From: Mike Taylor, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>Our right to self defence has not descended anywhere. I repeat.......ad
>nauseum....you all have a right to self defence!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
>
>It just so happens that firearms are not available for self defence. If a
>firearm had been used in this case, then, provided it was legally held for
>say, clay shooting, then no jury in a million years would convict someone
>using it. Don't delude yourself.
>The law only restricts self defence as being a good reason for possession.
>
>IG
>--
That juries will almost always acquit in these circumstances may be
true. Which raises the question of why the prosecution is brought in the
first place. How do the prosecuting authorities decide?
Prior to the trial the licensing department will have revoked the
certificate for any legally held gun.
After the acquittal, which implies that no crime has been committed,
will they reissue the certificate without any fuss?
Cybershooters website: http://www.cybershooters.org
List admin: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
___________________________________________________________
T O P I C A http://www.topica.com/t/17
Newsletters, Tips and Discussions on Your Favorite Topics
