move to make the cap even tighter in future. 

Gun‑safety advocates argue change is overdue 

Gun‑safety advocates and public‑health groups have welcomed the direction of the reforms but want NSW to go further. In the wake of the Bondi attack, Gun Control Australia vice‑president Tim Quinn said the tragedy exposed serious weaknesses in vetting and oversight. 

“Nobody feels safe today” he told SBS, pointing to gaps in licence assessment, firearms categorisation and information‑sharing between agencies 

The Australian Gun Safety Alliance, a coalition of health, community and victim‑support organisations, has argued that the number of guns per owner is now the more important indicator of risk than simple licence counts. Its ten‑point plan, backed by the NSW Greens, calls for tighter caps, stronger storage checks and the removal of recreational hunting as a “genuine reason” for a licence. 

Public‑health researchers note that even securely stored guns are sometimes stolen and that reducing the number of firearms per household decreases the chance that weapons will leak into the criminal market. 

New England’s day‑to‑day reality 

On farms from Walcha to Moree Plains, most firearms are work tools: a .22 for putting down stock, a centrefire rifle for kangaroos or pigs and a shotgun for foxes or crop‑raiding birds. Contractors and larger properties may have more varied collections. 

Service NSW’s existing rules already require licence holders to nominate a “genuine reason” such as primary production, vertebrate pest control, business use, sport/target shooting or collecting. Personal self‑defence is explicitly not accepted as a reason in NSW law.

The new laws do not change those categories but they will force some primary producers and contractors to rethink how firearms are owned and registered across business partners or family members. The state and federal governments have pledged a jointly funded buyback (around $300 million nationally) to remove newly prohibited weapons from circulation but the fine detail of how that will operate in regional areas is still being settled. 

A regional balancing act 

For New England and the North West, where agriculture remains the backbone of the economy and gun ownership rates are among the highest in NSW, the reform debate is not abstract. The question is whether the cap and related measures are calibrated to curb accumulation and close loopholes without undermining legitimate farm work or loading more red tape onto small communities. 

That balance will depend on detailed regulations, how generously exemptions are interpreted and whether local police commands in places like Tamworth, Armidale and Inverell use their expanded powers proportionately. A statutory review in two years will give farmers and shooters another chance to argue their case… but by then, any forced sell‑offs will already have reshaped gun ownership across the region.