longweekend58 wrote on Dec 27^th, 2015 at 12:36pm:

Reasonable force depends on the threat that you are facing. If you reasonably believe that you or another person is faced with imminent grievous bodily harm or death then you may use deadly force to stop it.

You also claim that all I want to do is kill people. I've had the opportunity to do so already where I could have argued it was justified because I was face to face with someone wielding a knife and within meters of me, threatening to kill me but I didn't draw my firearm and shoot them, instead I de-escalated the situation by talking to the person. Not shooting them.

That's kind of the opposite of what you are suggesting.

CRIMINAL CODE - SECT 271
271 Self-defence against unprovoked assault

(1) When a person is unlawfully assaulted, and has not provoked the assault, it is lawful for the person to use such force to the assailant as is reasonably necessary to make effectual defence against the assault, if the force used is not intended, and is not such as is likely, to cause death or grievous bodily harm.

(2) If the nature of the assault is such as to cause reasonable apprehension of death or grievous bodily harm, and the person using force by way of defence believes, on reasonable grounds, that the person can not otherwise preserve the person defended from death or grievous bodily harm, it is lawful for the person to use any such force to the assailant as is necessary for defence, even though such force may cause death or grievous bodily harm.

ian wrote on Dec 27^th, 2015 at 1:23am:

Of course your belief that they posed an imminent threat of grievous bodily harm or death to you or another person must be reasonable. 

What do you think is more dangerous within 5m, a person with a handgun or a knife? The answer is the knife, not the gun. I'd much rather be attacked and shot at with a handgun at that distance than attacked with a knife.

You're actually more likely to die from the knife attack than the gun attack at those ranges.

.

There are clear rules as to how police officers can engage with deadly force.... in self-defence or in defence of others..... in this way they are the ONLY ones legally entitled to use deadly force to defend others.... but the ordinary citizen has the right to use deadly force to defend his/her own life....

If it were my children under threat of life....

No, not your own personal belief. It must be the belief of a reasonable person. a paranoid junkie may very well believe they are in danger or great harm, but if a reasonable person would not believe that in a similar situation then it wont wash in court. There are no clear hard and fast rules here. The law can be quite grey in this regard.

African Americans were the first in this country that were the victims of gun control. They were denied their right to keep and bear arms.

As for it being a world that no longer exists. It is the same world, but people have become more ignorant of their rights and less willing to fight for them.

You mean in places where firearms are banned? Surely if banning firearms in a certain place were a good idea to stop gun violence, then gun violence wouldn't occur where it was illegal, right?