The real reason for B/E-cat storage requirements and inspections

From Kiwi Gun Blog, although old, some things do not change. You obviously suspect it, but what can you do against plausible deniability? Yet here is a look into police thinking, from a 1973 NZ Police report. The context is stricter storage requirements for pistol collectors:

7.17 We appreciate that it will be difficult to police the regulations. However, the mere fact that stringent conditions of ownership exist should discourage people from becoming collectors.

7.18 No doubt 'collectors' will resist attempts to impose the restrictions outlined by us.

I note ironic selective use of quotation marks. Manipulation by slander. Same old.

And this sort of thing is why so many people have zero trust of our police.

(insert insult here)

If your have security inspected when you apply for your FAL and then again when applying for your B,C etc and do not change addresses then what has changed. You know the rules and as a law abiding firearms owner and you abide by the rules and want to keep your stuff safe.

so the reason is ...........................?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by mikee

If your have security inspected when you apply for your FAL and then again when applying for your B,C etc and do not change addresses then what has changed. You know the rules and as a law abiding firearms owner and you abide by the rules and want to keep your stuff safe.

so the reason is ...........................?

---

Because so many gun owners do not abide by the rules. Like ones who leave guns unsecured and seem surprised when they are misused by kids or stolen by thieves.

Or sell their guns to gang members like that fat fuck Mabey from the Coromandel. Or Dale Jenner from Hamilton.

Or join a gang themselves like that guy Beaver from Auckland who had a B and E endorsement and joined the Hells Angels.

Or leave the keys in the lock of the safe "So I don't lose them" like a stupid prick that used to belong to a club I belong to.

And, if you know the rules and as a law abiding firearms owner and you abide by the rules, you'll know the cops can and do inspect guns held on endorsements.

If the cops don't check, how will they ever know you abide by the rules? The examples above, just off the top of my head, show that too many firearms licence holders simply can't be trusted to follow the rules.

I'm happy for them to come and check my guns and security anytime.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by systolic

Because so many gun owners do not abide by the rules. Like ones who leave guns unsecured and seem surprised when they are misused by kids or stolen by thieves.

Or sell their guns to gang members like that fat fuck Mabey from the Coromandel. Or Dale Jenner from Hamilton.

Or join a gang themselves like that guy Beaver from Auckland who had a B and E endorsement and joined the Hells Angels.

Or leave the keys in the lock of the safe "So I don't lose them" like a stupid prick that used to belong to a club I belong to.

And, if you know the rules and as a law abiding firearms owner and you abide by the rules, you'll know the cops can and do inspect guns held on endorsements.

If the cops don't check, how will they ever know you abide by the rules? The examples above, just off the top of my head, show that too many firearms licence holders simply can't be trusted to follow the rules.

I'm happy for them to come and check my guns and security anytime.

---

you forgot to mention leaving guns unattended in vehicles.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by systolic

If the cops don't check, how will they ever know you abide by the rules?

---

...and let them search your house and browse your hard drives. If they don't check, how will they ever know you aren't a drug dealer or kiddy porn distributor?

They could just install a camera in my gun room and monitor, as long as they don’t look when I have a stray in there? Big brother for the wrong guys, now install monitor cameras in gang head quarters with listening devices, that would be a start, they have the city centres and malls covered?:O_O: fuck freedom!!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Banana

...and let them search your house and browse your hard drives. If they don't check, how will they ever know you aren't a drug dealer or kiddy porn distributor?

---

There's a very big difference in that you agreed to cops checking your endorsed firearms and security when you got the licence endorsements.

It has been in the Arms Regulations for a long time that it's a condition of your endorsement that they can check and you let them. You didn't have to get the endorsement.

If you don't want cops checking your stuff, you could always surrender your endorsements.

No point getting upset on about things you agreed to.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by systolic

There's a very big difference in that you agreed to cops checking your endorsed firearms and security when you got the licence endorsements.

It has been in the Arms Regulations for a long time that it's a condition of your endorsement that they can check and you let them. You didn't have to get the endorsement.

If you don't want cops checking your stuff, you could always surrender your endorsements.

No point getting upset on about things you agreed to.

---

Just a reminder to everyone that this is true, just remember that if the police want to come inspect your gear and it is not a good time for you then tell them so and book a time that suits both parties.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by systolic

There's a very big difference in that you agreed to cops checking your endorsed firearms and security when you got the licence endorsements.
It has been in the Arms Regulations for a long time that it's a condition of your endorsement that they can check and you let them. You didn't have to get the endorsement.
If you don't want cops checking your stuff, you could always surrender your endorsements.
No point getting upset on about things you agreed to.

