Aw, Agricola.......
You're not still trying to play in lonely little Timmy Lambert's one man
anti-Lott band, are you?
If Tim had anything more than a personal vendetta against Lott, surely we'd hear more about Tim Lambert from other than the anti-gun fanatics.
He's seems to be yet another Australian academic elite who doesn't like the idea of firearms in public ownership.
This institutional anti-gun idea, by the way, doesn't seem to be resulting in much by way of positive results in Australia, despite all of our much publicised "buy backs" and "tightened gun laws". :barf:
I do try to avoid the British tabloids such as "The Guardian", but last month there was an article suggesting that John Lott is, in fact, correct in speculating that there is increasing resistance to the odd notion that "proportionate force" is somehow necessary when dealing with a violent criminal threatening their victim.:
John Hooper in Rome
Monday April 19, 2004
The Guardian
Silvio Berlusconi's rightwing government in Italy is to change the law
to allow people to kill intruders without fear of imprisonment.
The justice minister, Roberto Castelli, appeared to suggest at the
weekend that in addition the benefit of the doubt should be given to
shopkeepers who shot robbers in the back as they left their premises.
Mr Castelli, a member of the Northern League, was speaking after an
incident in Milan last week which had echoes of the case of Tony Martin, the
Norfolk farmer jailed for killing a burglar. A jeweller and his son face
charges of murder after shooting and killing a 21 year-old robber.
The risks facing shopkeepers were highlighted at the weekend when a
Roman tobacconist was shot dead during an attempted robbery.
A committee headed by a leading prosecutor is currently drawing up
proposals for a wide-ranging reform of the penal code. Addressing an electoral meeting on Saturday, Mr Castelli said: "In the new penal code, we shall be changing the concept of legitimate defence, which today is too far unbalanced in favour of the criminal, to the detriment of honest people."
One of the changes would include "the principle that anyone who is at
home should be considered a priori under attack [from a burglar] and may
legitimately regard himself to be in danger of his life." In these
instances, "any action must be considered legitimate defence".
Mr Castelli also intended to change the law so that it took account of
the "state of mind of the victim" of a robbery. He gave as an example a
shopkeeper who had just been robbed and did not have the clarity of
mind to work out if the thief was leaving his shop or had other intentions.
"The legitimate use of firearms will be better disciplined without
turning the country into the Wild West and without turning members of the
public into sheriffs," Mr Castelli said.
The reform would "nevertheless allow people to defend themselves in
cases of unjust aggression, if necessary with gunfire".
Mr Castelli said his views were shared by the chairman of the legal
reform committee. Parliament is already discussing a private member's bill
tabled by a senator from Mr Berlusconi's Forza Italia party which would give a
broader dispensation to victims of burglaries, though not quite as
broad as that suggested by Mr Castelli.
His bill would allow householders to "use any means to defend
themselves or their families". However, if the risk were merely to property, the victims of the robbery would only be within their rights "to brandish weapons without an intention to kill".
The penal code says that a killing is not an offence if the killer has
been "obliged by necessity" to put an end to the life of another person.
However, the use of force must be proportionate to the threat. The
victim may only do what is indispensable for their protection.
