Should pepper spray remain illegal?
According to Wikipedia, pepper spray is banned for personal use in all states except Western Australia. This is an outrageous restriction on a non-lethal means of self-defence. Sadly, most voters appear comfortable with the status quo.
The only way to change policy in favour of individual liberty is to take baby-steps. Instead of jumping straight to legal gun ownership, a moderate position would be to question the rationale behind the pepper spray ban. Pepper spray reform could elicit a more reasonable response from the public than advocating guns for self-defence, because there’s less potential for emotional fearmongering when it comes to pepper spray.
23 Comments »
Leave a comment
-
Recent Comments
jc on Minimum wages frozen 
nicholas gray on Discussion 
Bee on What Type Of Libertarian Are… nicholas gray on What Type Of Libertarian Are… 
TerjeP (say tay-a) on What Type Of Libertarian Are… 
Michael Sutcliffe on What Type Of Libertarian Are… Bee on What Type Of Libertarian Are… 
Michael C on What Type Of Libertarian Are… nicholas gray on Discussion 
Jono on America’s version of… 
Stephen Kirchner on GFC confusion, part 3: caused … nicholas gray on What Type Of Libertarian Are… 
Chris on GFC confusion, part 4: blame… 
P.M.Lawrence on Minimum wages frozen 
MikeO on GFC confusion, part 4: blame…
-
LINKS
-
Featured Book
Stats
-
ALS elsewhere
I do think this is going too far. I (unlike I’m sure other readers) support heavy restrictions on firearms for the sake of the overall safety of citizens. However pepper spray being a non-lethal weapon which is designed not to cause long term injury, should be an option for those concerned with personal safety. Otherwise what other options do we have for personal defense? (a kitchen knife maybe? no restrictions there).
Pepper spray is an option for people who are not trained in the use of guns for self defence. So are tasers, knives and sword sticks. I’d support their availability for anyone who wants to use them for that purpose.
In the US, concealed carry permits for pistols are available in 41 states. However, the permits are only issued after applicants complete a training course covering safe handling and the law. In other words, you need to know when and how to use it.
In trained hands (and it’s not that difficult to learn), a gun is hugely superior for self defence. It has much longer range, fires multiple shots (pepper spray can be used just once), and will reliably stop violent attack. However, for those unwilling or unable to learn how to use guns, any kind of weapon is usually better than nothing.
The principle behind self-defence is that we do not own our own lives unless we are able to protect them. Having the means is obviously integral to that. Libertarians definitely should support the availability of pepper spray, just as they should support the availability of other methods of self-defence including guns.
Baby steps might be required to turn back the tide of the nanny state, but only as long as we know where our steps are leading.
I … support heavy restrictions on firearms for the sake of the overall safety of citizens.
Except that nowhere in the world has there been a situation where strict gun laws have made citizens safer. For some reason those who harm others with guns do not seem to be affected by laws.
I agree that we should support Jarryd and Sukrit’s ideas of starting small before jumping straight to all out firearms ownership for self defence. Gradualism is the way forward and non-lethal technology solutions are a great way to open the debate.
Push the line of sporting firearms ownership and then, in some time, self-defence as a legitimate reason for owning a firearm under current laws.
[I]Except that nowhere in the world has there been a situation where strict gun laws have made citizens safer. For some reason those who harm others with guns do not seem to be affected by laws.[/I]
I’m speaking more in regard to unwanted mishaps whilst someone is defending themselves. I have been in situations in which I have felt my life was in danger however my perceived attacker was simply your run of the mill shit-stirrer. If I had a gun in that situation it could have ended badly, if I had pepper spray it just would have taught someone a valuable lesson
.
The idea behind an armed population is that people won’t go out starting trouble because they fear that their victim would be armed. Yeah, you may think of past situations where if there was a gun involved it might of been messy, BUT that event may not of also taken place due to a fear of a lethal reprisal by a victim. It is suicide trying to pull off a home invasion on the house of a gun nut. Its states with a lot of gun ownership criminals tend to leave people alone because they don’t want to be killed for small loot.
Pepper spray is a perfect way to get your foot in the door and try to get woman’s rights activists on board. An unarmed woman is most likely powerless against a man or group of men who may want to victimize her. Men can hit harder, become more aggressive, ect. Right now a woman can call for help, which may not work, or she could fight back, which may not work, or she could just sit and be a victim. Pepper spray, and guns, turn this table. Two 100kg body builder type guys who want to victimize a 50kg woman can be immediately met with incapacitating or lethal force, their size and strength advantage means almost nothing. People won’t victimize others if there is a good chance that it will end your life. The “Hey lady, give me your purse” phenomena may come to and end when it results in the dude’s brains being scattered behind him.