---

In the OP I was not talking about inspections, but about heavy secure storage requirements. I personally have no problems getting checked on that I stick to the law as I am not casual about firearms ownership. Just dust did a few hours work on my guns and duly stuffed them all back inside their kennel, a bit of a jigsaw, but I don't feel comfortable with such stuff lying about, even when there are no kids about.

The point was, many people who are safe, responsible, fit and proper do not apply for B/E cat as they just can't be bothered and/or cannot afford the extra heavy "security" -- and this discouragement was/is the MAIN (and intentional) effect of the stricter storage requirements, at least on the part of police. Which explains why they are so hot on security but can't be bothered to attend to investigate many firearms thefts.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by 40mm

you forgot to mention leaving guns unattended in vehicles.

---

Or toilets.... or leaving them in toilets.....

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Cordite

In the OP I was not talking about inspections, but about heavy secure storage requirements. I personally have no problems getting checked on that I stick to the law as I am not casual about firearms ownership. Just dust did a few hours work on my guns and duly stuffed them all back inside their kennel, a bit of a jigsaw, but I don't feel comfortable with such stuff lying about, even when there are no kids about.

The point was, many people who are safe, responsible, fit and proper do not apply for B/E cat as they just can't be bothered and/or cannot afford the extra heavy "security" -- and this discouragement was/is the MAIN (and intentional) effect of the stricter storage requirements, at least on the part of police. Which explains why they are so hot on security but can't be bothered to attend to investigate many firearms thefts.

---

So you think it's all a conspiracy mainly to stop people applying for endorsements, rather than simply having higher security requirements for more dangerous (or attractive to criminals) weapons like pistols and machine guns to prevent them falling into the wrong hands?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by systolic

So you think it's all a conspiracy mainly to stop people applying for endorsements, rather than simply having higher security requirements for more dangerous (or attractive to criminals) weapons like pistols and machine guns to prevent them falling into the wrong hands?

---

It would also be nice if folk didn't leave pistols lying around the place for unendorsed folk to pick up as well.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by systolic

So you think it's all a conspiracy mainly to stop people applying for endorsements, rather than simply having higher security requirements for more dangerous (or attractive to criminals) weapons like pistols and machine guns to prevent them falling into the wrong hands?

---

Cripes. @systolic, did you not read @Cordite's original post?

"However, the mere fact that stringent conditions of ownership exist should discourage people from becoming collectors."

If that quote is accurate then how can anyone deny there was/is an agenda to dissuade people from collecting restricted firearms?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by systolic

So you think it's all a conspiracy mainly to stop people applying for endorsements, rather than simply having higher security requirements for more dangerous (or attractive to criminals) weapons like pistols and machine guns to prevent them falling into the wrong hands?

---

My dear Systolic,

NZ Police sees BCE-cat firearm license holders as a problem to be managed, the fewer the better. No weather change since 1973.

Conspiracy? Such things are hard to prove so we should not bother speculating. NZ Police were not going to come right out and publicly recommend to the government "Make it unreasonably hard to own black guns and pistols so as to reduce ownership numbers." Except of course in confidential reports to ministers. But, the public gets served "elfunsafety" speak. Always harder to argue against such plausible and noble intents.

Security is always and only just for kids and random burglars. Heavier security is a joke when it comes to the sort of criminals who use guns. Such criminals will do things others won't do to get guns.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Beaker

It would also be nice if folk didn't leave pistols lying around the place for unendorsed folk to pick up as well.

---

@Beaker, Who do I need to hang around if I want to find abandoned pistols?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by 40mm

@Beaker, Who do I need to hang around if I want to find abandoned pistols?

---

Don't hang around public toilets, just don't.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by systolic

There's a very big difference in that you agreed to cops checking your endorsed firearms and security when you got the licence endorsements.

It has been in the Arms Regulations for a long time that it's a condition of your endorsement that they can check and you let them. You didn't have to get the endorsement.

If you don't want cops checking your stuff, you could always surrender your endorsements.

No point getting upset on about things you agreed to.

---

Do you actually believe any of the dribble you post on this forum?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by 40mm

@Beaker, Who do I need to hang around if I want to find abandoned pistols?

