Self defense with light... lots of it

[InisBineest]

Can any direct me to the laws in Australia (or Vic specifically) that talk about the act of self defense? I have read some, but i couldn't quote anyone on it, and google searches generally end up in forums where there is a lot of shouting about it.

I am curious (given the number of drug affected individuals involved in incidences in my neighborhood) what would be a permittable (of action with the lowest level of personal liability) to defend one's self and family in their house.

Now, I know what I intend to do if it comes to it, but that won't be stated here... for reasons.

I am wondering how it might go if one were to use a potent enough handheld torch to dazzle a would be attacker should they try to enter the home. Has anyone ever mucked around with bright torch to try this out (cause.. hey, people do some random stuff, who knows, may as well ask) as i'd rather not turn an olight into my face to check for efficacy!

Cheers!

[bladeracer]

Strobe setting on a powerful LED torch should be very useful.

[on_one_wheel]

I can't speak specifically about self defence laws but there's some extremely powerful torches on the market and they definitely dazzle people, I have a ryobi one+ spotlight that is bright af, it hurts your eyes, if you could find one that strobes it'll be even better, not only would it be more dazzling but it might induce drug affected morons to switch into rave party mode... could be very entertaining.

[rc42]

If you use an object for self defense you may have to demonstrate in court that not only was any force used both necessary but you only used minimum that could reasonably be expected to ensure your safety or the safety of others. If it's dark then having a torch in your hand is reasonable whilst a baseball bat is not, if you hear a noise then pointing a torch light at that noise is also reasonable, if it turns out to be an intruder then keeping the light on them is also reasonable. If they attack you then using the torch as a defensive weapon may also be reasonable.

If your torch happens to be very bright then good for you, however, if it is a hyper bright laser pointer and you keep it pointing just at their eyes and cause permanent eye damage then that isn't reasonable.

The general position of police seems to be that they expect people who are attacked to run away and call police as soon as they can, leaving the intruder to take anything they want to, anything that involves actual defense needs to be justified based on an immediate physical threat to yourself or others, defense of property is not an accepted reason.


As this is a firearm forum, a reminder to not mention firearms to an intruder and don't go to get one or be be holding one, even empty. If you do the police will cancel your license and confiscate all of your firearms for using them outside the conditions of your license.

[Blr243]

Estwing Brand for dazzling effect

[Oldbloke]

If I had a problem with pests entering my home I would use insect or better still European Wasp spray.

I'll just leave this here also. It may assist.

https://www.sportingshooter.com.au/gun- ... ose-cannon

[wanneroo]

I am wondering how it might go if one were to use a potent enough handheld torch to dazzle a would be attacker should they try to enter the home. Has anyone ever mucked around with bright torch to try this out (cause.. hey, people do some random stuff, who knows, may as well ask) as i'd rather not turn an olight into my face to check for efficacy!

Cheers!

Some of these lights now are coming with warnings they could cause eye damage on the highest settings. Some of the light output of these modern LED lights is pretty damn impressive. I would imagine an intruder at night would probably have their eyes adjusted to darkness so suddenly being lit up with 5000 Lumens would be an awakener. And they don't know what is behind the light.

Years ago I read some of the actual laws on the books in regards to self defense in Australia and basically to me in my interpretation, they value the attacker over the victim and essentially the attacker can have their way with you and you are totally in the wrong if you do anything about it. As part of my job we do all sorts of attack scenarios and they are kept as realistic as possible. Having been involved in thousands of these scenarios the thing I have learned is attacks of all kinds happen very fast and critical decisions are made within a second or two. I think at that point if your brain is cluttered with too much legal morass while someone is trying to kill you, then you will end up dead. My stance is always retreat if you can to avoid conflict but do what needs to be done if your life is in jeopardy and do it without hesitation. I saw someone mention if you used a firearm your licence would be revoked. Well, if the intruder has a deadly weapon and is in the walls of your home, I'd rather be alive and be dealing with licence revocation and legal action rather than being dead because when you are dead, you're dead and there is no reanimation.

