I have a theory.
Big Government types want passive populations. Obviously the more passive the population the easier they are to rule over.
Which is why we see people hauled before the courts for defending themselves. If we passively submit to petty criminals we will also be passive in the face of petty government.
Here is the next chapter in the sorry saga of people whose lives are turned upside down because they have the temerity to not submit passively to criminality but to fight back.
So far so good but inevitably the tut tutting from the authorities and a threat to prosecute follows
And that does not bode well for our future.
Related Link:
Big Government types want passive populations. Obviously the more passive the population the easier they are to rule over.
Which is why we see people hauled before the courts for defending themselves. If we passively submit to petty criminals we will also be passive in the face of petty government.
Here is the next chapter in the sorry saga of people whose lives are turned upside down because they have the temerity to not submit passively to criminality but to fight back.
A Tokoroa takeaway owner who shot a masked gunman in the leg after wrestling a semi-automatic .22 rifle off him could end up being charged for defending himself.
Aotea Chinese Takeaways owner Zhuofeng "Titan" Jiang, 25, grabbed the rifle as the gunman pointed it at Mr Jiang's 19-year-old cousin and demanded money from the till about 9.45pm on Monday.
The gunman had already fired a warning shot into the floor. Another shot went off as the men wrestled with the rifle.
When Mr Jiang got hold of the rifle he fired two shots, one into the floor, and another into the man's leg, to stop him from being attacked.
The gunman screamed in pain after being shot and fled.
So far so good but inevitably the tut tutting from the authorities and a threat to prosecute follows
Detective Senior Sergeant Todd Pearce said part of the inquiry would look at whether Mr Jiang was liable under the Arms Act. Police did not encourage people to fight back when firearms were involved.Once upon a time standing up for yourself was considered admirable but now it is quite likely to be considered criminal.
"The victim was threatened with a firearm and sought protection to retrieve the rifle.
"If it is found he did not use the appropriate level of force to defend himself it is possible charges could be laid."
And that does not bode well for our future.
Related Link:
I posted on this early today Andrei--although not as well as you have here.
ReplyDeleteAnd I reached the same conclusion.
Our job is to be the sheep who work, pay taxes and shut up while enduring a government-approved level of predation.
When one defends themselves with their own weapon it's bad enough. Now they suggest defending yourself with the assailants weapon is also criminal.
ReplyDeleteAny case brought to court by the Police would result in much time and money being spent by the person accused of the crime of self defence, a punishment in itself irrespective of the outcome.
This nonsense has to stop. Time to get the law made crystal clear so that police do not have to act stupid. They surely must be getting more and more embarrassed every time they do things like this?