Add Your Idea

Self Defence: Legalise non lethal offensive weapons.

17 Comments 24th January 2015

Under current legislation it is illegal to own and carry weapons such as pepper spray, pepper spray projectiles, and stun batons. The proposal here put forward requests the legalisation of such devices.

The current restrictions on such matters makes it difficult for law abiding citizens to protect themselves and their loved ones from harm at the hands of those who hold no such respect for the law. Knives and other lethal weapons are illegal for citizens to own and carry, and yet in recent years this has not prevented blade-related crime, stabbings, and deaths caused by such weapons.

Current self defence legislation puts law abiding citizens in a rather helpless position: the law prevents them from carrying anything which may be classed as an offensive weapon, even if its only intent is for defensive purposes, and yet the only thing this accomplishes is to put the advantage in the hands of criminals who have the means at their disposal to thwart and avoid such regulations. Despite their best efforts, it is simply not possible or realistic to expect law enforcement agencies to completely eradicate this problem.

Legalise the right to own and bear non lethal weapons for personal use in threatening situations, such as

  1. Pepper spray canisters.
  2. Low potency stun batons and related devices.
  3. Possibly projectile based weapons armed with non lethal ammunition, i.e pepper spray projectiles.

Why does this matter?

Provide an effective means for law abiding citizens to defend themselves and their loved ones without necessity of breaking the law. Let it be noted that the proposal solely covers non lethal weapons. In extremely threatening circumstances, these could make the difference between life, and death.

Act as a deterrent to predators, assault, rape, and other forms of serious crime.

1 Star2 Stars3 Stars4 Stars5 Stars (9 votes, average: 4.44 out of 5)

Highlighted posts


17 Responses to Self Defence: Legalise non lethal offensive weapons.

  1. Mike says:

    By legalising these non lethal weapons for self defense we will only compound the problem. The criminals we are defending against do not follow the law and, a determined criminal will simply purchase a more lethal weapon and use that against us. If a civilian doesn’t pose much of a threat most criminals will use minimal effort to rob/mug you and you will have minimal injuries. If you pose a threat they will up the force they need to use against you to achieve their goal.
    Plus legalising these weapons will allow criminals easier access to these weapons and they will use them against you. Remember, they have the element of surprise so will usually strike first leaving you no time to retaliate. I personally know someone in England who was mugged for his phone by a criminal using pepper spray. All legalising these non lethal weapons will achieve is better armed criminals, give them what they want and buy another, it’s better than having a permanent injury.

    • David Robertson says:

      Can you tell me where I can buy replacement facial bones, just in case my mugger happens to be having a bad day and decides he wants to smash my eye socket in while robbing me?

      Didn’t consider that part, did you Mike? You’re spineless and pathetic.

    • david says:

      mike – read the book TWELVE WEAPONS YOU CAN FIND IN THE HOME – oh and one is a child’s rattle??

    • steve says:

      You’ve had a ‘bashing’ here Mike, but your comments are right on the money. There is so much I could say about this but I fear it would be wasted on those who seem to only see the small picture.

    • Sam says:

      I’d rather be pepper sprayed and have my wallet taken than be stabbed and have my wallet taken

  2. John says:

    A sensible idea … and what a jumble of contradictions Mike’s post is.

    The bad guys have these weapons *already* Mike (not to mention firearms).

    You obviously have a right to your beliefs, but none at all to attempt to constrain others to your impotent masochistic life-view.

  3. 357mag says:

    Not true Mike, you really should try to back up what you say with evidence.
    There was a case in NSW Australia where an individual was dragged before the court with an assumed illegal pepperspray being used to defend himself. The judge set him free because he had a right to defend himself, this set a legal precendent in that state and now people are arming themselves with peppersprays with impunity.
    Assaults by criminals with sprays has not occured, violent crime has reduced. So the evidence is that allowing them SAVES LIVES.

  4. 357mag says:

    Criminals get and use any weapon they choose already so allowing the law abiding to have them would even up the playingfield just a little.
    There has been recent calls to allow the householder more leniancy and scope when tackling an intruder. I for one dont want to “bash a burglar” I would rather fill the air with an irritant spray and cause them to leg it.
    Nobody has died directy due to being sprayed, always it has been proved they had an underlying health problem, ok so peppersprays are harmless and yet in the UK they are a section 5 firearm. That is to say they are in the highest category of particularly dangerous arms alongside machine guns bazookas and hand grenades. The category should be lowered or at least there should be exemption from section 5 if used for personal protection, that way it would still be an offence to misuse them.

  5. Saveyourself says:

    Excellent idea. The prohibition on UK citizens carrying items for self defence is plainly wrong.
    Mike, you are “minimal”! I find your roll- over attitude repulsive.

  6. Jon says:

    Whats a non-leathal weapon? If i carried a rounders bat with me, thats sports equipment not a weapon. If I had a metal hair comb, its leathal if I stab you in the eye, but not leathal if i comb my hair.

  7. jon doe says:

    a criminal will always seek an edge armed or not, make the damn solicitors work for their money by really punishing the low lifes for commiting the crime in the first place, not a victim using anything to defend their /others lifes ,the circumstances of use not possession should be the issue ,license certain items via local police ,get it from them if you want it ,then they have records like shotgun certificates and revinue

    • david says:

      when one of the nomarks want to rob you they will not be polite-so do not be polite with them-mike is it you have lost touch with this planet.

  8. david says:

    I am trained in 12 forms of un armed combat and I am a serving soldier in the best army in the world if I am so bad should I be allowed out side??

  9. simon says:

    I believe a homeowner should be allowed to defend their property with whatever means. The burglar has forfeited any rights he has when he decided to burgal your home!
    i believe we should be permitted to own non lethal weapons for defence but a bit of thought can already give you this! I have some drain cleaner ( bought legally in B&Q) which is 99.9% concentrated sulphuric acid!
    – use your imagination!-

  10. Ray says:

    Good idea, the law as it stands could not be more irrational. Law abiding citizens abide by the law and go around unarmed. Criminals have no respect for the law and go around armed ! Very intelligent ! As for making it easier for criminals to get hold of weapons that is a nonsense, as it is simple for them to get hold of them now.
    Figures are also massged to make it look like our system works better. Recording murders by only those that are solved, etc.
    If it makes things better by having no defence against anything, why not apply this in every area of life ?

Comment on this idea

Good idea? Bad idea? Let us know your thoughts.


Back to top
Add Your Idea