The other critical thing I learned is the best way not to be attacked is to not be on the X when it happens. In your situation with such weak laws I think the thing to focus on is criminals like to prey on the weak. Make yourself a hard target. Trail cameras and security cameras are dirt cheap these days. Motion activated lights are cheap these days. House alarms are cheap these days. Add thorny brushes around the perimeter of your fence. Fence your front yard/driveway. Improve your doors or windows, make them more difficult to break down. When I was a youth, one of the houses I lived in had a storage unit behind it that kept getting robbed. This was the days when surveillance video was expensive and didn't work well at night. The city put a no s**t real city light in the back yard of our house and my dad and I planted thorny Russian olive trees to keep anyone from jumping our fence. These days on the rural property I live on I let blackberry brambles grow on the perimeter. No one wants to walk through blackberries even high on cocaine. So make your house and property look like you have a good security posture and make it look like they'd rather find a more soft target.

The other thing I learned from the world of surveillance detection is the vast majority of attacks and invasions are pre planned, even by druggies. In almost all cases a property or target has been surveilled ahead of time. Very rarely does any criminal pick a target totally randomly. It does happen but mostly they have identified a target ahead of time. So again improve your security posture, take note of any odd behaviors, record licence plates, take pictures.

[wanneroo]

If I had a problem with pests entering my home I would use insect or better still European Wasp spray.

I'll just leave this here also. It may assist.

https://www.sportingshooter.com.au/gun- ... ose-cannon

Reading that reminds me of the saying "everyone has a plan until they are punched in the face".

I wouldn't say the lawyer there provided a great deal of clarity and it's the type of stuff that can make it more confusing. Somehow one has to take all that and streamline it all down. The human brain is hardwired to fight or flight.

Based on what he said if out on a rural property in NSW, I don't see the issue with being armed. I have been armed when confronting trespassers here in the USA. I think the mistake people make is they lose their mind and make threats or point guns. These days everyone has a cell phone camera. When I have confronted people I turn the camera on and record them, I say who are you? What are you doing here? This isn't your property, leave. I don't make threats, point guns or anything like that. The camera seems to keep people pretty honest.

[womble]

Home invasion Melbourne last week. https://www.9news.com.au/videos/national/victoria-police-released-footage-of-terrifying-home-invasion/ckllc3af9000i0htcs4zyev8z

And you want a torch ???

Note how casual they are. Just another day. They do this all the time.
Worst part is they get caught and charged but never jailed. So they just do it again.

[womble]

Politically this dose’nt happen in victoria. Politically they steadfastly won’t admit to it. We don’t have this problem. We don’t have armed gangs etc.

Except that we do. And the police released this footage, which is unusual. Because they’re supposed to be towing the political line.

From the second the first sledge hammer blow, you are asleep in bed. How can you be prepared to counter that.
They are organised from learned experience. Rudimentary but still. The door breacher gives way to the gunman. There is a lookout in the yard. And theres probably another guy with a car in the street. And there could be more. Our police patrol in pairs, so it’s conceivable they are prepared for that. Because they do prepare for that.

Note at the door they don’t stand close together. They are mitigating their own risks.
There really is a lot to unpack here and i hope the police are processing all this. Note it was a very hot summer night. Heavy layers of clothing, puffy jackets. Because worst case scenario would be bird shot.
2nd worse case scenario for them, typical homeowner suburban Melbourne would be armed with a knife. And of note they will only be armed with long weapons to keep you at arms length.

They learnt this stuff growing up, but not here.
It’s the calmness in their manner which is the most telling giveaway. There’s some secondhand commando training that’s been passed onto them from older kids or adults. It’s almost comical because you can see how relaxed they’ve become here.
Because have nothing to worry about here.

You need to know it would be very dangerous for you to aim a torch at them. Because guaranteed that will trigger a different learned response from them.

[InisBineest]

Lots to read here, and a lot of interesting discussion.

RE firearms, mine are in a safe, locked up unloaded and separate to ammo. I know the idea that given the choice that I'd rather go to gaol alive with my family safe, than not loosing my licence but someone gets stabbed... But realistically my firearms are well out of reach in any situation like that.

The situations I most often see in my street involve drug affected individuals raging up amd down the street. Most recently it was a couple (both on drugs?) who had a domestic that moved up and down the street for about 20 min until someone yelled convincingly enough at them and they split. Police arrived, within 5min of me calling, but if the guy had noticed me on the phone, or started beating on the woman he was off at, that could well have been 5 min too late.

