Cortez
member
I thought it might interest US readers to know how self defence laws operate in Australia, so that if you ever decide to come here to stay, you won't get too big of a shock.
First up, the federal government and the individual state governments will not permit you to own a gun for self defence (unless you are a senior politician or a powerful businessman in which case, the laws are made "flexible" to cater for your needs - you won't find anything written in the Acts to cover this by the way).
Second, the various State laws, with one exception allow you to use "reasonable" force to protect yourself in the event you are attacked. The onus of proof that the force you used was reasonable is on you, the victim. Nowhere is there a definition of what constitutes "reasonable" force. It depends on how each judge interprets it.
What has become general practice in Australia is that, if for example, your home is invaded, the law will expect you to submit to whatever demands are made of you. If you do resist, you must only use force in direct proportion to the force being used against you. However that means that you are reacting all the time and implies that you can only kill an assailant if he kills you first - not a very satisfactory outcome.
If you harm an assailant in any way the chances are that he will sue you and the records shows that he will generally win his case, you will be fined or imprisoned and he will get off scot free - I kid you not.
The other alternative which the law encourages is, that if you can, you flee from the assailant. This assumes that you can and/or that there is no one else in the house that you need to protect.
The only state that permits a realistic type of self defence is New South Wales, which recently changed its laws to permit a householder to use whatever force he/she believes is necessary to protect thier lives. The onus of proof that the force used was excessive rests, in this state, with the prosecution.
Getting attacked on the streets in any state in Australia offers you very few alternatives. Usually attacks are by "packs" of youths, armed with knives, guns, baseball bats, iron bars, etc. Most such attacks result in the death or severe and permanent maiming of the victim. You are not permitted to carry anything that could be used as a weapon in your own self defence and that includes sprays, hat pins, etc. Your only hopes are that you are in company and can fight off such an attack or you can run away faster than them.
Going back to home invasions - if you are already a licensed firearm owner, the law requires that your firearm be locked in a substantial safe. The firing mechanism must be separated from the weapon and stored in a separate safe and ammunition for the firearm must be stored in a different storage facility again, a safe being the preferred option.
You don't have to be too bright to see that if your home is invaded and you use a firearm to defend yourself, then not only will you be in trouble for possibly using excessive force, you will also be charged under the relevant firearms act with various offences because there is no way you could get access to your weapon and have it in a usable condition unless it was already out of its secure storage and loaded, all of which is in contravention of the law.
It is also never a good idea to have some other form of self defence close at hand, such as a baseball bat or knife, or sword. As far as the court is concerned having such a weapon "on hand" constitutes "lying in wait" for an assailant and this too is against the law.
The result is that most home invasions, which are invariably carried out by more than one person these days, will see the occupants killed or severely injured and/or raped and the offenders are rarely, if ever caught.
So, why don't you drop down this way for a visit? As our latest tourist ad says, "So where the bloody hell are you?". The answer to that ought to be "somewhere safer than Australia".
Have fun.:banghead:
First up, the federal government and the individual state governments will not permit you to own a gun for self defence (unless you are a senior politician or a powerful businessman in which case, the laws are made "flexible" to cater for your needs - you won't find anything written in the Acts to cover this by the way).
Second, the various State laws, with one exception allow you to use "reasonable" force to protect yourself in the event you are attacked. The onus of proof that the force you used was reasonable is on you, the victim. Nowhere is there a definition of what constitutes "reasonable" force. It depends on how each judge interprets it.
What has become general practice in Australia is that, if for example, your home is invaded, the law will expect you to submit to whatever demands are made of you. If you do resist, you must only use force in direct proportion to the force being used against you. However that means that you are reacting all the time and implies that you can only kill an assailant if he kills you first - not a very satisfactory outcome.
If you harm an assailant in any way the chances are that he will sue you and the records shows that he will generally win his case, you will be fined or imprisoned and he will get off scot free - I kid you not.
The other alternative which the law encourages is, that if you can, you flee from the assailant. This assumes that you can and/or that there is no one else in the house that you need to protect.
The only state that permits a realistic type of self defence is New South Wales, which recently changed its laws to permit a householder to use whatever force he/she believes is necessary to protect thier lives. The onus of proof that the force used was excessive rests, in this state, with the prosecution.
Getting attacked on the streets in any state in Australia offers you very few alternatives. Usually attacks are by "packs" of youths, armed with knives, guns, baseball bats, iron bars, etc. Most such attacks result in the death or severe and permanent maiming of the victim. You are not permitted to carry anything that could be used as a weapon in your own self defence and that includes sprays, hat pins, etc. Your only hopes are that you are in company and can fight off such an attack or you can run away faster than them.
Going back to home invasions - if you are already a licensed firearm owner, the law requires that your firearm be locked in a substantial safe. The firing mechanism must be separated from the weapon and stored in a separate safe and ammunition for the firearm must be stored in a different storage facility again, a safe being the preferred option.
You don't have to be too bright to see that if your home is invaded and you use a firearm to defend yourself, then not only will you be in trouble for possibly using excessive force, you will also be charged under the relevant firearms act with various offences because there is no way you could get access to your weapon and have it in a usable condition unless it was already out of its secure storage and loaded, all of which is in contravention of the law.
It is also never a good idea to have some other form of self defence close at hand, such as a baseball bat or knife, or sword. As far as the court is concerned having such a weapon "on hand" constitutes "lying in wait" for an assailant and this too is against the law.
The result is that most home invasions, which are invariably carried out by more than one person these days, will see the occupants killed or severely injured and/or raped and the offenders are rarely, if ever caught.
So, why don't you drop down this way for a visit? As our latest tourist ad says, "So where the bloody hell are you?". The answer to that ought to be "somewhere safer than Australia".
Have fun.:banghead:
