Self defence: an original right

While we may use anything at our immediate disposal to defend ourselves, we are not permitted to carry anything for the specific purpose of self-defence. That includes not only potentially lethal options such as guns and knives, but non-lethal means such as pepper sprays, mace and personal tasers. Even bullet-proof vests are prohibited.

In terms of insanity, it gets worse. In Victoria, the government has just introduced a ban on the carrying of machetes. Already "controlled weapons", meaning they could not be possessed or carried without lawful excuse, they will now be classified as prohibited weapons like grenades and machine guns. The government claims the ban is necessary to address the use of machetes in violent crimes, following a surge in assaults and home invasions by youth gangs. The powers of the police to search for knives and machetes without a warrant is also being expanded.

As is obvious to anyone who follows the news, criminals pay no heed to laws prohibiting the use of guns. They are not likely to take any greater notice of the ban on machetes. Will youth gangs be deterred from carrying machetes? It seems unlikely. The surge in violent crime in Victoria, and to a lesser extent in other states, is mostly due to competition in the illegal tobacco market, a consequence of Australia's massive tobacco excise.

What will not change is most Victorians remaining unable to defend themselves. The elderly, disabled and women are particularly vulnerable, but any person who obeys the law is at risk.

Only the police have a practical right to self-defence and even then, only while on duty. The inference is that on-duty police are so well distributed in the community that the rest of us do not need to take personal responsibility for our safety. But as the saying goes, when seconds count the police are minutes away. Or, in the country, hours.

In countries in which practical self-defence is legal, criminals are more hesitant to attack people because they never know how a potential victim might resist. It is not necessary for everyone to carry a weapon; the real possibility that a victim may be carrying a concealed weapon is a powerful deterrent.

Australians may never embrace the use of guns for self-defence, but they also never agreed to being rendered defenceless. It is particularly obscene to tell women to remain vigilant about their personal safety while at the same time prohibiting them from carrying anything that might preserve that safety.

Only an authoritarian society would treat its citizens as victims, with the government masquerading as a guardian angel. Only Australia is that authoritarian.