I also know that keeping a torch by the door is a very legally defendable action. Where as a baseball bat is... Well yeh, less so (honestly officer, I'm a fan of spontaneous tea ball at odd hours of the night:P). My other issue is that neither myself nor my wife have the physical presence to intimidate a would be attached, especially one on ice. I've seen plenty of videos where taser plus multiple 9mm to the chest have not stopped even scrawny looking guys field on enough rage and meth from attacking an officer, I doubt in that case a swing from a bat is going to help.

I bring up a torch as a diversionary/time buying tactic. And that brings up the importance of a plan. In our house out plan is to leave via back door, the moment we have a nutter at the front door. Wife grabs kids, makes to the car. The concept of a bright torch is to just buy time and distract. I figure even a meth head will have trouble hitting what he can't see.

And it would be nice to think that all this is hypothetical... And is now, until the day it isn't.

Does anyone have a link to the appropriate laws, or even a previous court finding on a self defense matter?

[InisBineest]

If I had a problem with pests entering my home I would use insect or better still European Wasp spray.

I'll just leave this here also. It may assist.

https://www.sportingshooter.com.au/gun- ... ose-cannon

That's a good one, very helpful in my situation, thanks for the link!

[wanneroo]

Home invasion Melbourne last week. https://www.9news.com.au/videos/national/victoria-police-released-footage-of-terrifying-home-invasion/ckllc3af9000i0htcs4zyev8z

And you want a torch ???

Note how casual they are. Just another day. They do this all the time.
Worst part is they get caught and charged but never jailed. So they just do it again.

Well there are no real consequences for their actions, so they'll just keep doing it. Here in the USA their career would be short before they succumbed to lead poisoning.

I would take a bet that they had surveilled the target ahead of time and knew exactly what they were going for.

[cz515]

Have a nice German Shepard or a similar dog with a decent inside the house, instead of a pug/rat dog.

That is enough of a deterrent, to give you time to leave the house...as in the dog will start barking well before someone enters the house.

[Gamerancher]

Dogs are a great deterrent and alarm system, of course they need to be perceived as a threat by the intruder, a "hairy rat" probably won't be.
Many moons ago in the town I grew up in there was a spate of house break-ins involving the stealing of video players. ( I did say many moons ago )
When police caught the blokes who were doing it, they were in possession of a "map" showing houses in the neighbourhood. They had marked the houses where there were dogs present. None of those houses had been targeted.

[boingk]

Yep, if we're talking reasonable deterrent then it goes something like this:

1) Dog. Just get one, they're the best deterrent and give good company, too.
2) Lighting. If your place looks dark and silent then the crooks will give it a go.
3) Security. Make sure you lock up and have reasonably secure doors/windows/fencing.
4) Valuables. Don't have valuables in the car or house easily visible. Don't leave product boxes out either.

These all seem commonplace but I see a lot of people have their car broken into and then complain they had their wallet and smokes stolen. WTF, Janice? You left your wallet and a $50 pack of cigarettes on the front seat? Was the window broken? NO?? So you left it unlocked as well? Classic. Good work champ. May as well have held it out and given it away.

Keep your car clean and your house/yard secure and you'll likely have few issues. The other big tip is to collapse any product boxes - nothing screams "rob me" quite like a big 64" TV box or computer/console packaging out on the front verge awaiting the garbos. Cut it open, fold it inside out and put discreetly inside the bin... if not take to the tip yourself.

[trekin]

The thing to remember, in the situation outlined by the OP, is that your actions were not done in self defence, but were done in the defence of your home/dwelling. All the States have laws regarding defence of home/dwellings which allow more leaway for your actions than those of self defence. And remember, NEVER EVER allow yourself to talked into using self defence as your defence by the police, or your defence lawyer when you lay someone out inside of your home, it is always defence of your home/dwelling.

[Member-Deleted]

You'll have to research your states specific "Use of Force" and "Powers of arrest" legislation. Pay attention to the wording, some people believe you have to use equal or lesser force, or the absolute minimum force necessary, this sort of thinking is what will get you killed, don't even worry about gaol. However, Victoria's legislation allows a person to use proportionate force if one reasonably believes they are preventing the commission or continuance of an indictable crime. If I recall correctly. I'll link a few different sections in the Crimes Act Victoria 1958.

