Gunshop employee charged

[sAsLEX]

One thing is all these people rant about gun laws......ummm criminals by definition break the law so the tightening of controls on law abiding citizens does not affect the criminal underworld

[Pixie]

Mr Carvelle should be given a medal for gallantry and initiative in the face of danger! In fact, I propose we make up a KB medal for him and send it to them!

Bloody tree-hugging seal-kissing hippies...

I wouldn't go that far.The arsehole he shot is still alive

[The_Dover]

One thing is all these people rant about gun laws......ummm criminals by definition break the law so the tightening of controls on law abiding citizens does not affect the criminal underworld

of course it does, just ask the cops.

it makes it much harder for them to get guns and do robberies and shoot people.

dynamytus said so and he's the chief of police in howick.

guns don't kill people, cops kill people.

[Dai]

....

guns don't kill people, cops kill people.

Have to disagree with you here Dover.

Untrained or badly trained cops, with big boys toys, kill people.

They get to run around in paramilitary black uniforms waving the latest and greatest toys for the cameras to pick up on.

[The_Dover]

I saw the cops at big boys toys and they weren't killing people.

but I kept away just incase they recognised me.

[ManDownUnder]

Notwithstanding all the issues surrounding the actual guilt, or otherwise, of people involved...

I had a thought about this last night. If this is a test case shouldn't both sides be given the best counsel possible?

If funds are not an issue then the level of argument from both sides will be more rigorous, and less constrained by economics (length of debate won't be an issue, ability/experience of lawyers on both sides can be the best etc).

The legal question thus gets a far superior examination from every angle and a more learned decision/outcome is the result. If a test case is to be put, and the decision to become a precedent...

... shouldn't it be a good one...?

[The_Dover]

and who's gonna pay for that MDU?

[Bend-it]

Just charge it to:

4652-9547-3652-1586 Exp:04/08

Sorry if my randon number generator V.10 (i.e. fingers) picked an actual real cridit card number!

[scumdog]

guns don't kill people, cops kill people.

Unfortunately not enough of the right kind of people.....

[The_Dover]

maybe you should get some shooting lessons?

[ManDownUnder]

and who's gonna pay for that MDU?

Tax payer of course. Yes it's more money but I'd rather see money put into a rigorous examination of a point of law so decent precedents can be set for future consideration.

Otherwise we get a precendent that's set based on a weak defence. The defendant gets shat on from a great height and judges know to shit on all future defendants from a similar height.

The specifics of this case lend themselves to sympathies from me, but the principle holds for all such cases where good decisions, and good law can come of it. Why get bad law because a defendant is financially contrained?

I'm not saying provide crown defence for all cases (which raises an interesting point.. the uneven amount of justice available to people depending on the depth of wallet). But the crown should fund those it wants to use to it's own end... i.e. set precendents and test point of law.

[spudchucka]

In the past 3 years there have been 11 incidents where police officers have injured themselves with firearms whilst training. They dont get enough proper training with these weapons to be proficient

Where did you get that from?

[spudchucka]

i think its more a case of the media twisting the story.

Do they do that? Surely not!

[davereid]

Its really an old arguement I think... all these quotes from 1700-1799 or.. even earlier !

"They that would give up essential liberty for a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety."
-- Benjamin Franklin

"There are men in all ages who mean to govern well, but they mean to govern. They promise to be good masters, but they mean to be masters." — Thomas Jefferson

Guard with jealous attention the public liberty. Suspect everyone who approaches that jewel. Unfortunately, nothing will preserve it but downright force. Whenever you give up that force, you are ruined. The great object is that every man be armed. Everyone who is able may have a gun." — Patrick Henry, spoken during Virginia's ratification convention, June 14, 1788

."..and he who has no sword, let him sell his garment and buy one." — Jesus Christ, Luke 22:36 NKJV

[Big Dog]

Does this work?

http://www.petitiononline.com/create_petition.html

Can someone with some legal nouse do up the wording for it? Basically, people should be allowed to keep a firearm in a state that is semi-ready to use in self defence.

Semi-ready: Gun accessible but hidden, bullets in magazine and stored separately. Both out of sight.

Something like that?

Whole other can of worms going down the concealed weapon path.
I support the use of reasonable force.
I support the individuals right to bear arms.
I support the right of duly licensed persons to possess loaded weapons ( I mean for fuck sake we let people drive 4x4's that have no "reasonable purpose" for possessing one."

I do NOT support the carrying of concealed weapons, of any type (with the possible exception of a knife where you have a reasonable purpose for carrying one e.g for opening the many packages a store person would receive, or a hunting knife for a hunter when hunting).

I do think that if we are going to go down that route as a country we need to first review our gun laws and have stiffer penalties for unjustified hommocide.
Concealed weapons licenses would need to include a mental health requirement, a eyesight test and a clean criminal record on top of what is currently required.

I think a gun shop owner who's goods pose a significant risk to the public should be reasonable. Also he is likely to be someone who takes firearm ownership seriously, as evidenced by the single non lethal shot. (this argument becomes counter productive when you consider that the bullet then traveled through the intruder, through the window and into the street)
A dairy owner who just has to do as he is told is a little more marginal unless he has adequate training in how to handle a firearm.

Question of the ages is where do you draw the line?

Currently the law of the land says that a gun shop owner may not carry a loaded gun. Ifs and buts aside he knew he broke the law if and when he "strapped his piece".

I support his actions but if the law is wrong then the law must be challenged, not ignored.

I do hope he gets off, but he new what he was doing.