Page 1687 - Week 06 - Thursday, 13 August 1992
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
Mr Berry: There is no such place in the ACT; you are not allowed to discharge it on Commonwealth - - -
MR HUMPHRIES: You cannot shoot a gun anywhere in the ACT; is that what you are saying?
Mr Berry: Not unless it is to kill vermin. So, there you go.
MR HUMPHRIES: I am sorry, but you are stretching my credulity a rather long way. If I discharge my gun legally, and I shoot somebody's dog through the head - no pain is caused - how have I committed an offence? I have not.
Mr Berry: No, you have not.
MR HUMPHRIES: That is right.
Ms Follett: Except that it is somebody else's dog; it is their property.
MR HUMPHRIES: If I shoot someone else's dog, they have a civil remedy against me, presumably. They can sue me for the loss of their dog, which presumably would not be very much, as a dog does not have much economic value.
Members interjected.
MADAM SPEAKER: Members, please!
MR HUMPHRIES: A dog has little economic value; therefore there is not much - - -
MADAM SPEAKER: Order! Mr Humphries, please! We are on clause 19. Address your remarks to the Chair.
Mr Connolly: The answer is: Section 128 of the Crimes Act; penalty, 10 years.
MADAM SPEAKER: Order, please! Mr Humphries has the floor.
Mr Lamont: On a point of order, Madam Speaker: I thank my colleague the Attorney-General for confirming that I was right, that indeed the penalty prescribed is under the Crimes Act.
Mr Berry: Madam Speaker, this is all tomfoolery. I move:
That the question be now put.
Mr Humphries: On a point of order, Madam Speaker, I direct your attention to standing order 70, which refers to the motion "That the question be now put". It says that the motion may be put:
... unless it shall appear to the Speaker that such motion is an abuse of the rules of the Assembly, or an infringement of Members' rights ...
I am in the middle of my remarks. It is the first time I have exercised my right to speak on this clause. I have raised some reasonable points which took some time for those opposite to consider, and I would respectfully suggest that it is an abuse of my right to speak on this matter if that motion is put now. It is not tomfoolery.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .