TITLE:
In My Defence...
VALIDITY:
Allowed home defence via 158.1 (new policy suggested: homedefense, with dependency on guns being legal to read true)
DESCRIPTION:
After a flashbang grenade was thrown through his bedroom window and his locked front door was smashed open, @@DEMONYMCAPITALISED@@ Rifle Association member and legal owner @@randomname@@ reached for his shotgun to defend his home. He shot the first intruder he saw breaking into his house. Unfortunately for him, the intruder was a police officer, actioning a no-knock warrant at the head of a SWAT team. Later, it was found that the warrant was issued on bad information, based on a fabricated set of terrorism allegations by a vindictive ex-girlfriend.
OPTION ONE
"The home-defence laws have stopped me from being prosecuted, but not from being punished," explains @@randomname(1)@@, who sports a black eye and multiple taser burns. "They don't take kindly to 'cop-killers' down at the station, and... well, I can understand why they were a little emotional in their response. We have to stop these no-knock warrants from being issued altogether, and give compensation to victims of police overenthusiasm. Oh, and my ex-girlfriend? She should be the one standing trial for homicide. Serves her right for never bringing my Jack Michaelson vinyls back..."
Outcome: SWAT teams on drug busts always knock three times before entering
OPTION TWO
"Look, no-knock warrants are broadly useful tools of enforcement," rebuts police officer @@randomname@@, lovingly stroking the butt of @@his@@ rifle. "They actually reduce the risk of violence because we can normally act before perps get a chance to prepare any defence. Besides, we shouted 'POLICE!' just before we kicked his door in. Not our fault if he couldn't hear us because of his so-called disorientation. He knew he was shooting a cop, and should go to prison for it."
Outcome: glaziers and doormakers are busy all year round
OPTION THREE
"I never expected anyone to get shot," wails @@randomfirstfemalename@@, the ex-girlfriend who made the false allegations, fluttering her eyelashes innocently. "I just wanted him to have a shock in the middle of the night, like I did that time he came home drunk at 2am and threw up on my face. That's not a good way to wake up! I think maybe people should be allowed to have guns, but should only be allowed to use them for their jobs, or for sports. Idiotic use of firearms for so-called self-defence is just macho posturing, and someone always gets hurt with macho posturing. Get rid of the home defence laws!"
Outcome: guns are allowed so long as you don't actually shoot them
OPTION FOUR
"People don't kill people, guns do!" wails weeping liberal @@randomname@@, trying to make the issue about gun control, much to the disgust of the first two speakers. "Not only should private citizens not have guns, but the police shouldn't have guns either! In fact, I'm not even sure soldiers should carry guns! Guns are horrible things, and are the real bad guys here! Ban them all!"
Outcome: office staplers and paintball guns are seen as intrinsically evil
FIRST DRAFT:
SUBMITTED 30.1.2018