From Oz Fish And Game
and media reports
THREE months ago, NSW Premier Chris Minns called 75-year-old Keith Blessing a hero. It was difficult to describe him any other way after hearing what police alleged happened inside Keith and his wife Di’s rural home at Torrington, near Tenterfield, in June.
The couple were asleep when a 34-year-old man allegedly entered their home and attacked them with a knife. Di was stabbed in the chest and Keith suffered serious abdominal injuries.
Keith fought off the alleged attacker with a knife forcing him to retreat on to the verandah, and called 000.
Before the police could arrive, the intruder attempted to regain entry into the home, but Keith retrieved his legally-held firearm, and fired one shot. The alleged intruder was hit in the abdomen. Keith and Di were later airlifted to hospital in critical condition.
So why did this same Minns Labor government allow Keith Blessings’ firearms licence to be revoked and what happens next?
The alleged home invader has been identified as Joshua Dylan Trethewey, who survived the incident after being treated for a gunshot wound and placed under police guard. He was subsequently charged with attempted murder.
Detective Superintendent Chris McKinnon said at the time that Keith had done his best under extraordinarily difficult circumstances to defend himself and his wife, describing what he managed to do despite his injuries as “quite impressive”. Police also acknowledged that a person is entitled to use reasonable force in self-defence.
Speaking several days later, the Premier said: “I think Keith acted like a hero in these circumstances.” Minns said Keith had saved himself and his family and described the attack as the kind of crime that destroys people’s sense of safety inside the one place they should feel secure, their own home.
Oz Fish and Game says if Chris Minns truly believed that Keith was a hero, he’d provide him with enough support to overturn his licence removal.
“Between himself and his counterpart Yasmin Catley MP, they have enough clout behind them to influence the firearms registry.
“At the very least, this should lead to an urgent review of the facts surrounding this matter. At most, they could vouch for his use with a firearm in a self-defence capacity, and seek support from the attorney general for a retroactive exemption to his licensing conditions.”
The group notes that to date, none of this has happened and what’s more concerning is that they are unaware if any further legal proceedings are coming down the bureaucratic pipeline.
“Now, let’s ask the obvious question that exists here – Is there a precedent for MP’s to represent a citizen in this capacity? Yes, there is.”
The NSW hunting organisation Oz Fish and Game says local MPs routinely represent the public when faced with licensing refusal or revocation. While they don’t have direct control over the decision making process, they can request an ‘urgent review’ to be held on the behalf of the applicant.
Such a request is generally submitted to both the Police Minster (Catley) and the firearms registry. From their understanding, there’s also no legal barrier which prevents them from reaching out to the Attorney General and pleading his case.
The group also notes that in terms of quashing any charges placed against Blessing, there’s another precedent and ironically, it involves the misdeeds of another politician – the 2018 serving Police Minister David Elliott, who shared photos of himself and others shooting a handgun and a submachine gun at the opening of a prison shooting range near Windsor in north-west Sydney.
The participants were unlicensed, and the sub-machinegun is a prohibited weapon.
Elliot was investigated in 2020 after the photos were recirculated online. His defence was that he had “acted in good faith under the assumption that CSNSW had complied with all of its administrative requirements according to the Firearms Act”.
Effectively, he didn’t know it was a breach of the law and from any rudimentary understanding of the law, ignorance is not a valid excuse to break the rules.
Despite this Elliot was never charged, the matter was never taken to court, and he also retained his position as both an MP and the NSW Police Minister.
Oz Fish and Game asks why the NSW police failed to charge him for an obvious crime? They suspect that it was because of his influence as the Police Minister, along with the support of his colleagues.
“Now, if that’s the standard that politicians abide by, it’s worth asking – why can’t exemptions be made to otherwise decent, upstanding members of the community? Especially, in the capacity of self-defence?
“The answer is obvious. There’s nothing to stop an exemption being made. Only the deliberate avoidance of an issue by unscrupulous politicians, who’d rather push an agenda, than do the right thing!”
Last I heard, using a firearm for self defence or for any other purpose but for the purpose for which a firearm license was issued is considered an offence and makes the license subject to cancellation.
.
Unfortunately, nowadays, it appears our guvernors consider there is no longer a need for a right of appeal or an independent review against a license cancellation. So that’s that. Case closed. And there’s even no need to provide a reason!
.
But imagine if a law enforcement apparatchik refused to issue you or could take away your DRIVERS LICENSE or ANY other license for whatever reason he chooses. And you have no right of appeal or right to independent review! And no right to be even provided with a reason.
.
How would you like that sort of situation? A state where any license is no longer confirmation of Competence but is converted into a “privilege” or an “entitlement” issued and controlled at the behest of a faceless apparatchik. An apparatchik effectively granted Papal Infallibility by our lawmakers.
.
That makes an apparatchik’s decision the Word of God ! UNACCOUNTABLE to anyone but God.
.
Let us hope such denial of Natural Justice to the population delivers Divine Justice at the polls Because not only God knows who can remedy the situation! And who can eliminate Natural inJustice for Him.
I googled that information
RESPONSE to Neville Thompson’s September 22,10:15 pm assertion:
<<<<<<<<<<<<<
So where's the link?
