Home› Politics & Debate
If you need urgent support, call 999 or go to your nearest A&E. To contact our Crisis Messenger (open 24/7) text THEMIX to 85258.
Read the community guidelines before posting ✨
Aged 16-25? Share your experience of using the discussion boards and receive a £25 voucher! Take part via text-chat, video or phone. Click here to find out more and to take part.
Options

Homeowner arrested after burglar falls from window.

12467…13

Comments

  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    maybe, but why should have he had to make the phone call to get help for someone braking into his home?
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    stargalaxy wrote: »
    Come on, be honest... Why should he have called an ambulance? The burglar didn't deserve an ambulance. Our emergency services have more important things to do than deal with scum like that.

    Wow, you really are fucked up. Thankfully the law is a bit more reasonable that that, and so people who shoot someone and leave them to die, they get sent down.

    I won't even start on the irony of your first post, seeing as it is the very government that you pay for, that grant you the "right" to property in the first place. But we'll just sweep that little fact under the carpet should we?
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Man Of Kent wrote: »
    I'll ask you the same question that Territt is ignoring. Where is your limit - at waht point does another person's life become forfeit?
    The reason Territt is probably ignoring it, and I am too, is because it's a stupid, arbitary question that isn't worth answering.

    If someone entered a property of mine with clear intent to do damage or to commit crime, I would want to get them out of my property as quickly as possible. I would defend myself and my property. If they were injured in the process, tough. They shouldn't have been there in the first place. If they were killed, it would be unfortunate, but I wouldn't shed any tears.
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    stargalaxy wrote: »
    The name Tony Martin has appeared several times in this thread. What a good man he was. I still remember the scenes a few years later in which he met the person who tried to burgle his house. It was interesting, to say the least. The thieving filth that broke into his house was completely unrepentant. I doubt he'd have been quite so smug if he'd died that night. I certainly wouldn't mourn his passing. Liberals don't like Tony Martin, because he believes in protecting his own property. The rich champagne socialists who run this country pay other people to protect them, and use the security "services" to do it for them. Hence why they had no understanding whatsoever of why Mr Martin did what he did.

    There is a saying that "an Englishman's home is his castle". And long should it remain so. In my view, burglars deserve no rights. Frankly, if the scumbag in question had been shot whilst going about his crime, I would not weep. The homeowner should be released immediately, the police should apologise for their gross stupidity and the burglar in question should expect a visit from the Old Bill. But will that happen? Of course not.

    :banghead:

    Its nothing to do with liberalism - its value that murder should be against the law...

    The people who broke in were thieves who should have been jailed, not shot in the back and left to bleed to death. And that's what tipped the jury that it was murder. The average person who got someone dying in the front room calls the police and ambulance. They don't just leave them their...
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    I'm With Stupid wrote: »
    I've shocked that he got away with manslaughter for something so blatantly premeditated.

    Tony Martin was found guilty of murder - the jury rejected the option to find him guilty of manslaughter. They were given this option if they believed he had not intended to kill the victim. They rejected this and he recieved a life sentence as they clearly believed beyond any reasonable doubt that he had deliberately ended another's life, being fully aware that was what he was doing.

    He initally appealed on the basis of self-defence, which was considered then rejected by three judges. However the defence also submitted evidence that Martin is a person with a paranoid personality disorder that was directed towards the idea of people intruding into his home. Based on this he conviction for murder was altered to manslaughter due to diminished responsibility. As a result his sentence of life was changed to five years.
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Territt wrote: »
    your trying to make out that phoned then up, said come round and then shot them as they come though the front door

    No, he's relaying the facts of the case. Martin had turned his house into a series of traps. The shot someone in the back as they were leaving.
    and at the end of the day you would have to be a returd not to expect a farmer to own firearms, and to do what ever it takes to defend his home,

    You know that Martin was a criminal before[/i he shot they boy, don't you?
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    stargalaxy wrote: »
    Those defending the burglars might like to answer this simple question. If your house was being burgled, what would you do? Would you want to get this rotten filth out of your property by any means necessary? Or would you just make him a cup of tea, letting him take whatever he wants? Come on, be honest... Why should he have called an ambulance? The burglar didn't deserve an ambulance. Our emergency services have more important things to do than deal with scum like that.

    Who's defender burgulars? No-one seems to be saying that. Several people are defending murder though...
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    I'm With Stupid wrote: »
    I won't even start on the irony of your first post, seeing as it is the very government that you pay for, that grant you the "right" to property in the first place. But we'll just sweep that little fact under the carpet should we?
    Completely irrelevant.

