All very well, Craig, but how would you suggest that an elderly person defend themselves?

This 83 year old has no worries as he was trained in the art of killing/defence by some very thorough servants of the Australian Government and still has the capacity, and the willingness, to use some very dirty and up close and personal tricks if it ever proves necessary.

My guns can stay in their triple locked storage and my pistols in their safe, wrapped in oily rags, kept tight by elastic bands; I only take them out once a month to go to the range.

I'm by no means suggesting you can't be trusted, Is Mise, but there are lots of people who might be less capable and when faced with a perceived threat those people might be tempted to shoot first and ask questions later.

There was a case a few years back of an old bloke shooting and killing a kid who was sheltering in his carport, IIRC.

I do understand that with age comes a reduced ability to defend oneself, but there also comes a reduced threat. Assault of the elderly in their homes is not a common crime and it rightly earns very serious punishment. Leave the gunslinging to the cops, I say.

Is Mise, what you are saying is you have a predisposition to killing being trained in the art of killing/defense and all. Your explanation of "self defense" is rather vague. How exactly do you see guns and self defense. No good having a loaded gun for self defense, if it is at home in the kids toy box, and you are down at the railway station being mugged by a gang of nuns. Obviously you believe you should have the right to carry, presumably, a concealed weapon on your person at all times. Vagary is another form of ducking and weaving, and I said no ducking and weaving!

What about a comment on the quote by Lunatic Leyonhjelm, does your silence indicate your full support for dead coppers on the roadside?

Let's say a driver has a predisposition toward helping police in trouble and one day observes a traffic cop kneeling on the roadside with a bearded man with a knife standing behind.

Under present gun laws the driver would almost certainly have to leave the policeman to his death, leaving the body too. Why stay?

If gun laws were as they used to be the driver would likely have a rifle in the car and could demand the knifeman drop the knife and untie the policeman.

Similar could happen in a suburban street or outside a bank where a police department employee was about to be shot dead by a radicalized fool.

Times have changed.
Australians now face extremism and an increased population with increased danger from criminal and drug induced behaviour.
Australians have a right to life and to help preserve life of others.

What is the big deal about guns, is it gunophobia?
Radical people these days use knives or bombs or 'out of control' vehicles to kill.
How many beheadings are done with guns? Absolutely none.

Present gun laws should be reviewed and the tight controls made more sensible and reasonable as they were previously.

Eighty two year old people also have a right to peace of mind from having a gun close by.

Years ago it was sometimes said that Australia had sufficient private gun defence to form an army.

Guns also make criminals and butchers think twice about committing crimes.

It appears most murders done by guns in Australian homes are by legitimate gun owners. More guns make weapons of death more readily available to angry gun holders. Drive by shootings are drug related or honor killings. The general public have no threat from these. If you feel threatened by criminals I suggest you build a solid steel cage near the front of your house so bullets cannot penetrate and sleep in there. The answer to the fearful, insecure and paranoid.

Or he could use his phone to call 000? You know, "emergency, please help, there's a cop being threatened by an armed man at this location"?

You're not thinking this stuff through, JF. The last thing we need is vigilantes. To be honest, having someone who thinks the way you do running around with a loaded weapon scares the crap out of me.