So where are your examples I asked for, Individual?
Suseonline,
Are you for real ? Haven't you got any clue at all ?

Do you think her question do not matter?
Belly,
No, they're too stupid & don't warrant reply. If you think my points were wrong you'd better read them again.

Victims are forced to defend themselves again & again because the Law is not for them. Just take an interest in such cases & you'll see what I'm on about & when you eventually get tell Suseonline.

Lexi,

You are silent on the import of Suseonline's last sentence,

Suseonline: "It's because of people like you that we have the laws we have, Individual..."

Coming at the end that directs the offensive slurs at Individual, wouldn't you agree?

Lexi I had a different finding from reading that post.

I think both Individual and Suseonline are both quite happy dishing it out, my interest is in what was in my view a seriously biased reprimand of Individual whilst ignoring Suseonline's opening gambit.

Individual, whilst I share some of your perceptions about legal risks associated with defending yourself and or stepping in to help someone else I can't claim that I could back that up with a clear set of evidence. Hard to separate out the background noise from the actual evidence without more facts than I have on hand. Others may be able to contribute better material but as a start I thought I'd have a look to see what I could find.

This one appears to be British but some interesting examples at
http://www.lawteacher.net/criminal-law/cases/self-defence.php

Some Australian content at http://www.ask.com/wiki/Self-defence_%28Australia%29?o=2802&qsrc=999

Some material seemingly from the Victorian Crimes act at http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/legis/vic/consol_act/ca195882/

Queensland material, see the low 270's for self defence related material http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/legis/qld/consol_act/cc189994/

The overriding impression is that much of it is very subjective, even if innocent it may require a trial to prove that innocence.

There appears to be an assumption that most of have the resources to mount legal defence against charges when the reality is that for most the financial and personal impact could be devastating.

For many the cost of being found innocent at trial could be lifelong financial ruin with possible marriage breakdowns, loss of employment etc. along the way.

R0bert

Thanks again Lexi and Belly.
I fling off a response to an obviously vigilante-style rant by Individual this morning, then I come home after a long day at work to find all this controversy!

Always nice to hear from the charming Constance, by the way.
Any thoughts on the subject of the thread?

As it happens, I was reacting to an obviously aggressive approach to crime control by Individual.
I simply do not believe in anyone taking the law into their own hands, as Individual advocates.

I was pointing out that it is because of would-be lawless people that the original laws and criminal punishments were enacted by our forefathers originally, and later by our Parliaments.

I may not always agree with some obviously lenient punishments at times either, but am not in full possession of all the facts of each case, like the juries in the courts were...and neither was anyone else.

I seem to cause a flurry of rants whenever I post these days, I must be very popular!

The day of the 'vigilante' is fast approaching. With the repeal of the
'Vagrancy Act'
'Street Offenses Act'
'Consorting Act'
'Truancy Act'
and the implementation of the
'Bail Act'
'Juvenile Justice Act'
and the adoption of ' International and United Nations Conventions' on
'Human Rights
'Children'
'Refugees'
Left wing government under people like Whitlem and Hawke effectively destroyed Australia's ability to manage crime and social disobedience.

Chrisgaffe1000 talks about all those 'acts' that he/she thinks have ruined the criminal justice system in Australia.

And yet, here we are Chris, living in arguably the best country in the world.
One that many people in other countries strive to emigrate to.
Wouldn't you agree?