A NSW man, David Dunstan, apprehended an armed intruder (intruder had a knife) in his home with an unloaded firearm. In doing so he protected his family and property without violence and safely turned the criminal over to police.
However, now the NSW police have issued a notice to his wife that she is to have restrictions on her firearms license, and is unable to store firearms in ANY place where her husband resides or frequents.
This is a terrible miscarriage of justice. The situation was escalated safely, the firearm was used as a deterrent and no one was harmed.
I understand that the ruling is that firearms are to not be used for self defence; but if someone comes at you with a knife and you have a shotgun or a knife, what do you go for? The safest force-escalation option.
Long-time readers will know my stance on gun laws. I was a competitive shooter and also had friends who were victims in the Port Arthur massacre. I don’t believe gun laws should be relaxed, however this punishment is unjust for the Dunstan family.
This is an example of the nanny state in the extreme, punishing citizens for peacefully defusing a hostile situation.
NSW police should overturn this gross injustice, or station an officer 24/7 outside every home in the state.
