Castle Doctrine

[Chunder]

Note, I don't have any firearm's and unless I move somewhere in the country probably wont get any (unless I took up target shooting). And for those who read my location, I live in on campus at university, so no "weapons" of any sort allowed.

I have (one) for pest eradication.

Of course since firearms have to be stored in a locked gun safe with the ammunition stored in a separate locked container, you are unlikely to have one to hand anyway, unless you had it out for whatever reason.

Use of a gun to kill someone is really still debatable and up for murder if you have the wrong background. Licenses are not given for self defence, and the time in which it takes to get one ready for use - one could be up for premeditated murder. Even under the most extreme situations, and the DPP is only really susceptable to 'lynch opinion' i.e stand out cases where charges are down graded.

Police run random checks on fire arms storage, if you are caught improperly storing firearms you lose your license, the firearms are confiscated and you either get a fine of several thousand dollar's or go to prison.

Thats all correct, if you add the pre-fix "Can Be". Police are extremely irregular in their enforcement of firearms law - to the point it is an absolute farce and full of prejudice. What is the real shame is that is litterally the difference between a criminal conviction, or not.


The law doesn't even work, because it makes more issues than it solves.
Removing the potential from someones life to advance is the most draconian measure apart from prison that a government can make. (This is supposed to be Australia, fair go, benefit of the doub etc). Remember that case I told you about. I was speaking to a lady today who said her elderly father in law got told to get rid of the gun or get a gun safe. Thats a far cry from this other fella, the more and more I chat about this one particular case the more & more I come to the conclusion that the laws were made not for public safety, but to look good to the public. As such it's open to broad interpretation and an bad police officer.

Edit: 10 years after the new laws there are still people finding gun's in wall's and roof's in houses. :D

The Police won't even speculate how many guns remain out there that are unregistered, nor would be willing to enforce it. As long as the state treats record - free citizens as criminals on the whim of a police officer at the ignorance of the public, Australia can't even begin to take the informed high road.

I wouldn't use my gun as self defence anyway. It's a .22 rimfire rifle scoped, bolt action with no iron sights. It's in no position at all to be accessed at all easily anyrate, if it was it would be more of a hindrance than a use. I have no love for handguns, and none for automatics. allthough I wouldn't mind trying the latter stateside.

[StevoJH]

I have (one) for pest eradication.

And you didn't like the picture of the car I wanted. :(

Use of a gun to kill someone is really still debatable and up for murder if you have the wrong background. Licenses are not given for self defence, and the time in which it takes to get one ready for use - one could be up for premeditated murder. Even under the most extreme situations, and the DPP is only really susceptable to 'lynch opinion' i.e stand out cases where charges are down graded.

True, in the time needed to unlock two safes, load a firearm and ready it for firearm, would definately bee some sort of premeditation. On the other hand, picking up the cricket bat leaning up against the wall from the last time you played cricket and thumping the intruder over the head?

Thats all correct, if you add the pre-fix "Can Be". Police are extremely irregular in their enforcement of firearms law - to the point it is an absolute farce and full of prejudice. What is the real shame is that is litterally the difference between a criminal conviction, or not.


The law doesn't even work, because it makes more issues than it solves.
Removing the potential from someones life to advance is the most draconian measure apart from prison that a government can make. (This is supposed to be Australia, fair go, benefit of the doub etc. Remember that case I told you about. I was speaking to a lady today who said her elderly father in law got told to get rid of the gun or get a gun safe. Thats a far cry from this other fella.

Its not what you know, its who you know, and who you talk to. Not gun related, but centrelink are an absolute shocker, one person will tell you one thing, the next person you speak to will tell you the opposite.

The Police won't even speculate how many guns remain out there that are unregistered, nor would be willing to enforce it. As long as the state treats record - free citizens as criminals on the whim of a police officer at the ignorance of the public, Australia can't even begin to take the informed high road.

And then you have old mate with a lathe, or who owns an engineering business who could make something like a sten gun if he felt like it anyway.

[Chunder]

Re- Self defence. The right to equal & opposite force has always seemed to me to be one of the misnomers an informed society like Australia's clutch dearly to...