CRIMES ACT 1958 - SECT 322K - Self-defence
http://classic.austlii.edu.au/au/legis/ ... s322k.html
CRIMES ACT 1958 - SECT 458 - Person found committing offences may be arrested without warrant by any person
http://classic.austlii.edu.au/au/legis/ ... /s458.html
CRIMES ACT 1958 - SECT 462 - Definition of finds committing
http://classic.austlii.edu.au/au/legis/ ... /s462.html
CRIMES ACT 1958 - SECT 462A - Use of force to prevent the commission of an indictable offence
http://classic.austlii.edu.au/au/legis/ ... s462a.html

I have come to the conclusion that the police will be trying to lock you up if you do anything. So you'll be fighting them the whole way. I believe based upon the home invasions that have happened in Victoria that a bright flashlight isn't going to do much for you. Reason being, home invasions are being conducted by large groups now, that arm themselves with weapons such as pickaxes, knives, guns, improvised weapons etc. You'll just piss them off then get seriously injured. Locking yourself in your room is only putting yourself in a corner that leaves you with no room to manoeuvre. You don't know how many there are or what they intend to do exactly, it can be reasonably assumed that they intend to do you serious injury at a minimum, as such, I'm comfortable with meeting them close to the entrance and firing on them. That way I give myself room to move back and also minimise the risk of me getting surrounded and ambushed. That's me though. A bright torch might send one or two back to reorganise, but it won't give you time to run away or call the cops if you're in your home.

[Bugman]

Coming in on a different angle. About 25 years ago I was woken up by the sound of someone trying to break into my work van. I shone a high powered spot light type of torch at them through the top floor bedroom window, which did the trick, and they started to run off. One of them tripped over a small rockery and ended up breaking his ankle. My wife had called the coppers, and ambulance, because the person would not give us his name ( no surprise there) but when the coppers arrived, I gave them my side of the story, they then spoke to this fellow and got his "side". The coppers did arrest and charged him, BUT warned me that he could take civil action against me for hurting himself on my property. Fortunately I heard no more of this part. Oh yes, he pleaded guilty to trespass and got a bond. The other charge of break into motor vehicle was dropped, and I still don't know the exact details.
My point is this....be aware of what action YOU take as the law seems to be on the side of the transgressor.

[Member-Deleted]

I'll also add this...

Defensive use of force must be reasonable and proportionate to the threat. If you are put in the situation where you have to act drastically to survive (lethal force). You must reasonably fear for yours or another persons life, or fear that you or another person are facing grievous bodily harm (nasty injury). The "reasonability" is a subject of great debate and criticism as there is no clear cut definition. While you may have believed you acted reasonably at the time, Peggy-Sue and The 5 Karens who are on the jury are pacifists and believes that violence is never the answer, it doesn't matter how factually correct you and your evidence are about the danger you were facing, you should have had angels come down from the heavens to fly the misunderstood people away. Not to mention the police and judge just don't like the way your hair falls and that you're a little tubby, they want to make an example of you, so they decide in their opinion you're actions were not reasonable, and who are you to argue?

Also keep in mind that you are responsible for every bullet you fire, so if you're in a suburb, keep in mind the over-penetrative nature of rifle rounds, larger shotgun pellets and fmj pistol rounds (even some hollow-points). The news reporters and police f***ing love talking about how the bullets passed through a neighbours house that had 2 old people, 3 infants, a litter of puppies and a goldfish that was fighting cancer inside that were all asleep at the time and thankfully none were hit.

Paul Harrell experimented a bit and found that number three shotgun pellets do the job without much over-penetration.

[InisBineest]

You'll have to research your states specific "Use of Force" and "Powers of arrest" legislation. Pay attention to the wording, some people believe you have to use equal or lesser force, or the absolute minimum force necessary, this sort of thinking is what will get you killed, don't even worry about gaol. However, Victoria's legislation allows a person to use proportionate force if one reasonably believes they are preventing the commission or continuance of an indictable crime. If I recall correctly. I'll link a few different sections in the Crimes Act Victoria 1958.

