Yes, that headline is correct.
A rural homeowner in New South Wales has not been charged, after shooting a burglar who broke into his property. The burglar, Ben Rhodes, “pleaded guilty to aggravated enter dwelling with intent, which carries a maximum of 14 years in jail, and larceny.”
The Herald reports:
BENJAMIN Rhodes went to run, but he could only crawl.
His mate, Ryan Jewell, sprinted across the remote property on The Weir Road at Teralba and jumped into Cockle Creek. The pair had just been confronted by a homeowner, alerted by a security light at his farm shed, who interrupted their bungled burglary attempt.
It was early on May 14, 2016, and the second time in a few hours that the pair had broken into the remote property in search of power tools and firearms. Rhodes was shot in the left leg at close range, with Jewell later telling the police he saw a flash, heard a loud bang and then heard his mate call out for help. Jewell said he then heard more shots ring out over his head as he turned and fled.
So all in all, this begs the question: why not the rest of us? On the basis of the report from the Herald, aside from perhaps allegedly shooting at a fleeing felon (that part is unclear from the report), this home owner did all he could to do the right thing. He complied with firearm storage laws, called the Police and was only forced into action at last resort when outnumbered with multiple assailants on his own property at night time.
Sure, there have been a plethora of cases over the last 20 years where lethal force in self-defence with a firearm or similar has occurred before, some of which have made the news and some have not. The fact remains that there is clearly legal precedent for self-defence with a firearm in defence of life and property.
We’ve pointed this out several times before, and more importantly that the reality of the right to self-defence is completely useless when you don’t have the legal means to self-defence in Australia. This could have ended very badly for the home owner being outnumbered and had he not been armed we may have heard of yet another law-abiding citizen become a victim of crime. And the vapid hashtags and meaningless filters would have been flowing.
So remind me again why self-defence is still “not a genuine reason” for ownership of firearms for law abiding citizens? That’s right, only employees of the state and a few cash-in-transit operators (in defence of their lives only, not the money) during working hours are entitled to that. Us plebs aren’t apparently worthy of preserving our own lives. Bummer.
Fortunately, incidents like this one have led to an increasing number of now red-pilled Australians, particularly in Melbourne in the wake of a violent crime wave, that have seen through the preceding 21-year social engineering onslaught regarding self-defence and firearms and that it’s not morally superior to be a victim of crime.
It is proven that criminals generally commit less crime after they’ve been shot, and in spite of his injuries you would think Ben Rhodes would be wise to continue that trend.