What makes you think that, when it comes to anything pertaining to Israel, hearsay will do ?
But no disclosure as to the identity of the individual(s) who issued the revocation !
So what’s the big secret?
It’s interesting to note that Satanyahoo advocated for greater restrictions on gun ownership in the Western countries…under the guise of “fighting terrorism”…written back in the 1980s. It’s documented within this very revealing expos’e:
https://www.bitchute.com/video/vRpcSgZer2Cy
+
WAKE THE FVCK UP AMERICA.
Seeing Israeli’s are allowed to defend themselves with lethal force under Section 345 of the Israeli Penal Code and Article 34J-34O why aren’t Australian’s allowed the same right to defend ourselves ?
The 1996 firearms act is 431 pages long. In its opening statement of its purpose it states: (i) establishing a system of licensing and regulating the possession, carriage and use of firearms and related items which DOES NOT ALLOW FOR SELF DEFENCE to be used as a reason for obtaining a licence to possess, carry or use a firearm. Our Ozzog MP vote Ho’s may be able to exempt themselves from it but not citizens. If an exemption was granted we would all be able to safely defend our homes soon enough. Armed criminals are no threat to Government, armed citizens not so much and why past Dictators have always banned gun ownership like Castro and Stalin did. Armed insurrection is the only real threat that Politicians have to fear. It is the main purpose of citizens right to bear arms being enshrined in the US constitution.
Not only that, as KBs’ self defense was legally ‘unlawful’, even despite his use of ‘reasonable force’ shooting the perp in the stomach, not head or heart the criminal is entitled to sue him for damages. If KB followed ‘the law’ he and his wife would be dead, 100%, . Dr Bruce Paix (exADF) explains all this and why at Rumble / Faith and Politics in Australia. I think a baseball bat to smash their face in reasonable enough, as long as the nose, teeth and jaw are all included, so sue me.
Minns should act immediately. Self-defense is a God-given right.
The root problem, though, is that there should be NO RESTRICTION on firearms. Instead, enforce the criminal laws regarding assault, battery and robbery. A firearm is a machine. Here, we would borrow a backhoe from a neighbor (they may even operate it for you) and plant a new flower bed. Fill it wihendangered species, making it a crime for the police to molest it. The poor would-be murderer would tragically go missing, one of many such events here in the wilderness. Poor bloke was probably eaten by a bear or maybe a croc.
What a weak kneed premier Minns is. One moment riding on the wave of support for the shooter of the criminal charged with attempted murder then, through total cowardice, failing to stick by what was obviously right by failing to show leadership in directing the craven firearms registry, allowing them to revoke his shooters licence. Being scared of the looney left and their obsession over guns is not the mark of a true leader but of a cowardly craven politician scared to make a correct decision. Grow a backbone and do the right thing Minns, and you shouldn’t have to be prompted.
UNDER ORIGINAL CONSTITUTIONAL LAW WHICH WAS VOTED INTO POWER AND AUTHORITY BY THE PUBLIC OF THE TIME, SELF DEFENCE IS NEITHER A CRIME NOR A THREAT TO ANYONE ELSE WHO IS NOT ATTACKING YOU.
SO HAVING A WEAPON TO USE FOR SELF DEFENCE IS NOT A CRIME AND LICENCING PUT IN PLACE WITHOUT A REFERENDUM REQUIRING IT SHOULD BE UNLAWFUL.
GOVERNMENT WOULD NOT BE FEARFUL OF THE PUBLIC IF IT ALWAYS DID THE RIGHT THING, AND WAS WORTH A CRUMPET.
COMMON LAW IS NOW BACK IN PLACE IN AMERICA, AND WILL FOLLOW ON HERE SOON, AND GUNS WILL BE ALLOWED AGAIN BY COMMON LAWS.
THE CORRUPTION OF THE AUSTRALIAN GOVERNMENT CORPORTATION THAT HAS STAGED A COUP D E’TAT HERE AND REMOVED THE COMMONWEALTH OF AUSTRALIA, WILL BE DISLODGED SHORTLY, AND IT’S PROPONENTS WILL BE TREADING ON THIN AIR.
Pushing an agenda versus doing the right thing is an accurate description of the bipolar situation afflicting today’s world. Unlike the left versus right polarity inherited from the French Revolution (but not the English revolutions of the 17th century, either Cromwell’s or King William III’s 1688 “glorious revolution” (unrecognized by Marxists) it has useful potential application. The global citizens’ movement that emerged with the COVID crime of 2021 is plagued by what can only be called superstition. This is a concept that to which importance was attributed in 17th and 18th century Britain but is not much part of the Marxist vocabulary. What is its opposite? AI gives the answer of rationality and/or science. But in the English-language terminology of 300 and more years ago (and in e.g. Greek there is no really adequate translation for “superstition”) the answer would be “enthusiasm”. Any student of English literature will be familiar with the way Dr. Samuel Johnson, (who wrote the first English dictionary) uses the word. It was not a personal eccentricity on his part. The usage was general: https://halva.proboards.com/post/3372 David Hume acknowledged that superstition has a social component that is generally lacking from the individualistic phenomenon of “enthusiasm” (except at regrettable times of mob insanity).