CRIMES ACT 1958 - SECT 322K - Self-defence
http://classic.austlii.edu.au/au/legis/ ... s322k.html
CRIMES ACT 1958 - SECT 458 - Person found committing offences may be arrested without warrant by any person
http://classic.austlii.edu.au/au/legis/ ... /s458.html
CRIMES ACT 1958 - SECT 462 - Definition of finds committing
http://classic.austlii.edu.au/au/legis/ ... /s462.html
CRIMES ACT 1958 - SECT 462A - Use of force to prevent the commission of an indictable offence
http://classic.austlii.edu.au/au/legis/ ... s462a.html

I have come to the conclusion that the police will be trying to lock you up if you do anything. So you'll be fighting them the whole way. I believe based upon the home invasions that have happened in Victoria that a bright flashlight isn't going to do much for you. Reason being, home invasions are being conducted by large groups now, that arm themselves with weapons such as pickaxes, knives, guns, improvised weapons etc. You'll just piss them off then get seriously injured. Locking yourself in your room is only putting yourself in a corner that leaves you with no room to manoeuvre. You don't know how many there are or what they intend to do exactly, it can be reasonably assumed that they intend to do you serious injury at a minimum, as such, I'm comfortable with meeting them close to the entrance and firing on them. That way I give myself room to move back and also minimise the risk of me getting surrounded and ambushed. That's me though. A bright torch might send one or two back to reorganise, but it won't give you time to run away or call the cops if you're in your home.

Thanks for that, good links that i can read into.

Separately, this thread has blown out a bit, but conversation is always good. My situation is a bit less drastic than what you see on the news. I'm more concerned about lone meth heads getting agro on our street and deciding our house is a good one to kick in. We haven't had any problem with gangs here (touch wood, as they say). Firearms are out of the question (legally and practically, they are not readily available in the house) so my only intention is to get the family in the car and leave... they can trash the house for all I care, stuff you can replace, people you can't.

My thought with the torch is just a device to buy time and deter. Against a gang it would be as good as pissing in the wind. (Should that happen, all bets are off and a different plan kicks in, something about judged by 12 not carried by 6)

[InisBineest]

There’s plenty of milspec or tactical torches you can buy that have a strobe function. That’s what it’s for. Disorientate and confuse.
Just search for torch with strobe.
Preferably one than can be kept charged with a USB cable.
.

I do like a good Olight, i know there are others, but my Javalot Pro is brilliant on my Warwick for hunting. Have a smaller handheld one on the way.

[Blr243]

I have never been a recipient of pepper spray or mace but many years ago someone let of a tear gas Grenade at an outdoor party for a joke. That was the worst thing I have ever smelt or breathed. If all it did was give u tears it would be nothing , but breathing it in is so incredibly irritating, I ran blindly away from it into the darkness as fast as I could run with no care about Personal injury If I ran into anything....I was desperate to escape it. It’s truly evil, no one could ever tolerate it. There ain’t nothin else like it on this planet ....if you were stuck in a room with it and your best friend was guarding the doorway, you would chew through your best friend to get outside .

[wanneroo]

I'll also add this...

Defensive use of force must be reasonable and proportionate to the threat. If you are put in the situation where you have to act drastically to survive (lethal force). You must reasonably fear for yours or another persons life, or fear that you or another person are facing grievous bodily harm (nasty injury). The "reasonability" is a subject of great debate and criticism as there is no clear cut definition. While you may have believed you acted reasonably at the time, Peggy-Sue and The 5 Karens who are on the jury are pacifists and believes that violence is never the answer, it doesn't matter how factually correct you and your evidence are about the danger you were facing, you should have had angels come down from the heavens to fly the misunderstood people away. Not to mention the police and judge just don't like the way your hair falls and that you're a little tubby, they want to make an example of you, so they decide in their opinion you're actions were not reasonable, and who are you to argue?

Also keep in mind that you are responsible for every bullet you fire, so if you're in a suburb, keep in mind the over-penetrative nature of rifle rounds, larger shotgun pellets and fmj pistol rounds (even some hollow-points). The news reporters and police f***ing love talking about how the bullets passed through a neighbours house that had 2 old people, 3 infants, a litter of puppies and a goldfish that was fighting cancer inside that were all asleep at the time and thankfully none were hit.

Paul Harrell experimented a bit and found that number three shotgun pellets do the job without much over-penetration.

I think the other thing to point out in these situations is excessive blabbering to police to try to explain yourself. I think it has to be "my life was in danger", "they were trying to kill me" and leave it at that because we know the whole thing is going to be judicially reviewed anyways and you'll need to get a lawyer involved.

[Blackened]

Locking this thread.

Too many posts going into inappropriate areas and requiring removal.

Hope you got some good info from what remains, InisBineest.