Joe, maybe you can define when self defense becomes, accidental homicide, which then leads to cold blooded murder. Given the total arming of the citizens, American style, I can imagine there will be many shooting that will fall into some gray areas. Is Mise fails to define what is self defense, what is accidental homicide and what is cold blooded murder.
The bloke who shoots an old man dead, because it was dark and he thought the old bloke was brandishing a gun, his life was under threat, self defense, accidental homicide, cold blooded murder. In the end, the old mans "gun" turned out to be his walking stick.Will a simple apology do? Maybe just a court issued good behavior bond is enough, possible the death sentence. What do you think? Do tell me such is impossible.

Paul,

You know very well that the inspector was unarmed, he didn't even have a walking stick, it was broad daylight and that Turnbull shot him in cold blood. Murder. end of.

BTT: what is a 'troll' ? Someone who insults a poster, uses ad hominems, steers the discussion away from the topic, and generally does not contribute in any sort of constructive manner. G'day Paul.

What is a 'Trot', i.e. Trotskyite ? A follower, or fellow traveller, or useful idiot, of one of the many strands of opportunism loosely based on one of the fetid versions of the eighty- and ninety-year-old sacred texts of Leon Trotsky, folded these days in with the barbaric rubbish of Stalinists. What a gaggle. Some of the Watermelon Greens would secretly be proud to call themselves one or the other. G'day Paul.

Any more side-tracks you want explored ?

Joe

"BTT: what is a 'troll' ? Someone who insults a poster, uses ad hominems, steers the discussion away from the topic, and generally does not contribute in any sort of constructive manner. G'day Paul."

Notwithstanding that Loudmouth reserves the right to steer the thread off topic when it suits him...

Eg,....on a thread titled "The Great Burqa Debate"

"Slightly off-topic: perhaps the same dumb-dumbs were involved in forging their addresses before the last elections, claiming to live in Indi when they didn't. Oy, how stupid can you get ? So after the election was called, and before voter registration closed three weeks or so later, these dumb-dumbs filled out registration forms, all neatly in a handful of files now, which the police can go through at their leisure, identifying frauds and preparing charges. One of them is supposed to have even been a lawyer.

When will children learn that you can't lie and cheat, and get other people into trouble, for what you think is a Good Cause.

God save us from fools.

Joe
Posted by Loudmouth, Saturday, 4 October 2014 10:25:18 AM"

Toni,

The Greens say USING a firearm in self defence,
So, as Paul has pointed out, they were using English and in that language their meaning is clear "self defence" means defence of the self against humans or animals.

There is no difference between animals and humans in the Greens' weird grasp of things, as evidenced by the teachings of their co-founder and guru Peter Singer.

//Well, he does say 'the Greens' PROPOSED law'. No need to go about shooting homeless people, that's a bit 'outside the Realm of Wild Hypothesis ', don't you think ?//

I can only assume that you believe talking about pigs doesn't miss the point.

In most jurisdictions, under most circumstances, people enjoy the fundamental right to not be killed. Pigs not so much.

But if you really believe that the law cares as much about as pigs as it does about people and that they enjoy similar legal rights, then you are just as entitled to your quaint views as everybody else who believes rubbish, or pretends to believe rubbish in order to make an absurd argument.

//So, as Paul has pointed out, they were using English and in that language their meaning is clear "self defence" means defence of the self against humans or animals.//

Yes, because context never has any bearing on meaning in English.

They are obviously using English in a legal sense (because the aim of forming a political party is to form government and the role of government is to make laws) and in a legal sense "self defence" means defence of the self against persons (humans and corporations. Not animals).

But do persist with your ridiculous argument that they're really talking about pigs if it amuses you to do so. I'm pretty sure that you know you are being disingenuous and just doing it to wind up Paul. Which is fair enough, because he is one of those people that it's fun to wind up.

//There is no difference between animals and humans in the Greens' weird grasp of things//

Really? There is a species of barnacle whose penis is about one and half times its body length. Mine's not that big (close, but not quite). Birds can fly. Thorny Devils can drink by standing in a puddle of water. Fish have gills. I think that probably even people who vote Greens accept that animals and humans aren't the same thing.

//as evidenced by the teachings of their co-founder and guru Peter Singer.//

Singer is a philosopher, not a lawyer. The joy of philosophy is the joy of believing as many as six impossible things before breakfast. Philosophers are seasoned travellers of Imagination Land. Lawyers not so much. They have to deal with what is and what is not. And in the eyes of the law animals is not persons.

The Great Ape Project are trying to get some basic legal rights for the four species of great apes, a tiny subset of the kingdom Animalia. There is no Great Pig Project, and much to Miss Piggy's consternation, nobody is trying to gets pigs recognised as people under the law.