2nd Amendment thread

What about self defense in general?
Someone breaks into your house at 2am, has a baseball bat, comes at you. Are you legally justified in shooting him?
 
  • Like
Reactions: David L
What about self defense in general?
Someone breaks into your house at 2am, has a baseball bat, comes at you. Are you legally justified in shooting him?

We can't own firearms for self defence. It's not a genuine reason. Professionals who need firearms, eg Police, correctives, cash in transit guards etc, can carry firearms for that purpose, but usually only whilst on duty. Most cops leave their firearm at work here. If they do take it home they have to comply with the same storage requirements as everyone else. Firearms are required to be secured in a safe unloaded with the ammunition in a separate, locked container. Violent home invasions in Australia are almost universally drug rips. If you do own firearms, there is no absolute prohibition on using them for self defence, however, if you do use them in self defence, standard Australian self defence law applies. You can even lawfully use an unlawfully owned firearm in self defence. That said there are penalties for the possession of illegal firearms. If you can't justify shooting the person at law, you may be looking at a murder/manslaughter charge. Our self defence laws are robust here, but you just can't kill people for no other reason than they are in your home. The response has to be reasonable and proportionate.

Some of you might be surprised to hear that Firearms are regulated at a state level and the laws are not federal, with the exception of border controls on imports, and that the National Firearms Agreement of 1996 was sponsored by John Howard, our conservative Prime Minister at the time. It followed the 1996 Port Arthur Massacre. Since then Australia has had only two mass shootings, and in both cases it was a domestic violence incident where a licensed shooter killed his whole family before turning the gun on himself.
 
The unsaid thing about all those laws is that they assume that everyone obeys the law. Criminals, for one group in particular, don't obey the law in the first place. That sort of negates the whole purpose of those laws.
 
The unsaid thing about all those laws is that they assume that everyone obeys the law. Criminals, for one group in particular, don't obey the law in the first place. That sort of negates the whole purpose of those laws.

That line gets trotted out quite a lot but even criminals find it difficult to get firearms in Australia, just on the basis of cost alone. Some junkie is just not going to be able to afford a gun to rob you with.


When a pistol costs 15 grand, you can imagine what an AR costs.

We also have a pretty good moat here which helps.
 
Yes, your "moat" helps a lot. Keep in mind, too, that there are many firearm manufacturers here. Most of the majors cater to governmental agencies but also "dabble" in the civilian market. On top of that is the Second Amendment. If you read that and read the thought line of the authors as well I think you'll see exactly why and how that was included in the Constitution and included right after the Free Speech clause. The clauses were listed in the order of importance that the authors found most important. I am not about to debate their intelligence and wisdom.
 
I really feel for the people in Australia after seeing their Gov't over powering their people during the Covid Lockdowns the past two years, though I may be wrong but something tells me that the police would not be so quick to storm into someone's house knowing they may have firearms to protect themselves.
 
We were over powered? Must have missed that. What news are you watching?

I don't watch the News, saw way too many videos from Australian's of what happened in your country. Next to Canada, I am not sure which country was worse in their Lockdowns...Of course China's last Lockdown cages were being placed around residents dwellings...
 
Last edited:
I don't watch the News, saw way too many videos from Australian's of what happened in your country.


All of those videos are from Melbourne Victoria and that isn't what happened in Australia, or Victoria, or even Melbourne on most days.

If you read that and read the thought line of the authors as well I think you'll see exactly why and how that was included in the Constitution and included right after the Free Speech clause.

I think one of the biggest difference in the attitude towards firearms stems from how we came to be free nations. The US was effectively born in the blood of the war of independence and I can absolutely see how the drafters of your constitution saw that a well regulated militia was essential to the security of a free state in the days before standing armies. Then you guys go and have a "civil" war. We became a country in 1901, not through blood but through the consent of of the people via referendum. And that's pretty much how we've done things since. We (all of us, voting is compulsory) vote for governments and they make laws. If we don't like it we vote in a different government. Our governments tend to be centrist because of that.
 
  • Like
Reactions: mat200
All of those videos are from Melbourne Victoria and that isn't what happened in Australia, or Victoria, or even Melbourne on most days.
Wow, sounds like the CNN "Mostly Peacefull Demonstrations" claims.
 
