Kerre Woodham: Justice in the line of public fire

We all know that you never take a knife to a gun fight. Well, everyone knows that except the 29-year-old man who walked into the Small Arms International gunshop on Thursday carrying a machete, and moments later was himself carried out with a bullet in his guts. Really. What did he expect?

While we don't know the machete-wielding intruder's intentions, I think it's fair to say that he wasn't looking for coconuts to open.

The owner of the gun store, Ray Carvell, whose son pulled the trigger, says his son probably saved his own life, the life of the shop manager and possibly the lives of innocent shoppers in the area who could have been mown down by this man had he got his hands on the guns in the shop. Wildly speculative but undoubtedly a scenario.

I have no sympathy for the man who was shot. And many members of the public who rang talkback this week don't either. They think Greg Carvell, the shooter, deserves a medal and a few of the more gung-ho callers just wish he'd aimed a couple of feet higher. They don't believe Greg Carvell should be charged with anything at all - it's obvious he was acting in self-defence - and anyone who thinks there should be anything more than a cursory police investigation is a namby-pamby idiot who's soft on crime and responsible along with this politically correct government for the degradation of New Zealand society today.

I paraphrase, but that's pretty much it. While I have every sympathy for the Carvells, pere et fils, I do think shootings involving members of the public should be put before a judge. That's what the police have tended to do in the past - gathered the evidence, put it before the courts and let the system decide where the blame lies.

In the past, in high-profile cases where men have feared for their lives and pulled the trigger resulting in injury and/or death, the defendants have been found not guilty or had the cases thrown out of court by the judges. Which surely shows that the system works.

Most people who phoned me, however, don't want to see Greg Carvell in court. They cite the stress of a court trial, the long delay in actually getting to trial and the expense involved as reasons.

All legitimate concerns.

When chummy-with-the-machete has his day in court, what are the odds that his lawyer is paid for by the taxpayer through legal aid? The Carvells would have to put their assets on the line to ensure they received proper representation and that doesn't seem fair.

Perhaps, if someone is found not guilty or has the charges dismissed in cases of self-defence shootings, their legal fees could be reimbursed. Or perhaps there could be an independent body set up to look at these types of shootings - with slightly more authority than a police investigation, but one step short of a High Court trial.

They're just suggestions, but hearing the righteous fury over the telephone lines this week made me very wary about sanctioning open season. There are some members of the public whose judgment I simply wouldn't trust and they're just a couple of heartbeats away from believing they have the right to go about acting as God's little pruning fork, ridding society of criminal scum.

Is it OK to kill a man who's trying to steal your car? Is it OK to kill a man who's running across your property? Is it OK to shoot someone who has come into your home or business wielding a weapon?

In many cases, the answer is yes, but I'd far rather the court of law was the ultimate arbiter than the court of public opinion.