    Still no answer to the question I asked, so I'll try again. If a burglar breaks into your property, what would you do?
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Territt wrote: »
    your trying to make out that phoned then up, said come round and then shot them as they come though the front door,

    and at the end of the day you would have to be a returd not to expect a farmer to own firearms, and to do what ever it takes to defend his home,

    if this was in the USA Tony Martin would have got an award for what he had done, not treated the way he was here.

    And I suppose the kid "breaking into" his garden to get his ball back deserves a lead sandwich as well, does he? Hypothetically, of course.
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    stargalaxy wrote: »
    The reason Territt is probably ignoring it, and I am too, is because it's a stupid, arbitary question that isn't worth answering.

    Hang on though, you are suggesting that it's okay to kill someone. So is it at any point after they have entered your house without permission, or do they have to have stolen something? If it's after the theft then to what sort of value, anything?
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Territt wrote: »
    your trying to make out that phoned then up, said come round and then shot them as they come though the front door,

    and at the end of the day you would have to be a returd not to expect a farmer to own firearms, and to do what ever it takes to defend his home,

    if this was in the USA Tony Martin would have got an award for what he had done, not treated the way he was here.


    Depends on the state - some have even tougher laws than the UK (ie its not self defence if you had a chance to run and didn't take it)
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    I'm With Stupid wrote: »
    And I suppose the kid "breaking into" his garden to get his ball back deserves a lead sandwich as well, does he? Hypothetically, of course.
    Don't be stupid. Nobody's going to shoot a small child for going into a garden to get a ball. Anyone who tried shouldn't be a part of society in the first place.
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    I'm With Stupid wrote: »
    And I suppose the kid "breaking into" his garden to get his ball back deserves a lead sandwich as well, does he? Hypothetically, of course.

    how the fuck is walking into a garden to get a ball the shame as braking a window, climing into the house and stelling or coursing arm to the poeple within the house?
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    stargalaxy wrote: »
    I doubt he'd have been quite so smug if he'd died that night..

    lol
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    stargalaxy wrote: »
    If a burglar breaks into your property, what would you do?

    Depends. If I'm there then I would want to make sure that I protect my family - but that's hardly relevant because that isn't what happened in the OP or in the Martin case.

    Possessions can be replaced.
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Man Of Kent wrote: »
    So is it at any point after they have entered your house without permission, or do they have to have stolen something? If it's after the theft then to what sort of value, anything?
    The way you go on, one would be half-forgiven for getting the impression that my first resort would be to grab hold of a handgun and pump the burglar full of bullets. A complete distortion of what I'm saying.
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Also if you see someone committing a crime you're allowed to perform a citizen's arrest. You certainly don't have to help them load the TV into the back of the van and give them some tea and biccies
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    stargalaxy wrote: »
    The way you go on, one would be half-forgiven for getting the impression that my first resort would be to grab hold of a handgun and pump the burglar full of bullets. A complete distortion of what I'm saying.

    No, that's what Martin did and you are defending him.
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Flashman's Ghost wrote: »
    Also if you see someone committing a crime you're allowed to perform a citizen's arrest. You certainly don't have to help them load the TV into the back of the van and give them some tea and biccies


    Besides, they might be coffee drinkers and we all know how all those thieving immigrants only eat swans...
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    stargalaxy wrote: »
    The way you go on, one would be half-forgiven for getting the impression that my first resort would be to grab hold of a handgun and pump the burglar full of bullets. A complete distortion of what I'm saying.

    What you are saying is that you can do anything you want to someone who has broken into your house, and the police should never look into it.
    stargalaxy wrote: »
    There is a saying that "an Englishman's home is his castle". And long should it remain so. In my view, burglars deserve no rights.

    Presumably you'd be happy for someone to be allowed to just rape a burgler to teach them a lesson, rather than end their life, if they felt like it at the time? Maybe just cut their hands off if they have run out of bullets?
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Man Of Kent wrote: »
    No, that's what Martin did and you are defending him.
    Martin defended his property, he defended his own life. I wouldn't want a thief rummaging around my house, stealing my things, endangering my safety. Neither did he. He did what he felt appropriate, and I won't criticise him for it. Either way, one thing is for certain. I will never shred a tear in sympathy for a criminal.
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    stargalaxy wrote: »
    Completely irrelevant.

