Baronvonrort wrote on Jul 7
th, 2015 at 6:02pm:
The police website has the actual legislation link, click on weapons prohibition act 1998 , it's number 7 in the contents-offence of unauthorised possession or use of prohibited weapon.
www.police.nsw.gov.au/services/firearms/permits/prohibited_weapon_permits
Ah, now we're getting somewhere, Baron. Your reasoning is logical, but unfortunately you're taking the WPA in a vacuum. s7 of the WPA says:
Quote: WEAPONS PROHIBITION ACT 1998 - SECT 7
Offence of unauthorised possession or use of prohibited weapon
7 Offence of unauthorised possession or use of prohibited weapon
(1) A person must not possess or use a prohibited weapon unless the person is authorised to do so by a permit.
Maximum penalty: imprisonment for 14 years.
(2) Without limiting the operation of subsection (1), a person who is the holder of a permit to possess or use a prohibited weapon is guilty of an offence under this section if the person:
(a) possesses or uses the prohibited weapon for any purpose otherwise than in connection with the purpose established by the person as being the genuine reason for possessing or using the weapon, or
(b) contravenes any condition of the permit.
So, on the face of it, self defence falls within s7(a), as you cannot get a permit for self-defence (as you've told the forum many a time). However, there is another statute you've failed to consider. That's the Crimes Act 1900 (NSW).
Quote: CRIMES ACT 1900 - SECT 418
Self-defence-when available
418 Self-defence-when available
(1) A person is not criminally responsible for an offence if the person carries out the conduct constituting the offence in self-defence.
(2) A person carries out conduct in self-defence if and only if the person believes the conduct is necessary:
(a) to defend himself or herself or another person, or
...
(c) to protect property from unlawful taking, destruction, damage or interference, or
(d) to prevent criminal trespass to any land or premises or to remove a person committing any such criminal trespass,
and the conduct is a reasonable response in the circumstances as he or she perceives them.
linkNow, you might say -- aha, these are different statutes; therefore the WPA impliedly repeals the CA to the extent of any inconsistency. However, that would be a mistake. s423 of the CA says that it applies to all "offences" committed post 1998. (There are a few other sections that modify the defence, but it's definitely there).
So, I hope it is now clear that:
1. You cannot own a firearm *for* the purpose of self-defence, but
2. If you happen to have a firearm, you're allowed to use it (or anything else) to defend yourself.
Feel free to ask if you have any further questions -- maybe make a new thread to get away from the thread vandals? Or PM me.