---

Go to a pistol club while the police are there, they are shocking and have been caught out leaving a club with knowing if they had all their pistols or not.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by 40mm

Cripes. @systolic, did you not read @Cordite's original post?

"However, the mere fact that stringent conditions of ownership exist should discourage people from becoming collectors."

If that quote is accurate then how can anyone deny there was/is an agenda to dissuade people from collecting restricted firearms?

---

It is taken from a report written, mainly about pistols being held by banks, security companies etc as a review of policy, so not actual policy.

Also referring to collectors, the report also says:

7.34 Conclusion
We conclude that there can be no objection to bona fide firearms collectors collecting pistols, provided the pistols are inoperable and kept under strict security conditions.

There was no formal definition of 'collector' at the time and no formal written policy.

Anyway, it's far too late in the evening for me to give any more thought about police reviews of policy carried out well before I was born and before both the 1983 and 1992 Arms Acts were written. Or Kiwi Gun Blog's constant persecution/victim complex. I've got a club competition in the morning and need some sleep.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by systolic

It is taken from a report written, mainly about pistols being held by banks, security companies etc as a review of policy, so not actual policy.

Also referring to collectors, the report also says:

7.34 Conclusion
We conclude that there can be no objection to bona fide firearms collectors collecting pistols, provided the pistols are inoperable and kept under strict security conditions.

There was no formal definition of 'collector' at the time and no formal written policy.

Anyway, it's far too late in the evening for me to give any more thought about police reviews of policy carried out well before I was born and before both the 1983 and 1992 Arms Acts were written. Or Kiwi Gun Blog's constant persecution/victim complex. I've got a club competition in the morning and need some sleep.

---

Good luck with the competition.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Beaker

It would also be nice if folk didn't leave pistols lying around the place for unendorsed folk to pick up as well.

---

And were not in the back pocket of gangs, and using the endorsements registers to tell the gangs where to 'shop'.

That home invasion in the Bay of Plenty would of been absolutely frightening, those wankers need to be eradicated. Would also have serious psychological effects on the home owners too. Sort of thing that makes you want to leave your home and or quit shooting all together.

Or alternatively, make you want keep a loaded firearm in the house so it never happens again. (Should never of happened in the first place tbh...)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by systolic

It is taken from a report written, mainly about pistols being held by banks, security companies etc as a review of policy, so not actual policy.

Also referring to collectors, the report also says:

7.34 Conclusion
We conclude that there can be no objection to bona fide firearms collectors collecting pistols, provided the pistols are inoperable and kept under strict security conditions.

There was no formal definition of 'collector' at the time and no formal written policy.

Anyway, it's far too late in the evening for me to give any more thought about police reviews of policy carried out well before I was born and before both the 1983 and 1992 Arms Acts were written. Or Kiwi Gun Blog's constant persecution/victim complex. I've got a club competition in the morning and need some sleep.

---

I think kiwi gunblog is fighting fire with fire, there is so much anti gun hype out there, it is a good thing to have some pro gun hype to try ballance things out a bit.
How did the comp go @systolic?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Sasquatch

That home invasion in the Bay of Plenty would of been absolutely frightening, those wankers need to be eradicated. Would also have serious psychological effects on the home owners too. Sort of thing that makes you want to leave your home and or quit shooting all together.

Or alternatively, make you want keep a loaded firearm in the house so it never happens again. (Should never of happen in the first place tbh...)

---

Yeah, but apart from that being illegal it probably wont work unless you are awake when they come in. By the time the door is smashed in and you wake up and figure out what is going on they will be at you. A good alarm with drive way sensors or a couple of dogs will be a good early warning signal.
Or punji traps and claymores.....

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by 40mm

Yeah, but apart from that being illegal it probably wont work unless you are awake when they come in. By the time the door is smashed in and you wake up and figure out what is going on they will be at you. A good alarm with drive way sensors or a couple of dogs will be a good early warning signal.
Or punji traps and claymores.....

---

Add fake safe with replicas and spiked guns, a safe room is also a good selling point for your house. Dog comes with us into the safe room, sorry.

Beyond that stick your hand in your pocket and point your index at me and you'll get my guns. The problem with gun happy criminals is the Prosecutors, Courts and the NZ Police. I have no wish to risk death or hurt to make up for their failures.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by 40mm

@Beaker, Who do I need to hang around if I want to find abandoned pistols?

