Posted on 12/15/2014 3:05:39 PM PST by naturalman1975
THE manager of the Lindt cafe who was fatally shot in the Martin Place siege is being praised as a hero, responsible for allowing others trapped in the cafe to escape.
Tori Johnson, 34, was wrestling a gun from gunman Man Haron Monis when he was killed.
It is understood the cafe manager decided to take action when the hostage-taker begun to doze off after the siege had been ongoing for 17 hours.
He lunged at the gunman’s weapon, enabling others to flee.
(Excerpt) Read more at news.com.au ...
Thanks for keeping the world up to date, naturalman.
We appreciate it.
No honest citizen should ever be denied the right of effective self defense. It is act of tyranny to even contemplate it!
When will the world be rid of this filth called Islam? Hasn’t the world had enough?
How did the rescue by police go so badly?
Or they could have helped him, and maybe he wouldn't have died.
At the moment, I can’t see any real indication the rescue did go badly.
That all needs to be examined - but they got most of the hostages out alive. And the two who were killed may have been dead before the police got into the room.
Meanwhile back in America, the DemonRats are outraged that the CIA splashed water terrorists faces and their DemonRat leader releases more terrorists to live another day to plot more killings of Americans.
From these reports, this man died defending himself.
I think Australia's gun laws are a travesty and I think SWAMPSNIPER is on the money when a few posts after yours, he refers to 'effective self defense' because a gun in the right hands makes it a lot easier to defend against a gun in the wrong hands - but, please, don't make the mistake of assuming being unarmed, means a person doesn't have the right to defend themselves. Mr Johnson did have that right under Australian law, under common law. He may not have had the means, but he had the right.
And as there are people who would like even that right taken away, I think the distinction is important.
why a desert. Put them on a ship than sink it so they can feed the sharks. Boy would the Muslim world scream. Tough teaty should be the response, as your countries’ leadership refuses to deal with the radical muzzie problem we encourage all Muzzies to recant their faith failure to do so off with their heads. The world would be less populated and there would be no need for oil problems.
Danged Straight!
When ever there are terrorists, all red-blooded males should all simultaneously rush them.
They can’t kill all of us. And someone will take them down.
There’s a field in Shanksville, PA that should teach each of us that lesson.
Are you conversant with gun laws in NZ? A friend there says he may own a gun, but cannot use it in self-defense. That sounds crazy.
You are on to something. What if FR commissioned the crafting of an appropriate medal, and the process of nominating and adjudicating candidates of Counter Jihadist Heroes?
Spot on Talisker That poor girl stood up to evil in protecting another - it takes just as much bravery to do what she did!
God rest their souls. Prayers for their families.
Without the means the right is nothing but empty rhetoric.
Reasonably conversant - and it comes down to some fine distinctions.
New Zealand has the same common law we have in Australia. And the common law of self defence says that a person may use reasonable force in self defence. And if the person is in fear or their life or of serious injury, any level of force is reasonable, including deadly force, and the use of any weapon.
So if you have a gun, and you find yourself in a situation where you honestly believe you (or another innocent person) is at risk of death or serious injury, you may certainly use the gun.
Because that is common law (that dates back centuries) most Commonwealth countries (like the UK, Australia, and New Zealand) do not expressly have laws that say you can use a gun for self defence - because they are redundant. Common law already gives you that right. That distinction is used to say that a person does not have an automatic right to carry a weapon for self defence - basically the argument is "just because you have the right to self defence, that doesn't mean we have to let you carry a gun" but if you do have one, you can use it if you need to.
You'd better be ready though to stand up in court and explain to the jury why you felt the situation was dangerous enough to use that gun. And you can't use it in a less serious situation (I could not shoot somebody who was robbing my house unless I could also explain why I felt I was in danger - if I did feel in danger, I could shoot them, but I would do it because of the threat, not the robbery (the level of force allowed to simply stop a crime is lower).
It sounds more complicated than it is in practice. In most cases, if a person shoots somebody in self defence they are in the clear. But you do get occasional cases like that of Tony Martin in the UK, where he was found to have committed a crime - mainly because he agreed during his interview with police that he didn't feel under threat (which is why you don't answer questions until you have a lawyer next to you) and because the perpetrator was running away.
Heaven knows Old Ben is no expert, but I’d say it went pretty well.
Losing two but saving the rest.
Australia is perfectly setup to deal with the problem, having a long 36,000 km border. Makes deportation easy. Move muslim to the border, and give a push to the other side. A few hundred feet will do in most cases. If the muslim gets hungry, there's plenty of seafood.
No - it isn’t.
People defend themselves against crimes every day without weapons. A weapon makes it easier and I do think people should be allowed to have them to defend themselves, but it’s a different right from that of pure self defence.
I’ve stopped two violent crimes in the last five years without using a weapon. In one case, I had one available, but I didn’t need that level of force to deal with the situation. In the other I wish I had been wearing my sidearm, because that one was much more potentially serious, but I still got the person down and restrained without one.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.