    Not when you're spouting bullshit like this it isn't.
    The rich champagne socialists who run this country pay other people to protect them, and use the security "services" to do it for them.
    That's the same security services that grant you the right to property in the first place is it? Maybe you'd prefer to get rid of them and defend everything yourself? Fine, but don't expect to own much more than a room full of small possessions.
    stargalaxy wrote: »
    Still no answer to the question I asked, so I'll try again. If a burglar breaks into your property, what would you do?
    Well since I'm not a fucking nutjob, I don't own a gun. But based on this 16 year old kid, I would grab the nearest bat-like object and use it to threaten them, but obviously not actually use it unless they became violent towards me (99% of burglars are cowards who will run at the slightest noise). If they did have weapons, and I could tell I would most likely be injured if I tried to use force against them, I'd do what any reasonable person would do, and sit it out, remember as much as I can, call the police, and claim on the insurance. Not fucking rocket science, is it?
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Territt wrote: »
    how the fuck is walking into a garden to get a ball the shame as braking a window, climing into the house and stelling or coursing arm to the poeple within the house?

    Just seeing where you're willing to draw the line. How about if the kid was going to steal your garden gnome?
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    stargalaxy wrote: »
    Martin defended his property, he defended his own life. I wouldn't want a thief rummaging around my house, stealing my things, endangering my safety. Neither did he. He did what he felt appropriate, and I won't criticise him for it. Either way, one thing is for certain. I will never shred a tear in sympathy for a criminal.
    stargalaxy wrote: »
    The way you go on, one would be half-forgiven for getting the impression that my first resort would be to grab hold of a handgun and pump the burglar full of bullets. A complete distortion of what I'm saying.

    Which one of those views represents your opinion SG?

    Martin's first response was inflicting death, you defend him. Yet in your second comment you seem to say that it's wrong to do that?
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    stargalaxy wrote: »
    The way you go on, one would be half-forgiven for getting the impression that my first resort would be to grab hold of a handgun and pump the burglar full of bullets. A complete distortion of what I'm saying.

    But not a distortion of the actions you're defending and praising.
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    I'm With Stupid wrote: »
    But based on this 16 year old kid, I would grab the nearest bat-like object and use it to threaten them, but obviously not actually use it unless they became violent towards me. If they did have weapons, and I could tell I would most likely be injured if I tried to use force against them, I'd do what any reasonable person would do, and sit it out, remember as much as I can, call the police, and claim on the insurance. Not fucking rocket science, is it?
    You think that the police would actually do anything about it? Goodness me, have we gone back to another age? Chances are they'd just give you a reference number and forget about it within a few weeks.
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Tony Martin - nice bloke

    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2004/04/18/nnazi18.xml&sSheet=/news/2004/04/18/ixhome.html
    Tony Martin, whose late uncle Andrew Fountaine was a founder of the National Front, said: "I am not aware of all the BNP's policies but voluntary repatriation seems a good idea to me."

    "Apparently we haven't got enough labour so we are going down the same road as the 1960s when we brought in the Pakistanis and Jamaicans. It is all very ill-thought-out."

    "There is going to be a dictator in this country, but there are such things as benign dictators. Too much liberalism is worse than too little. The politicians as we know them are already anachronisms.

    "There are things that want doing today, right now. A dictator is the way to go."
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Jim V wrote: »
    And presumably in this world view - a drug dealer should be legally allowed to kill a policeman who breaks into his house to arrest him?

    One did legally kill an undercover surveillance officer...

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kenneth_Noye
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    stargalaxy wrote: »
    You think that the police would actually do anything about it? Goodness me, have we gone back to another age? Chances are they'd just give you a reference number and forget about it within a few weeks.
    Who cares? I have insurance, like any normal person. If you don't, tough shit. But in my experience, the police have been very good. We had a bunch of tools stolen from a van outside our house. They caught the bloke, we got the money back (he'd sold the tools), and he got convicted. End of story.

    Ever actually had any experience of reporting a burglary SG, or are you going off what you've read again?
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Man Of Kent wrote: »
    Which one of those views represents your opinion SG? Martin's first response was inflicting death, you defend him. Yet in your second comment you seem to say that it's wrong to do that?
    What nonsense. Martin believed that he had little option but to shoot the burglar. I'm not going to criticise that, nor am I going to express any sympathy for the burglar in question.
Sign In or Register to comment.