You, being woken in the middle of the night to a violent home invasion, you have no real way to get yourself out of the situation apart from complete submission. Expecting yourself, let alone your family to be able to defend oneself against a potentially hardened criminal, or someone on 9 minutes of adrenalin speed - is naive, and stupid - regardless of any adrenalin you might be able to summon. The consequences of you stuffing up mean you stand good chance of enraging the invader - and getting yourself seriously hurt. They further do not take into account the mental stability of an intruder. My neighbor got stabbed almost to death on his front doorstep several years ago, about 10 meters from mine.

The best thing in Australia is if you have a family, however society might want to avoid it, is to lay face down, hands behind your head if you can't afford the security screens necessary to protect your abode - and teach the kids to run away. Fighting back might get you some valor in the local newspaper - but your likely to become a statistic.

The most the media is going to say is 'a violent home invasion occured in x suburb last night, A Man has been admitted to x hospital and is currently in x condition'.

Now of course If the option were available to me, if the law allowed for self defence... As I have a 22. Rimfire I'd be down the other end of the hall, letting the guy know I had a gun is most important. Presuming I could make it to the end of the hall. Bolt action magazine fed I'd only rely on one shot in poorly lit conditions, so it's a shoot to the golden noggin.
Shotgun , or another large callibre it's a shoot to injure. TTYTT I don't beleive I would be so lucky to get to the gun in the first instance.

[StevoJH]

My grandparent's place in Tamworth is built like a fortress. Bars on all the windows, security doors outside all the normal doors. Gates are all padlocked etc.

No one is getting inside there in a hurry.

[Chunder]

And you didn't like the picture of the car I wanted. :(

Gimme a break, I hate cars, I really really do. Do you know what, the other door handle gave up this week, and now the flexiglass thing at the back won't open because the lock has shit itself. I was just venting steam. two weeks ago I lent it to someone it came back without an exhaust and a scrape along the drivers side...

True, in the time needed to unlock two safes, load a firearm and ready it for firearm, would definately bee some sort of premeditation. On the other hand, picking up the cricket bat leaning up against the wall from the last time you played cricket and thumping the intruder over the head?

Depends on how many tiems you repeatedly stuck him. Being afraid of your life in close contact is more defensible in court (and shows a lot more emotionally as well) The Jury will beleive you... Besides, the criket bat was beside your other sporting gear ready at hand :)...

Its not what you know, its who you know, and who you talk to. Not gun related, but centrelink are an absolute shocker, one person will tell you one thing, the next person you speak to will tell you the opposite.

Aye to that. Hey Im open I don't get too bad about the issue, but I know second & first hand how bad and unflexible the law is (Edit: or open ended, bias, and highly subjective), and it friggin stinks. IMO it only passes muster because most Australians don't own a gun and aren't subject to the network of information that gets passed around the traps in relation to laws. I do think that people with no record have a right to access - its the reward for being a good citizen. I do however think the way it is policed is borderline criminal.

And then you have old mate with a lathe, or who owns an engineering business who could make something like a sten gun if he felt like it anyway.

Last month a guy on the Eyre Peninsula injured someone with a home made bolt gun, before committing to suicide with the same weapon.

I have a healthy mistrust and skeptisism for peoples intentions. The thought of someone in my home spooks me no end, I have absolutely no control over their intentions and at best 50/50 with diminishing odds as numbers increase. I don't want to be in prison. I thisnk it sucks that I've been in more violent situations that a lot of people by nature of my 2nd job, to know well enough that it's the one you didn't see that sends you to hospital, and the best way is fast, hard and direct if you can't use body language and small talk first. None of which is available to you in the middle of the night. Intentions of clost contact a built more on ego than what many would rather admit. Have a lock on your bedroom door.

Did had to laugh about that stupid douche down on the coast there that broke into a house, cut himself on the window pain and bled to death before the cops arrived.

Another one last year I think, some kid from a private school broke into to the Adelaide zoo to steal small change one night. On attempting get away he slipped and impaled himself on the main entrance gate and died right there infront of his mates and police. Now the gate has a plastic sheath going over the gates so criminals can't kill themselves by accident...

What a friggin joke!

[StevoJH]

Gimme a break, I hate cars, I really really do. Do you know what, the other door handle gave up this week, and now the flexiglass thing at the back won't open because the lock has shit itself. I was just venting steam. two weeks ago I lent it to someone it came back without an exhaust and a scrape along the drivers side...