---

Parliament toilets, on the roads just outside gun ranges (after police training sessions), etc.... :)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by 40mm

Yeah, but apart from that being illegal

---

I wouldn't say it's illegal, more so, it is frowned upon by 'law enforcement'. There is no law stipulating it is a criminal offence to defend yourself with necessary force. Necessary being so, that if your dwelling is being invaded by armed burglars who want your guns.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Sasquatch

I wouldn't say it's illegal, more so, it is frowned upon by 'law enforcement'. There is no law stipulating it is a criminal offence to defend yourself with necessary force. Necessary being so, that if your dwelling is being invaded by armed burglars who want your guns.

---

The concept of a panic room has a lot going for it.

https://unitedlocksmith.net/blog/how...diy-panic-room

A related concept us safe zones. E.g. everyone sleeps upstairs and a secondary locked sturdy door stops free movement downstairs to upstairs in effect presenting intruders with a secondary front door. . Buys time to activate the loud burglar alarm indoors and outdoors, phone for help, even extract n load any guns stored in a legal manner. Unlikely to need them by that stage as invaders now know they are dealing with a harder target and will take off ---- unless rhey are on P or benzos, in which case you will need to apply everything you have learnt from watching the Walking Dead.

BTW how many seasons of that nonsense show by now?

@Cordite season 9 is the latest one, AMC have a break over the holidays then part two of S9 will commence mid Feb.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Sasquatch

I wouldn't say it's illegal, more so, it is frowned upon by 'law enforcement'. There is no law stipulating it is a criminal offence to defend yourself with necessary force. Necessary being so, that if your dwelling is being invaded by armed burglars who want your guns.

---

Yeah true, but having it ready for defence is surely not legal. And by the time the safe is opened and the ammo loaded etc its probably gonna be too late. Unless you just so happened to have the gun out already for maintenance etc then its unlikely to be any use.

Personally I think that any intruder in your home should be treated as an immediate threat to you and your families safety. (Regardless of any weapons visible)
I'm not speaking from experience, but if someone came into my house I would assume I was being flanked by their fellow scumbags (going around to the other doors/windows and attempting to surround me or get to my family) and the only reasonable defence would be to try to incapacitate, with no hesitation whoever I see first then move onto the next guy and give my family as much time as I can to hide or escape etc. (watched enough movies eh)

As for reasonable force in a situation like that, How would an aggressive intruder in your home react if you tried to defend yourself but didn't hit hard enough, or missed? Do they deserve to be hit softly or carefully?
HELL NO! the only reasonable amount of force in a situation like that is to use all of it! what ever is the best tool you have immediate access to: bat, gun, kung fu, what ever you can to ensure they do not get up while your back is turned, so you can continue to protect your family from the next guy who is probably climbing in your daughters window by now.

makes me mad thinking about scumbag tough guys.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Sasquatch

@Cordite season 9 is the latest one, AMC have a break over the holidays then part two of S9 will commence mid Feb.

---

I'm worried about you too Sasquatch. (<:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by 40mm

Yeah true, but having it ready for defence is surely not legal. And by the time the safe is opened and the ammo loaded etc its probably gonna be too late. Unless you just so happened to have the gun out already for maintenance etc then its unlikely to be any use.

Personally I think that any intruder in your home should be treated as an immediate threat to you and your families safety. (Regardless of any weapons visible)
I'm not speaking from experience, but if someone came into my house I would assume I was being flanked by their fellow scumbags (going around to the other doors/windows and attempting to surround me or get to my family) and the only reasonable defence would be to try to incapacitate, with no hesitation whoever I see first then move onto the next guy and give my family as much time as I can to hide or escape etc. (watched enough movies eh)

As for reasonable force in a situation like that, How would an aggressive intruder in your home react if you tried to defend yourself but didn't hit hard enough, or missed? Do they deserve to be hit softly or carefully?
HELL NO! the only reasonable amount of force in a situation like that is to use all of it! what ever is the best tool you have immediate access to: bat, gun, kung fu, what ever you can to ensure they do not get up while your back is turned, so you can continue to protect your family from the next guy who is probably climbing in your daughters window by now.

makes me mad thinking about scumbag tough guys.