Wow, sounds like the CNN "Mostly Peacefull Demonstrations" claims.

Oh no those were proper riots with lots of OC and impact munitions. COVID response wasn't nationally homogeneous, or even homogenous within states or cities. Melbourne copped the worst of it. I think they took the gong for most locked down city in the world. The current state government down there leans left of centre and the locals call Dan Andrews, the Premier, Dictator Dan. There was a fairly concerted campaign of resitance down there, and those scenes were not replicated in the other states.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Ssayer and mat200
All of those videos are from Melbourne Victoria and that isn't what happened in Australia, or Victoria, or even Melbourne on most days.



I think one of the biggest difference in the attitude towards firearms stems from how we came to be free nations. The US was effectively born in the blood of the war of independence and I can absolutely see how the drafters of your constitution saw that a well regulated militia was essential to the security of a free state in the days before standing armies. Then you guys go and have a "civil" war. We became a country in 1901, not through blood but through the consent of of the people via referendum. And that's pretty much how we've done things since. We (all of us, voting is compulsory) vote for governments and they make laws. If we don't like it we vote in a different government. Our governments tend to be centrist because of that.
So where are these camps located? Just curious...


EDIT (Nevermind):



1658834063099.png
 
On the Australian political spectrum, I've always been centre right, and I despise wokeness, but, from my limited knowledge of US politics, I suspect I'd be labelled a bleeding heart communist.

I've always liked the respect and admiration most Americans had for their military and law enforcement, the people who go into harms way on their behalf, and I always liked how people backed the men and women of those organisations, even when they didn't personally believe that they were being asked to do the right thing at that point in time by their political masters. An organisation can't become corrupt, unless the people in it are corrupt, and it saddens me that your law enforment officers appear to be copping it from all sides now. and they have to try to do their job in an environment where they have been written off before they even turn up.

I could post these type of stories daily, at least weekly, about the corruption in the Federal Bureau of Incompetence

 
All of those videos are from Melbourne Victoria and that isn't what happened in Australia, or Victoria, or even Melbourne on most days.



I think one of the biggest difference in the attitude towards firearms stems from how we came to be free nations. The US was effectively born in the blood of the war of independence and I can absolutely see how the drafters of your constitution saw that a well regulated militia was essential to the security of a free state in the days before standing armies. Then you guys go and have a "civil" war. We became a country in 1901, not through blood but through the consent of of the people via referendum. And that's pretty much how we've done things since. We (all of us, voting is compulsory) vote for governments and they make laws. If we don't like it we vote in a different government. Our governments tend to be centrist because of that.

Great points @SyconsciousAu

I believe Britain learned better how to control the Penal Colonists after the American Rebellion .. sometimes just a fraction more power can make a significant difference.

For the USA, France was a key part of the path to Freedom in addition to a successful rebellion.
 
We can't own firearms for self defence. It's not a genuine reason. Professionals who need firearms, eg Police, correctives, cash in transit guards etc, can carry firearms for that purpose, but usually only whilst on duty. Most cops leave their firearm at work here. If they do take it home they have to comply with the same storage requirements as everyone else. Firearms are required to be secured in a safe unloaded with the ammunition in a separate, locked container. Violent home invasions in Australia are almost universally drug rips. If you do own firearms, there is no absolute prohibition on using them for self defence, however, if you do use them in self defence, standard Australian self defence law applies. You can even lawfully use an unlawfully owned firearm in self defence. That said there are penalties for the possession of illegal firearms. If you can't justify shooting the person at law, you may be looking at a murder/manslaughter charge. Our self defence laws are robust here, but you just can't kill people for no other reason than they are in your home. The response has to be reasonable and proportionate.

Some of you might be surprised to hear that Firearms are regulated at a state level and the laws are not federal, with the exception of border controls on imports, and that the National Firearms Agreement of 1996 was sponsored by John Howard, our conservative Prime Minister at the time. It followed the 1996 Port Arthur Massacre. Since then Australia has had only two mass shootings, and in both cases it was a domestic violence incident where a licensed shooter killed his whole family before turning the gun on himself.

What about owning and using a speargun for home defense? It's not a firearm.