Ouch, I assume that person won't be borrowing anything you own again.

Depends on how many tiems you repeatedly stuck him. Being afraid of your life in close contact is more defensible in court (and shows a lot more emotionally as well) The Jury will beleive you... Besides, the criket bat was beside your other sporting gear ready at hand :)...

Yup, its all subjective.

Aye to that. Hey Im open I don't get too bad about the issue, but I know second & first hand how bad and unflexible the law is (Edit: or open ended, bias, and highly subjective), and it friggin stinks. IMO it only passes muster because most Australians don't own a gun and aren't subject to the network of information that gets passed around the traps in relation to laws. I do think that people with no record have a right to access - its the reward for being a good citizen. I do however think the way it is policed is borderline criminal.

More then you'd think, if wiki is to be believed (looking for a beauro of stats number) then roughly 795,000 australian's have firearms licenses. Thats roughly three and a half percent, a minority yes, but how many of those have more then one firearm?

Last month a guy on the Eyre Peninsula injured someone with a home made bolt gun, before committing to suicide with the same weapon.

What did he expect to happen when it was pointed at someone and he pulled the trigger?

I have a healthy mistrust and skeptisism for peoples intentions. The thought of someone in my home spooks me no end, I have absolutely no control over their intentions and at best 50/50 with diminishing odds as numbers increase. I don't want to be in prison. I thisnk it sucks that I've been in more violent situations that a lot of people by nature of my 2nd job, to know well enough that it's the one you didn't see that sends you to hospital, and the best way is fast, hard and direct if you can't use body language and small talk first. None of which is available to you in the middle of the night. Intentions of clost contact a built more on ego than what many would rather admit. Have a lock on your bedroom door.

Life sucks when you options are "risk death" and "risk gaol". Though I have to admit I know which one i'd choose.

Did had to laugh about that stupid douche down on the coast there that broke into a house, cut himself on the window pain and bled to death before the cops arrived.

Serves him right.

Another one last year I think, some kid from a private school broke into to the Adelaide zoo to steal small change one night. On attempting get away he slipped and impaled himself on the main entrance gate and died right there infront of his mates and police. Now the gate has a plastic sheath going over the gates so criminals can't kill themselves by accident...

What a friggin joke!

Bring back the Razor Wire!!

[gunnut]

My grandparent's place in Tamworth is built like a fortress. Bars on all the windows, security doors outside all the normal doors. Gates are all padlocked etc.

No one is getting inside there in a hurry.

That is pretty sad. I remember places like that in Taiwan. Over here you see these dwellings in urban slums. I have friends who grew up here pretty much with front door open all day and unlocked cars.

[captain]

That is pretty sad. I remember places like that in Taiwan. Over here you see these dwellings in urban slums. I have friends who grew up here pretty much with front door open all day and unlocked cars.

Yes, it is sad.
I grew up on the land and our home was never locked, even if every one had gone to town for the day for supplies.
On hot summer nights, before a/c became standard, we slept with all the doors and windows wide open to catch any breeze.
We never had any problem misplacing keys to any of the property's vehicles because the keys were never removed from the ignition.
The firearms were in an unlocked gun rack in the laundary and ammo in the cupboard underneath.

People that lived in the towns did exactly the same.

So yes, it is a sad state of affairs where we now have this fortress mentality and fall over ourselves to allow more rules and regulations that govern our lives, just to make a safer world of course.

One of the reasons I still live in the country is that rural communities still try to maintain that cohesivness and standards that permit to some extent, people to go about their daily life without being afraid of shadows.

How we as societies could reverse the current trends to fortress mentality is a question worth considering but the solution will not be easy.

Cheers.

[Chunder]

More then you'd think, if wiki is to be believed (looking for a beauro of stats number) then roughly 795,000 australian's have firearms licenses. Thats roughly three and a half percent, a minority yes, but how many of those have more then one firearm?

The point I am trying to make is that if more people had a firearm, including prominent people, and were subject to the inconsistencies in the law itself, there would be outrage. Criminal charges are very serious, yet all it takes is the officer not to like the look of someone, or not get any nookie the night before - to take someones livlihood away.

