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
Well, good luck........
If he had shot him in the front he wouldn't have been prosecuted for murder because it would atleast look like it he shot the kid because he was scared he was coming to 'get him'!
I have come across this case time and time again whilst studing my A-Levels in law and we all have agreed that its a shame that Tony Martin got the short straw (or longest one in this case), but we all agree with the court's judgement.
Because "someone" drug up this dead thread, I shall respond to the questions which I had not addressed, a month ago...
Yes, I HAVE been shot, myself... once when I was 17 years old, while being "mugged" by an incompetent, and three times in Vietnam.
To the unasked question? Yes, I have shot others, myself. I know what is required to deliver an incapacitating shot.
As to my perception of "Fiend_85"? You are a self-possessed and ignorant twit who prattles on about that which you have zero experience, and zero comprehension. When the supposedly "trained up" police miss their target 4 out of 5 times, exactly how easy do you believe it to be to "shoot someone in the leg"? :rolleyes: Difficult enough to hit a moving target, center of mass... to hit the MUCH more erratically moving limb? Virtually impossible, by intent, and happens only through coincidence.
Yes... when my M-16 rifle jambed, in Vietnam... I delivered a headshot (with my Colt .45acp 1911 pistol) and killed an NVA soldier at a distance of about 75 yards... necessary because the NVA carried their spare magazines in a chest pouch, and the pistol bullet would not have penetrated to stop the enemy dead in his tracks. However... I would NEVER have been so patently stupid as to think that I could have delivered a shot to a moving leg.
You, however? Have demonstrated that you ARE capable of such stupidity...
The average untrained civilian? Nine times out of ten cannot hit even the trunk of an attacker. To hit a moving leg, by intent? Would be worthy of "Rippley's Believe It Or Not"...
for once man :thumb: for you
someone trained with a weapon telling it what its like
"Reasonable force"?? I know someone who used what I would consider "reasonable force" on an intruder and ended up with a criminal conviction. Gave the burgler a beating with some sort of a pole which held a lamp on the top, ended up in court for giving the guy a bashing - fucking ridiculous.
If you confront a burglar, what constitutes "reasonable force" isn't going to be of particular concern :rolleyes: .
You don't know if the intruder's got a weapon, so the obvious thing to do is take them out as quickly and as hard as possible.
The law isn't going to be there to help, it's a case of acting on instinct
If a gun is owned legally, then they've got every right to use it against burglars. As I said, you've got no idea what a burglar has in terms of weapons himself - or how far he is willing to go - so in such situations, where there's plenty of risk to the actual victim of the robbery, i can't see any reason for disagreement.
Ever use a shotgun, yourself?
The pattern of the shot does not open up all that quickly... the idea that you would cover a 6' span across a room only is accurate in fairy tales...:rolleyes:
You still must aim, and aim carefully. Otherwise, no one would ever miss at skeet shooting...
so youre quite happy that if everyone owned guns, the burgulars would arm themselves as well
we dont live in a land of eye for an eye tooth for a tooth
you use reasonable force, or even better you just avoid confronttation, and make sure they dont break into your house next time, since most burgulars only go for houses that are easy targets in terms of open doors etc
I support prohibition of guns, i was speaking hypothetically.
It's got nothing to do with an eye for an eye, a tooth for a tooth.
As for your point about making sure they don't break in, you're living in a fantasy land, that's pure delusion...breaking into houses isn't difficult, obviously an open door is an 'invite', but that's totally beside the point...
What do you term "reasonable force"? If you're confronted by a burglar, should you not have the right to incapacitate them by any means neccessary? As I said, they could have a knife, gun...you could have children, a wife...
So to give a burglar a proper seeing-to until he's unconscious, would that in your opinion be acceptable conduct?
If you just confronted him in the kitchen and twatted him then I don't see any problem whatsoever. It's you against him.
That's not to say you can hit him 20 times on the head when he's already cold though- it's all about reasonable force, and despite the Daily Mail brigades' protestations to the contrary, most people can assert without any problem what constitutes reasonable force.
If someone, like that murdering twat Martin, took careful aim and shot someone in the back who was running away, then they should rot in jail for murder.
no most burglaries are done as a result of not securing ur home, with just simple things that will make a burglar go for someone else
and on confrontation, aladins summed it up
however the man who got stabbed in his house decided to confront a burgular, and well i wouldnt risk it, id rather lose a few items i can replace than my life or risk it for the sake of a few possesions, and id make sure the bastard gets caught
That's your prerogative...plenty would confront them on principle.
Aladdin seem to think everything can be nicely categorised, reality is somewhat different. Obviously injuring a burglar who is, say, unconscious is going outwith the limits of protecting yourself etc, but it's still not something the actual homeowner should be prosecuted for - taking into account the situation, who actually provoked the assault...etc etc.
The basic line is, if you rob someone's house, you can't complain.
Likewise, if you fiddle your tax return, you can't complain if the taxman beats you up, or runs you over.
And you cant complain, if you shoplift and the store detective electrocutes your genitals
:yes:
Those who do will be dealt with accordingly by the law.
:no:
There's a stark difference between breaking and entering someone's house without intent to injure/steal and stuffing a few cans of irn bru under your jacket.:rolleyes:
An intruder poses a threat to you and others with you, the circumstances are polar opposites.
How about pre-emptive self-defence. Sounds reasonable to me.
Because no property is worth a human life. And no one has the "right" to kill anyone else even if they're trying to take off with your DVD player.
So perhaps any burglars who have killed people were just thinking on those lines... protect my life by killing them before they kill me...
Aah, but some shoplifters also pose a threat.
And some burglars pose none at all .......
so not polar opposites at all.
Each individual case is different - and wanting permission to rape, torture and kill any intruder on your private property is a sign of a diseased mind.
Who mentioned raping and torturing intruders. I certainly didn't.
What I did say is prosecuting people for beating up burglars is ridiculous. You personally have no idea how you'd react or what you'd do if it was your pad which was getting raided.
Rape, torture, assault, murder - whatever.
Do I not?
I never knew that......
:hyper:
Especially as I've been at home when a burglar came to visit.
:rolleyes:
hardly, I'd rather be assaulted than raped, I'd rather be murdered than raped.
really? i could live with rape, i couldn't live with murder
You are SO very funny...
i'll take that as sarcasm yea?
My point is simply that there have to be limits.....
Because someone comes onto your property does not give carte blanche - and nor should it......
I'm sure