O'Reilly's in Thornbury robbed earlier today.

[AusTac]

Haven't read the whole thread but escalation de-escalation rules should still apply in my opinion, can't go all out hammer and tongs like some, also training can't train for every situation by any means but it sure helps

[Gwion]

Haven't read the whole thread but escalation de-escalation rules should still apply in my opinion

They do and likely always will, mate.

[juststarting]

So you're a regular Mr Miyagi.

I am not even sure what you're debating. I simply said that everyone should have the right and legal support for self defence with a firearm. If I'm being assaulted with a stick, I think my life is in danger and I should have LEGAL right to respond to my life being in danger (not the stick), with a firearm. At least while on my property. See, I do know

What are you talking about? You're sort of saying, yes, I agree, but then you're being selective, as to what you're agreeing with. Can't have it both ways.

[Gwion]

I've recently read an article about someone, where they shared their history, how she (person I was reading about) and her friend were raped at gun point during home invasion robbery. While her husband was tied to a chair and forced to watch.

Whats proportional, in that situation, Gwion?

What is proportional in that situation is to employ lethal force in an attempt to neutralise the situation as soon as you feel in fear for your life or safety. Once things get to the point where you are being raped or forced to be tied up and watch it is too late.

If the attackers take you by surprise, it's not going to matter if you have a gun or not, they will have you at an advantage anyway. It's up to the individual to assess their response and the most acceptable possible outcome in any given situation.

[juststarting]

I'm not sure what you are debating Gwion. Any attack on you is potentially life-threatening, like that South Park episode...

What are you talking about? You're sort of saying, yes, I agree, but then you're being selective, as to what you're agreeing with. Can't have it both ways. And I don't even know what you're on about now.

[Gwion]

So you're a regular Mr Miyagi.

I am not even sure what you're debating. I simply said that everyone should have the right and legal support for self defence with a firearm. If I'm being assaulted with a stick, I think my life is in danger and I should have LEGAL right to respond to my life being in danger (not the stick), with a firearm. At least while on my property. See, I do know

What are you talking about? You're sort of saying, yes, I agree, but then you're being selective, as to what you're agreeing with. Can't have it both ways.

No. I am not being selective. I am saying that if you want to use lethal force then you need to understand how the legalities work. If you are not prepared to understand how self defence works then you really shouldn't be asking for more lethal options.

I've thought long and hard wether an accessable firearm would do me any good in a situation where some bad guys decided to rock up to sort me out or harm my loved ones and i can honestly not think of many scenarios where I'd have more advantage by having to then access my firearm. I certainly don't want to carry a gun on my person everywhere on my property.

[Gwion]

And BTW. I'm not Mr Miyagi. I just listed my training to back up that it is in my personal interest to understand how i am legally allowed to use force.

[juststarting]

Well, this could go the other way too, ye?

For example, I grew up in Melbourne and enjoyed the night life, most likely a lot more than your average person. And hand on heart I can honestly say that every CC I came across, spoken too or seen is the lowest of the low dumb as dog s**t scum that's looking for a fight and rather resolve the situation with a fist than negotiation. And I'm not an agressive person... last time I got into a fight was in like grade 7. So perhaps you were an exception. But mid/late 2000s that was pretty much it. Militant ****** looking to prove their manhood because they failed at life. So, with all that training you know how easy those guys skirt around the law, assault patrons, apply a little bit more twist or a little bit more pressure to really work that joint and realise that I'm actually 100% correct in saying that proportional force is a myth.

[Gwion]

Yep. That's why i stopped doing it. I took pride in resolving situations with minimal force when people i worked with just wanted to beat someone up. Not all of them but enough for me to not want to work with them. It doesn't pay enough to fight for work.

[Gwion]

But proportional force is not a myth and understanding how it works is key to legally defending yourself.

[Gwion]

See... this is called the broken record technique. It's very handy for dealing with drunks and imbeciles....


Understanding how proportional force works in the law is key to effective and legal self defence.

[juststarting]

That's all well and good. But you can't have your cake and eat it too. You're either an advocate of self defence by any means possible or you're not. Seems like you rather watch grannies get assaulted, than allow them to own guns.

[Gwion]

No mate. You're being rather contentiou s about it all and obstinately ignoring what i am saying.

If grannies want to understand how the force continuum works and the legal use of force, then give them guns.
BUT.
Until you, Grannie and Bob or Jenny down the street want to understand how legal self defence works and are prepared to train in basic personal protection techniques then giving you guns is a stupid, stupid move.

[juststarting]

See... this is called the broken record technique.

It seems to me that I play this game better than you hehehe

[Gwion]

So. Have figured out how proportional force works yet?

[juststarting]

I still think it's a crock

[Gwion]

Then you shouldn't have access to a firearm for self defence...

[juststarting]

Not exactly, this is why nobody is allowed to own firearms for personal protection. Because proportional force is bulls**t and everyone knows it.

[Gwion]

Which shows you don't understand how it works....

You need to understand a concept before you call bulls**t on it.

In Australia we had laws brought in, way back, that prohibit the carry of any device for the purpose of self defence. These laws were in response to the razor gangs. Known thugs, crooks and violent offenders who carried razors and other weapons and took advantage of the allowance of items for self defence as an excuse to "go equiped to commit a crime". Our inabilty to carry a weapon for self defence has nothing to do with proportional force being "a myth". The claim that these laws are there to make us defenceless is a myth.

If proportional force is a crock, do you think it's ok to stab someone in the neck because they told you they would punch you in the face if you didnt leave them alone?

[Gwion]

Given. That was an extreme example but it clearly demonstrates why the laws of proportional force are in place. You were threatened with force but you were given a exit (the part where they say "#&%$ off or..."). You are not in reasonable fear because you were given an option to walk. So, without a law to state that your response should be reasonable and proportionate.....

[sungazer]

I think I would like to have my cake and eat it too. I would like to be able to use a firearm in self defense but there are situations when if there was a robbery being committed in my presence with wife and kids that I would prefer just to let the thieves take whatever and have no one challenge them. I think I could take a life pretty easily without too much bother if it was a justified self-defense but I would not want to put every sales person in a bank or gun shop in the position that they were expected to defend against theft.

[Gwion]

And that is what it comes down to. The law is based on what a "reasonable man" would do. Hence a jury panel to set the bench mark of what is reasonable in a given situation.

[juststarting]

Soooooon basically, you're onboard with guns for self defence?

[Gwion]

It's not that simple but if you say so...

Just not for you, JS

[juststarting]

Typicall crowd controller attitude. Discriminating against someone with a different opinion. What's next, you're going to punch me for disagreeing?

[Gwion]

No mate. You're just wearing the wrong shoes

[juststarting]

Point illustrated.

[Gwion]

Come on JS. We were just playing, mate.

[juststarting]

You won't be laughing, when I drink and all your beer and eat all your trout!

[Gwion]

Just watch me...