o sung wu.

Let's say the wife in the house died next day from injury from torture to get her pin number. It was the torture that made her scream.
And the first shot from the 222 was to distract the lion off what it was eating. It was a shot intended to attract attention and it worked.

Would I be charged that night?

Where is onthebeach, OTB, Beachy Boy or what ever you want to call him? He is usually right (far right) onto this kind of stuff. Has he been kidnapped by a gang of wild 'Amazonian Greenie Feminists', who are now having their way with him. Has he seen the light and joined the fantastic, fabulous, 'Fabian Society'. Could he have gone to American in a last ditched effort to save The Donald's presidential campaign. Could he be in Syria fighting with you know who. Could he have eloped with the lovely Pauline, and they are not enjoying a love nest in the back blocks of the sunny state of Queensland.

Is Mise as your 2IC in these debates, what have you done with your very own Sancho Panza? I miss the old F@$t, strange but true.

Or did his puter decide it had, had enough of his torment of the keyboard and it has committed computer hari kari by infecting itself with the dreaded 'Trotskists Virus' supplied by pinko Bill?

LOL
Goodnight

Paul.

If you can stop being ridiculous for a moment, do you not think that all Australians, in fact people everywhere, have the right to self defence?

ttfn,

It takes the average person at least 5 seconds to move 20 metres from a standing start, I can draw and fire in 3 seconds and there are many faster than I am.

And for those who think that pistols are not accurate, the .357 Smith and Wesson Magnum revolver, in the 1930s was developed for shooting at ranges up to 600 metres.

I have, in the past, put all 6 shots from a .36 Navy Colt, 1851 model, into a the upper torso area of a figure target at 100 yards

Is Mise,

Your question is too broad and encompassing to be given a simple yes/no answer. We live in a complex society and there are ramification to consider before giving such an undertaking. If I say yes, you will come back with the line that self defense should include the indiscriminate right to own and use firearms, without any consideration of the consequences, so I'm not going to say yes.

It is ridiculous to say guns should be made available to jail inmates, kindergarten children and the mentally insane for self defense, but it is also ridiculous to say all.

"I can draw and fire in 3 seconds and there are many faster than I am." Who are they Is Mise Wyatt Earp and Billy The Kid? Dodge City here we come.
"I have, in the past, put all 6 shots from a .36 Navy Colt, 1851 model, into a the upper torso" What did he do, steal your ice cream when you were in third class at school? Lucky he didn't take your Iced Vo Vo's as well, then he really would have copped it!

Paul,

It is very simple, either we have the right to defend ourselves or we don't.
Whether or not the State recognizes the right doesn't effect the existence of the right.

As we have the right to defend ourselves then we have the right to an effective means of defence, even if the State denies us the means.

In Australia possession of a desired means of defence is forbidden by the State, be it a firearm or a walking stick; that's why I have a Doctor's Letter to the effect that for medical reasons I need such a stick and I do, it helps getting out of the car and where there are steep kerbs and gutters.