6
Under Section 10, a person accused of using firearms unnecessarily, and therefore charged with manslaughter, would only have to say that it appeared to him necessary to fire, and that would be an end of the matter. I think this difference must be a slip, but it is nevertheless a very important one.
If there were no references to firearms, I think these sections would authorise their use "if"necessary": should not that be sufficient? The words in parenthesis seem to me a dangerous invitation to use firearms where there is no real need to do so.
In view of the correspondence about the Protected Places (Safety) Ordinance, it is perhaps surprising that the Secretary of State was not consulted before this Ordinance was enacted. On the other hand, I would refer to the proposal to send a circular despatch to Colonial Governments, suggesting that they should ensure that they have sufficient security powers; nevertheless I do not think that the power to use firearms as conferred by Part II of this Ordinance is contemplated.
With regard to X in Mr. Sidebotham's minute, we frequently have surprising legislation to which no objection has been taken in Colonial Legislatures.
S 23/12/48.
I think an should
ack
them to
Correct
10/2). But I fell that to
amend the Ordinance generally
xas
to withdraw the power given for the use
would be interpreted at
of picamus would be
present
an an
and
indication of weak mus
I would therefre
would be highly damaging to
public morale.
Fell the Gov. of the doubts which have
been expressed
and ade
that
the
malter
may
be reviewed whene
June
settled
conditions
are
restored. Meanwhile,
be
administrative directions should
issued
to the police as to the cricumstances
in which there powers may
in practice.
powers may be invoked
6.8.8.8.1.49.
I agree, kes 10/1 al- once