The Crime of Self-Defense
by Duncan Bayne
Self defense in New Zealand is a crime, not a right. If you try to defend your life, the lives of your loved ones, or that portion of your life you spent to obtain your property, you'll almost certainly be the target of criminal charges.
For example, consider the case of farmer Paul McIntyre. A group of thugs illegally entered his property, and attempted to steal his quad bike. He fired a warning shot from his shotgun, and then shot one of them, Sam Hati, in the neck. He was charged with shooting and injuring Hati with reckless disregard for the safety of others. Fortunately, a jury acquitted him of this charge , but he is awaiting a trial on a lesser charge of discharging his shotgun without reasonable cause, in a manner likely to endanger the safety of others .
This is a typical reaction to the use of force in self-defense by a New Zealander. Unlike many countries, there is no special provision for self-defense by police officers; technically they abide by the same rules as the rest of the citizenry . Of course, as it's the police who bring charges against those who defend themselves, one would hope for fair treatment for all, but the truth is that they are anything but fair. When private citizens use lethal force in self-defense the police prosecute them, as in the case of Mr. McIntyre, but when police officers do likewise, the police attempt to quash any prosecution, and try to maintain the anonymity of the officer concerned.
The issue of armed self-defense in New Zealand is made more complicated by the fact that much of our population is dispersed lightly throughout rural areas, meaning that if called, Police can take hours to provide assistance. This was highlighted recently by the case of an armed robbery in the home of an elderly couple. Police were called out to the scene, but prior to their arrival, the victims followed advice given to them earlier by the police—they handed over anything requested by the burglars, and didn't attempt to resist them with force. They couldn't call their armed neighbours for assistance, because the emergency telephone operator refused to let them make any outgoing telephone calls. The result of this was that the burglars beat the elderly man so badly he required lengthy hospitalisation, and then escaped. Worse, it transpired that the burglars likely knew of the police telling locals to simply give in to any demands made of them by armed thugs, and selected their target on that basis. The one upside to this sorry tale is that the police actually sent armed officers instead of a taxicab, and they sent those officers to the right address.
It shouldn't come as a surprise that the Government is opposed to giving New Zealanders the right to self-defense. To do so would be to admit that one has the right to keep one’s property and dispose of it in voluntary interactions; it would also involve admitting that the theft of property is equivalent to the theft of that portion of the owner’s life which went into earning it. These admissions would be out of character for a Government that now takes 46% of the average family income through taxation. Furthermore, to recognise the morality of defending oneself against aggression in a manner likely to harm the aggressor, the Government would have to surrender its own altruistic morality—as there are few acts less altruistic and more rationally self-interested than the use of force in self-defense.
There are two political parties in New Zealand committed to changing the status quo. The Libertarianz, of course, want to see self-defense recognised as an human right in the Constitution. Stephen Franks, of the ACT party, wants the law amended to provide for armed self-defense as a legitimate and easily definable defense against criminal charges. The difference between these positions underscores the differences between ACT and Libertarianz in general; the former are pushing for a rule change on the terms of the current oppressors, whereas the latter are standing on principle, regardless of the twisted morality of those unable or unwilling to distinguish between offensive and defensive force.
So, until the Libertarianz achieve real political change in New Zealand, my advice is to try to hold on to as much of your property as possible (against the efforts of both burglars and Ministers of Finance), and if you're ever in the unfortunate situation of having to defend yourself, your loved ones or your property with force, hire a good lawyer.
If you enjoyed this, why not subscribe to The Free Radical?
Discuss this Article (11 messages)
|