I was quite surprised when I found out that pepper spray is banned for importation (with a $275,000 fine or 10 years imprisonment) and sale in most of Australia. I thought that legalising all non-lethal weapons, at least, is something that reasonable people could agree on.
I can understand people being brainwashed by the gun massacres in America, but I’m really interested in what sorts of justifications are given for a pepper spray ban. Why isn’t it just assumed that women and the elderly should have access to it to protect themselves at night?
The reasons offered make no sense Sukrit. The most common is that it will be taken by the criminal and used against the victim, a standard lie used by the anti-gun lobby as well.
My view is that the nanny-statists see it as opening pandora’s box. Once possession of an object for the specific purpose of self-defence is acknowledged in the law (as opposed to using something that is kept for another purpose), it then leads to an argument about why you can’t have something that is genuinely effective. Like a gun.
It seems silly to make a ban on carrying something harmful. Am I not legally allowed to carry other harmful things, like rocks, or scissors, or jars of acid ?
Yeah, I’m all for pepper spray being available…
As for tasers – in some ways, I’m actually more wary of tasers than I am of guns, especially in hands of police.
“It seems silly to make a ban on carrying something harmful. Am I not legally allowed to carry other harmful things, like rocks, or scissors, or jars of acid?”
You can carry scissors, but you’re not allowed to run with them.
At the moment, Jono, yes, you are allowed such dangerous actions. But when we get a really effective Police Force, you’ll be sorry!
Why don’t we start celebrating our Aboriginal Heritage by carrying sharp-edged boomerangs around? They are sold to tourists, after all. They’ll have a hard time banning that!
Am I not legally allowed to carry other harmful things, like rocks, or scissors, or jars of acid?”
Fleeced; Apparently not if you are in England, check the article, “Cricket fan is caught with ‘lethal’ ball.”
I am not sure whether we can expect this here, we are not a very submissive people.
That’s pretty shocking, Jim… the UK really has been going downhill fast with this sort of stupidity.
I would like to think that such nonsense couldn’t happen in Australia, but for a mob that’s not very submissive, we do seem to put up with a fair amount of crap. I fear we may simply be a decade or so behind them.
For those too lazy to click on the link, the poor bloke was hassled by police for carrying “a very hard object” in public: a cricket ball.
And you’d better start bluntening those sharp tongues! An article in the Legal Affairs section of last Friday’s ‘The Australian’ discusses the Steyn Case before the Human Rights Commission- and points out that the court is looking into an equally serious matter. A standup comedian made jokes about lesbians, and some lesbians heckled him, and they didn’t like his response to their heckling, so they charged him with hate crime. In Canada, to be charged is to be guilty, it seems.
I’m sorry, JC, you’ll have to very polite from now on. How will you fill up your columns now?
I think campaigning for pepper spray legalisation is a great idea. I had no idea it was banned, and I’d wager most of the population are equally ignorant of that fact.
Great idea for a post Sukrit.
This issue is a no-brainer. Pepper spray is obviously a tool of self defense.
With a very small amount of training, pepper spray can be highly effective even on multiple attackers. The sprays in the US have a powerful spurt of at least a few metres.
I agree, it’s infuriating to think that good, conscientious citizens such as older ladies are at increased risk of horrifc crimes such as abduction, torture, rape and murder thanks to our government that is perverting their function of protecting us from violence.
If you were found walking the streets with scissors in your pocket you would most likely be charged.
[...] just been reading a post about the legal status of pepper spray in Australia[1], which seems to also serve a secondary purpose, which is airing the author’s views on gun [...]
Pingback by Guns for personal defence? No thanks. at sw’as | August 13, 2008
I bought a pepper spray for my wife and daughter and believe it is a must if they work, travel or are alone at night. Is it worth it for $35, a potential tool to save someone you loves life? I think so. I highly recommend these guys in WA http://www.ExclusiveProducts.com.au very helpful, great product
Home invaders broke into our home and used pepper spray on myself and my son then proceeded to bash and rob us as we were unable to see to defend ourselves.
This happened in Victoria thanks to the importation of WA sourced pepper spray across the borders to Vic where it is illegal to posses.
may be a good shot gun would have been handy but more than likely they would have just stolen it or worse been able to use it on us.
interested in peoples thoughts.
It sounds like you wouldn’t have been prepared to use the shotgun Jane. With any weapon, gun or pepper spray, familiarity improves effectiveness. There’s not much value in having it if you can’t or won’t use it.
Jane – how do you know it was imported from WA?