---

Be vary careful confronting an intruder. May be loaded up on drugs to cope with their fear, they can be addicted to the buzz of the burglary but have to take something to cope with the fear. Sometimes the fear is what makes them suddenly have to defaecate in your living room. Basically, confronting someone drugged up, all bets are off and you can end up with a biro kicked into your brain through your ear. Definitely don't sneak up on them, make a racket rather.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by 40mm

Yeah true, but having it ready for defence is surely not legal. And by the time the safe is opened and the ammo loaded etc its probably gonna be too late. Unless you just so happened to have the gun out already for maintenance etc then its unlikely to be any use.

Personally I think that any intruder in your home should be treated as an immediate threat to you and your families safety. (Regardless of any weapons visible)
I'm not speaking from experience, but if someone came into my house I would assume I was being flanked by their fellow scumbags (going around to the other doors/windows and attempting to surround me or get to my family) and the only reasonable defence would be to try to incapacitate, with no hesitation whoever I see first then move onto the next guy and give my family as much time as I can to hide or escape etc. (watched enough movies eh)

As for reasonable force in a situation like that, How would an aggressive intruder in your home react if you tried to defend yourself but didn't hit hard enough, or missed? Do they deserve to be hit softly or carefully?
HELL NO! the only reasonable amount of force in a situation like that is to use all of it! what ever is the best tool you have immediate access to: bat, gun, kung fu, what ever you can to ensure they do not get up while your back is turned, so you can continue to protect your family from the next guy who is probably climbing in your daughters window by now.

makes me mad thinking about scumbag tough guys.

---

I'm not saying this is the best option, @Cordites post about making a secondary obstacle for them to get past is a bloody good one, cheers cordite.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by 40mm

Yeah true, but having it ready for defence is surely not legal.

---

Yeah but how is it not? If the firearm is under your supervision then how is it 'illegal'? The bollocks in the arms code about self-defence not being a valid reason to own firearms is not law. It's your dwelling, you might live on a farm and carry a rifle around with you some of the time.

Obviously firearms must be locked away securely when not in use but lets say hypothetically, your neighborhood had one or two aggravated burglaries during the night in the past week. What are some viable options for protecting you and your family? Must be law-abiding recommendations and concur logical and rational thinking:

- Alarms, sensors and dogs. Yep, great but if intruders are persistent enough or 'cracked-out' you need a back up plan. Alarms can be ignored and dogs wounded or killed.

- Panic room? Yeah sure but have you got the funds for that? You renting like most of the country? Not an option for most.

- Your bare hands, I wouldn't recommend it. If you did decide to go that route you need a lot of discipline and training to be proficient enough to defend yourself and others. High level of training and years of experience is required for disarmament too, hardly an option for the physically challenged and the elderly.

- Bat or other blunt weapon, yep good, up until a certain point...

- Knife, sword or machete, yep good, up until a certain point...

- Blank firing pistol, probably a viable option for most people, no license required other than must be 18+ (make sure it's not a top venting model, has to be front) but other then making a lot of noise, at the end of the day, you are only bluffing.

- Telephone or cellphone calling the police, your kidding right? Even with a 5 minute call out time (that's me being overly optimistic!) a LOT can happen in 5 minutes... If doable, a sensible option is to get another family member dialing 111 WHILST attending to the immediate threat yourself. Note: Short call out times are only realistic for city slickers, the average call out time is more like 10-15+ minutes for big towns.

- Loaded firearm, the equalizer and best option for home D. Deals with lethal and non-lethal threats. Non-lethal threats may deter from the mere presentation of one. And then there is also a warning shot - That would make most criminals scat and used in a non-lethal way, can defuse very tense situations.

Some here may disagree with this and say 'we don't need firearms' for defence radi raa, but at the end of the day it's you and your families lives you're wanting to preserve. May only be a point-of-a-percent chance it could happen to you but we still all wear seat belts when we go driving.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by 40mm

@Beaker, Who do I need to hang around if I want to find abandoned pistols?

---

The police... https://kiwigunblog.wordpress.com/20...-a-little-bit/

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Sasquatch

The bollocks in the arms code about self-defence not being a valid reason to own firearms is not law.

---

I suggest that the Arms Code summarizes society's rules for the legal possession and use of firearms.

When there are intruders into our houses and our families are at risk, these ferals have broken the agreements and rules that sustain our society - into tiny little pieces - and by their presence in our dwelling they intend harm to our families. The Arms Code does not, can not* then apply.

(* I suspect after the event a moiety of the Crown's lawyers will disagree, and pursue the citizen defending his/her family with more tenacity and zeal than has ever been seen directed at home invaders... but that speaks far more to the hypocrisy and treachery of some legal Pharisees than it does to the right to protect one's family from intruders).

