Save Search

Note: Where available, the PDF/Word icon below is provided to view the complete and fully formatted document
 Download Current HansardDownload Current Hansard    View Or Save XMLView/Save XML

Previous Fragment    Next Fragment
Thursday, 31 August 2000
Page: 17049


Senator COONEY (10:38 AM) —The only problem with that proposition, Minister, is that, if the situation is covered by (2) in any event, why have we got (3)? If a person is about to injure somebody else, whether he or she is escaping or is not escaping but is simply there trying to cause danger, (2) covers it in any event. Why do you want the additional (3)? Subsection (2) states that an ADF member can shoot if he or she thinks that the person being shot at will cause serious injury to another person. Subsection (3) does not really add anything to that because, whether the person is fleeing or whether they are taking up a stationary position, that person—the criminal, if you like—is still going to inflict serious injury on another. The fact of escaping is quite irrelevant to that. So, the only additional thing in (3) is the escaping. If you were charging a jury, you would say that (2) really covers the whole situation and the only additional thing about (3) is that the person is escaping.