Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: naturalman1975
The idea that you can't use a firearm for self defence is based on a misunderstanding of the rules that exist when you are required to provide a reason you want to own a firearm. If you put 'self defence' on that form, you'll be denied.

That pretty much says it all.

Also, how is someone supposed to use a gun for self defense if there are requirements that they be locked up at all times? Do they have to concoct lies in order to protect themselves? "I just happened to take my gun out of its locked safe, in preparation to go to the target shooting range, when, lo and behold, there was a criminal invading my home who I luckily was able to shoot in self defense. Not that that's a valid reason to possess a gun in Australia, of course."

My God! The intellectual somersaults required to justify basic human rights in collectivist authoritarian regimes are truly breathtaking.

The bottom line is, Australian subjects, like those of the rest of Europe, are utterly vulnerable to the whims of their rulers, whose governments apparently grant "privileges" rather than recognizing fundamental "rights".

Ultimately, it's a recipe for the creation of a police state, where peaceable citizens are subject to arbitrary prison terms for possessing rudimentary firearms which feature technology well over a century old.

Such phony notions of Freedom are essentially alien to Americans. It sure is nice to live in a country where rights are real, at least on paper.

Europe doesn't even have the paper anymore; and their governments' modern interpretation of human rights under the common law has become an absolute joke.

The submissiveness of the European mind is truly a thing to behold.

America, and Americans, remain exceptional, and we should be proud of that, rather than apologizing for it...

18 posted on 08/03/2015 9:38:31 PM PDT by sargon
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies ]


To: sargon
Also, how is someone supposed to use a gun for self defense if there are requirements that they be locked up at all times? Do they have to concoct lies in order to protect themselves? "I just happened to take my gun out of its locked safe, in preparation to go to the target shooting range, when, lo and behold, there was a criminal invading my home who I luckily was able to shoot in self defense. Not that that's a valid reason to possess a gun in Australia, of course."

Well, they don't have to be locked up at all times - that's an exaggeration, although it's closer to being true than I like. But the test that's applied is the reasonable person test.

If you shoot somebody who has broken into your house in the middle of the night, the police are unlikely to charge you unless you did something like shoot the person in the back. Because you can easily argue you felt under genuine threat.

The problem is this wrong idea that people don't have the right to defend themselves has actually caused people to get themselves into legal trouble. Because they did not understand the law and believed they had done something illegal, they've said things that have incriminated themselves. Under questioning, they've agreed they weren't legally justified because they did not realise they were.

If I ever shoot somebody in self defence, what I will say to the police is simple. "I was in fear of my life." That's what I need to say.

20 posted on 08/03/2015 10:41:55 PM PDT by naturalman1975 ("America was under attack. Australia was immediately there to help." - John Winston Howard)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson