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 ✨
Options
Essential support for under 25s
Essential support for under 25s
Take a look around and enjoy reading the discussions. If you'd like to join in, it's really easy to register and then you'll be able to post. If you'd like to learn what this place is all about, head here.
Comments
For the millionth time, the case of Tony Martin was not self defence. It wasn't an accidental death either. It was murder. Rather than not being sent to jail at all, the only disgrace here is that he served little over 3 years for the senseless and brutal murder of a 16 year old man, and all thanks to the limitless power of the fascist press.
do you mean that as soon as someone breaks the law they lose their rights? and does that include the right to justice.
He should have gone to jail for the illegal firearm alone, if I knew my nieghboor had a pump action shot gun I know I'd want them locked up. Would you be happy knowing some one on your street who the police classed as too dangerous to own a gun of any sort had a pump action shot gun?
Why?
Gun ownership should be legal.
In some instances people have the right to murder someone.
Did you know 50% of all statisics are made up on the spot.
I think its funny that in the past 50 years ago people have had less and less general respect for each other. This conincides with the campaign for more and more ridiculous human rights, coincedence i think not.
Cleary he wasn't a danger to people who went about normal lives. He was a danger to criminals, criminals who some of you are defending.
If he didn't have a shotgun and the burglars ended up killing him you'd probably be saying ohh they dont deserve to be put in prison for 25 years for killing a mad, lonely farmer. Dont blame them blame their upbringing their tough lifes anything but them.
Its so simple, if he wasn't there he wouldn't be dead. He was there he is dead, thats one more scum off the streets. Martin served his time, i think 3 years is probably right, in a ideal world he wouldn't have served a sentence at all, maybe given a medal. But i recognise that killing people shouldn't go unpunished but the law is totally screwed regarding reasonable force.
Why don't some of you invite burglars to come and take your stuff, put a sign on your door 'burglars welcome'
It doesn't matter one bit if YOU think it should be...bottom line is its NOT!! And anyone who decides to break the law should accept the consequences if they are caught!!
It's their loss.
I am defending their right to life, which fortunately in civilised countries is granted to everybody.
You are wrong that in some instances is okay to murder someone; it isn't. In some instances it's acceptable to kill someone. A killing and a murder are two different things. Martin murdered that boy; he didn't kill him in self-defence or in an accidental death. He was aware the boy was running away, he was aware his own life was not in danger, and yet he took aim and shot him in the back like a rabid dog, probably yelling "take that you c*nt!" as he shot.
That some people see nothing wrong with that is a fucking disgrace. I would recommend them to emigrate to less civilised countries that allow such practices where they will be happy living amongst their own. In here fortunately we do not believe in the death penalty for any crimes- least of all for burglary- nor in the right of anybody to become judge, jury and executioner and dispatch ‘sentences’ at will.
``It said " Over the centuries there evolved an implicit contract: in return for our renouncing our right to defend ourselves, the state undertook to do it for us. Now the authorities cannot defend us adequately - but are reluctant to redress the balance``
As far as the law is concerned, Someone else breaking the law doesnt give you the right to break the law in response, although they should take into account that most people would react similarly in similar circumstances.
Of course not. Why is that an issue?
thats all
I'd aggree with you about it being a personal freedom issue, but in this case I think the rights of society clearly out wiegh that of the individual.
what do you mean by that?
well i wouldn't have asked the question if i understood. could you provide an example?
The simple ownership of the gun does not harm anyone or infringe on their rights.
People are too pussified these days.
I mean, what a bunch of pussies and control freaks they all are for not allowing you to own a nuclear warhead or two eh monocrat?
Can we give the issue a rest? Or at least create its own thread for it...
OK I get it...with bulles it ain't safe.....:rolleyes: :rolleyes:
Because.