"Do you doubt that some people in Australia may live in fear of being attacked by packs of dogs?"

What's the evidence? Why are the attack dogs not culled by rangers that can use guns under current laws? Why are rednecks allowed to own attack dogs and let them loose? Why should all Australians have to live in fear of the far greater likelihood of being gunned down if the annual pre-Howard massacres are restored? If the gun freaks want the power to kill at a distance why not suggest referenda to decide if the Australian people really want gun anarchy - and be prepared to respect the result? Answer?

What are the chances of a gun toting granny being attacked by a marauding pack of rabid Pomeranian's on a Tuesday, during a thunder storm? Obviously given this very common occurrence there is absolutely no need for gun laws.

Come, come, Is Mise, your comment on that crazy old bloke in the US was a weak cop out, of cause it is relevant. You support the arming of old farts in society.

History, until 1934 it was legal in the US to purchase a 'Thompson' sub-machine gun, usually from a hardware store for $200. The Thompson was marketed as the ideal weapon to protect your property! It was also a favorite of the Chicago Mob led by Al Capone. The founding father of The Shooters Party in the US. Is Mise would you recommend it for that granny of yours?

Julian et Paul,

"Seven dogs believed to have attacked and killed a Kimberley teenager have been destroyed.

The 18-year-old woman was found dead in the backyard of a house in Fitzroy Crossing on Saturday afternoon.

Senior Sergeant Andrew Stephens said that while she had been mauled by dogs, it was not clear whether that had caused her death.

"Unfortunately this young girl was found deceased, and she'd received injuries which were consistent with dog bite wounds, " he said.

"But at this stage the cause of her death has not been determined."
http://www.abc.net.au/news/2015-03-16/dogs-believed-to-attack-kill-fitzroy-teen-euthanised/6323666
These were Aboriginal dogs, ordinary folk in Fitzroy Crossing are only allowed to own a maximum of two dogs but the local Aboriginal community can own as many as they like and some like to own a lot.

"The peculiar circumstances that exempt Kurnangki from dog safety rules that apply on the other side of the highway at Fitzroy Crossing are now likely to be examined by the WA Coroner as part of her inquiry. Residents of the Aboriginal community can have as many dogs as they wish, while residents of the gazetted part of the town a few metres away may only have two each.

Shire rangers who see dog packs roaming wild at Kurnangki have to drive by. The camp at Fitzroy Crossing is an Aboriginal community, which means the council by-laws do not apply there. Rangers need an invitation to go there and they know from experience that if they act without that authority — as a ranger did at a nearby community a few years ago by destroying rogue dogs — they can be barred from entry. “We are powerless to do anything,” says Derby-West Kimberley shire president Elsia Archer. “It’s something that people have been concerned about for a long time but because of the different laws in the communities you can’t make people do anything. It has to be voluntary.

“If a dog bites someone here in town, you would have a ranger round there right away and the dog would be destroyed, but that can’t happen on communities.” ".
http://www.theaustralian.com.au/national-affairs/state-politics/kimberley-locals-powerless-to-deal-with-killer-dogs/story-e6frgczx-1227288505977

Paul,

Indeed three cheers for Mark Pearson, admittedly another S&F member would have been great but Mark is far better than a Green because he really does care for animals and their welfare, unlike the Greens he does not support the use of the incredibly cruel 1080 poison.
He is also concerned about road kill which amounts to

"An estimated 86,000 native animals are killed each year on Australian roads and many others are seriously injured."
http://www.abc.net.au/news/2014-01-09/sleepless-nights-for-wildlife-carers-as-road-kills-reach-peak-o/5191722

however at
http://www.australiansforanimals.org.au/2014/01/08/roadkill-infographic-by-budget-direct/
the estimate of deaths is 500,000 per annum, which seems a more realistic figure.
i narrowly avoided two possums and a wallaby last night, driving between Inverell and Glen Innes.
In 'roo country at night I drive at 80 kph, at 100 there is much less margin of safety.

I searched the Greens' NSW site but could find no reference to road kill, which is strange as they call themselves conservationists; perhaps there is no political mileage to be gained if the motor car is part of the equation or perhaps they don't really care.

1080 and all that.

The "clever" solution: arm every "responsible" redneck in Australia. Mr/Ms "responsible" would carry a loaded rifle in the car, stay below 50 mph, and on seeing a native animal slam on the skids, grab the rifle, leave the car, cock the rifle, shoot the animal, eject the cartridge, return to the car, drive on (avoiding the carcass). What convoluted scenarios the gunnies dream up to justify demanding nationwide open slather with guns!

Dogs in Aboriginal communities? If an unregistered dog enters non-community land, capture it and destroy it. If the communities REALLY want to run their own law inside their own territory, let them live with the consequences. There is no evidence the teenager wasn't killed by someone else and the body mauled by dogs.

Enough of twists and turns. The bottom line is clear - the gun freaks want pre-Port Arthur open slather restored and the fancy scenarios are mere fluff.

Re the the Greens - I don't speak for them. I see their party as social engineers who fear democracy as they have demonstrated in the WA Upper House. But at least they oppose revamped dictatorship by the gun-armed and their brand of social engineering is less-worse than that of the other parties.

Julian,

How could a person defend themselves against a pack of dogs?

Alloy your fantasy to run and tell us.