It's critical that those not versed with firearms not be allowed to make the laws for them - and this is exactly what has not happened. When a person gets lobbed with a criminal charge (I really have to post some case notes up on this one) They initially should go to a lawyer, who reads the act if they are not versed in it - then tells you how serious it is. To the average person (and too myself) A gun is nothing more than another tool, which I barely use, and think nothing of. (Another one is dynamite - or gelignite - later PE, we used to use that quite frequently too. we'll get into that later & I promise I'll get off my ass and post some stats pre 1996 and trends).

To the average Joe, who has a gun, whoose dad had a gun, whoose dad's dad had a gun when it becomes apparent what he has been charged with, (and especially if he becomes aware of discrepancies) His automatic reaction is "I do not deserve to be charged like a criminal". They begin to resent the system. This is the fundamental problem of anti-firearms advocates. They don't realise this, they impose harsh conditions on honest people, and are genuinely not interested in the consequences at all. In the vast majority such people have never been responsible for any crime at all - Getting a gun is only thought of a process - not one you have to kiss ass for. Sure the catch cry might be theres no right to bear arms in Australia, but it's fundamentally ignorant that everyone has the right of fair & transparent process - and thats not what is afforded to firearms owners should they be in breach of an uncompromising act They do NOT get any fair and transparent treatment in relation to licensing specifically the security and investigations licensing act and regulations 1996 - automatic suspension, without any recourse whatsoever. Either the officer has to exercise Common sence i.e break the law - or enforce it.

Several years ago, Gramps produced his fathers WW1 service revolver. He was an officer (acting captain) on the Western Front, got shot in the leg, returned home after the war. Never spoke of the war, said it was too terrible and nobody would want to know. Whats special about it is three things - it's an officers revolver, the fact it saw the things he did, and the fact that you don't take home firearms from active service anymore. Let alone a personal momento of the family history.

In otherwords priceless. What happened to the revolver? Guess - in the name of tough on guns...

What did he expect to happen when it was pointed at someone and he pulled the trigger?

He intended to kill the guy. Forwhatever reason he missed the job proper, but did not fail on himself.



We used to use a lot of explosives in drilling. We did so because of the random rock formations which we would have to deal with - but not worth the while of spending 200G on a specialist rig. You can still get an explosives license, but it costs far too much and you have to use detonator wires etc. Furthermore your storage requirements have to be rediculous.

So now, we just charge the customer 8 times the price to drill the same hole... If they complain, we told them how it is. They Never have went to get somoene else when they looked at the price. I suppose some bright spark thought 'well its inevitable that someone will blow up something and cost hundreds of lives'. Since 9/11 it's got even worse. Somewhere in amoungst it all someones lost the plot that society is becomming more hitlarised in the name of public safety. Like Captain / Gun nut, the 4.10 used to be stored behind the filing cabinet next too the back door. The house never used to get locked....


Heres an excerpt from the Age- Note the date.

More than 5,000 guns handed in amnesty
April 5, 2009
Ads by Google
Learn to Trade CFDs



Owners of more than 5,000 firearms previously unknown to NSW police have come forward during the first month of the state government's gun amnesty.


Police Minister Tony Kelly says 796 firearms have been surrendered in the first month of the amnesty, with applications also taken out to register 5,000 weapons.

The surrendered guns include 606 rifles, 49 handguns, 141 shotguns and 11 replica firearms.

"The police now know where those guns are," Mr Kelly told reporters on Sunday.

"They were guns that were in the community, not necessarily held by criminals, but by people who had come by the guns and not got around to registering them in the past."

However, Mr Kelly doesn't expect anyone involved in crime to be among those coming forward to surrender or register guns during the three-month amnesty.

"I'd expect none, if any, have come from hardened criminals," he said.

Can you see the discrepancies in the article, vs the law? It's full of them. the Owners of these 5000 guns had the right to be treated as criminals, without the amnesty - thats why amnesty is provided.

"The police now know where those guns are," Mr Kelly told reporters on Sunday."
Why do they need to know where these guns are? What MR Kelly isn't saying is that he probably never even knew that these guns were out there - sure they knew there were guns out there, but 'these guns' indicates serial numbered guns. I.E they specifically knew that gun was in society, they just didn't know where - I hardly think so Mr Kelly - I think your trying to create to wrong impression of an 'all knowing' police force.