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by 40mm

I'm not saying this is the best option, @Cordites post about making a secondary obstacle for them to get past is a bloody good one, cheers cordite.

---

Your driveway alarm, I have one acquaintance with one - he had it combined with a camera that would freeze frame whatever drove past, effectively increases the security of your front door as you won't be surprised there either, never mind needing the secondary zone. To have a secondary zone effective, you'd need to be able to respond to door callers through a video link to upstairs as well as to downstairs. Anything too inconvenient, and eventually it won't be used.

A simple driveway sensor system. Does look like it needs some more weather protection and camo paint, except over the sensor window.
https://www.trademe.co.nz/home-livin...22f6e3bfe30186 There are el-cheapo ones for less than $20, but with only 60m range, but even they can easily get their range extended to several hundred metres by longer aerial wires. I had a garage opener I got working out to 300m by extending aerials of controller and receiver - no real purpose for it, just playing.

@Sasquatch, a simple measure like a sturdy beam or bolt inside your bedroom door can buy you time. Mistake to focus on the whole Jodie Foster panic room movie thing with food for 5 days, CCTV screens, running water and toilet. Over the top -- except there is the usual civil defense preparedness supplies to consider. Also bear in mind that you can have your old mobile phone with an old sim sitting ready there - you do not need a plan or credit to dial 111, just need to have it charged (knowing sod's law, your new phone will be downstairs on the sofa). The older the better as it will have a more powerful transmitter to cope with the old days of poorer cell tower cover. Having a video/voice system from bedroom to front door is useful - if someone calls uninvited in the early hours, they won't find you bleary eyed and half conscious just inside when they break down what appears to be your only front door.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Sasquatch

Yeah but how is it not? If the firearm is under your supervision then how is it 'illegal'? The bollocks in the arms code about self-defence not being a valid reason to own firearms is not law. It's your dwelling, you might live on a farm and carry a rifle around with you some of the time.

Obviously firearms must be locked away securely when not in use but lets say hypothetically, your neighborhood had one or two aggravated burglaries during the night in the past week. What are some viable options for protecting you and your family? Must be law-abiding recommendations and concur logical and rational thinking:

- Alarms, sensors and dogs. Yep, great but if intruders are persistent enough or 'cracked-out' you need a back up plan. Alarms can be ignored and dogs wounded or killed.

- Panic room? Yeah sure but have you got the funds for that? You renting like most of the country? Not an option for most.

- Your bare hands, I wouldn't recommend it. If you did decide to go that route you need a lot of discipline and training to be proficient enough to defend yourself and others. High level of training and years of experience is required for disarmament too, hardly an option for the physically challenged and the elderly.

- Bat or other blunt weapon, yep good, up until a certain point...

- Knife, sword or machete, yep good, up until a certain point...

- Blank firing pistol, probably a viable option for most people, no license required other than must be 18+ (make sure it's not a top venting model, has to be front) but other then making a lot of noise, at the end of the day, you are only bluffing.

- Telephone or cellphone calling the police, your kidding right? Even with a 5 minute call out time (that's me being overly optimistic!) a LOT can happen in 5 minutes... If doable, a sensible option is to get another family member dialing 111 WHILST attending to the immediate threat yourself. Note: Short call out times are only realistic for city slickers, the average call out time is more like 10-15+ minutes for big towns.

- Loaded firearm, the equalizer and best option for home D. Deals with lethal and non-lethal threats. Non-lethal threats may deter from the mere presentation of one. And then there is also a warning shot - That would make most criminals scat and used in a non-lethal way, can defuse very tense situations.

Some here may disagree with this and say 'we don't need firearms' for defence radi raa, but at the end of the day it's you and your families lives you're wanting to preserve. May only be a point-of-a-percent chance it could happen to you but we still all wear seat belts when we go driving.

---

Man, I fully agree with you.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Cordite

Be vary careful confronting an intruder. May be loaded up on drugs to cope with their fear, they can be addicted to the buzz of the burglary but have to take something to cope with the fear. Sometimes the fear is what makes them suddenly have to defaecate in your living room. Basically, confronting someone drugged up, all bets are off and you can end up with a biro kicked into your brain through your ear. Definitely don't sneak up on them, make a racket rather.

---

Is that "biro kicked into your brain" from an action movie? It rings a bell @Cordite