"They were guns that were in the community, not necessarily held by criminals, but by people who had come by the guns and not got around to registering them in the past."
No but the act treated them as such you moron! But it gets even more interesting because then theres this:

However, Mr Kelly doesn't expect anyone involved in crime to be among those coming forward to surrender or register guns during the three-month amnesty.

"I'd expect none, if any, have come from hardened criminals," he said.

It might not be Mr Kelly, so much as the reporter. But what have you got to say about those people who did not come foward in previous amnesties, that did in this one? Were they criminals too? Obviously - because the act treats them as such...

For the record the NSW police are now saying they won't hold any more amnesties, because the previous one cost them 10 million to run, and it's simply too expensive. So I suppose those who didn't come foward will just have to treated as criminals.

Thirteen years after Port Arthur - un-freakin beleivable!

[antimony]

Fully support

And I am glad that the State of Washington sees it the way I do...

[StevoJH]

That is pretty sad. I remember places like that in Taiwan. Over here you see these dwellings in urban slums. I have friends who grew up here pretty much with front door open all day and unlocked cars.

They are in their 80's and used to be away travelling a lot. My Grandpa gave his rifles to my uncle who used to hunt roo's (who was a policeman) and he had to hand them in in 1996, always wondered what they were, but never wanted to ask. ;)

[Station 22]

Y'all need to visit the rural South. I have no idea how many weapons are owned by me and just my next three neighbors. The number is probably at least 20, given what I have either seen or heard them speak of. I have 7, ranging from a Japanese Model 99 my grandfather brought back from the war, to an SKS, with several handguns and other long guns thrown in for good measure. You will see this repeated all over.

It was not uncommon, when I was a boy, for gun owners to have their weapons displayed in glass-front cabinets in the living rooms of the house. You don't see that much anymore, mainly because it invites burglaries, so they armaments are usually kept in a gun safe now.

We view weapons as you would any other tool. We grow up around them and learn to treat them with respect and handle them in an appropriate manner from an early age. We value life and take great consideration when pulling a weapon out to protect ourselves, because, while we do value life, we value ours and our friends and family more than we do some miscreant who may to do us harm and has the means to do so.

[Shamus]

We view weapons as you would any other tool. We grow up around them and learn to treat them with respect and handle them in an appropriate manner from an early age. We value life and take great consideration when pulling a weapon out to protect ourselves, because, while we do value life, we value ours and our friends and family more than we do some miscreant who may to do us harm and has the means to do so.

You hit the nail squarely on the head with this,excellent post Station.

[Station 22]

Thank you, Shamus.

It is interesting that while the gun control advocates (liberals) scream and holler about the "gun culture" in the South, the fail to realize who it is that kill each other regularly in this part of the country - their very own supporters. I invite you go to the United States Department of Justice website and see what small category of individuals commit the vast majority of murders in the Southern United States. In in some cities, this group commits 100% of the murders in a given area, year after year after year.

Yet it is people such as myself who are regularly ridiculed and cited as a danger to society because I sometimes carry a concealed weapon in public *gasp* and teach my children how to handle firearms. Yet it is notable that the only time that I or any of my friends and family have resorted to making their intentions plain to another individual is when we were defending ourselves from that other individual, who was intent on depriving us of our possessions and/or our life. I have no compunction against planting 6 in the 10-ring, if it is to protect my wife and daughters.

I have worked hard to obtain the standard of living that my family enjoys. I do not intend to do anything that would jeopardize what I have worked for by participating a criminal act, nor do I intend to allow some miscreant to take what I have labored for. We live a good distance from the nearest city and have to rely on the sheriff's department for our law enforcement. No matter how dedicated they are (and we are blessed with good men in the department), they are still 15-20 minutes away most of the time. The thugs know that most of us are armed out here, they tend to leave us alone.

[Blue]

In reference to the castle doctrine in Missouri(pron Misery)

Our laws says that, whether in the home or otherwise(CCW) you cannot use deadly force to protect property. You may only use it to protect life. This still leaves a broad spectrum of justified uses of deadly force. However, our castle doctrine clearly states, we do not have to attempt to retreat to defend ourselves anywhere, on our property or otherwise. We stand our ground wherever we feel we can do it. There is no legal duty to retreat anywhere.

It is perhaps the only thing I like about my state of residence and birth!