Would You Support This Action?

[Oresai]

It reminded me of another story from a few years ago, when an Englishman was sent to jail for shooting at one of the thugs who broke into his home. These two thugs had spent a great deal of time repeatedly doing so, and provoking this man, simply because he lived alone and was considered `strange`. The case brought into the public eye, just how few rights homeowners have over their own property..."an englishmans home is his castle" and all that, you know?
Putting aside my ingrained feelings about the `Auld Enemy` :D I supported the mans actions. And even though it would land me in jail, should anyone break into my home, well, I have an assortment of good working crossbows and the ability to shoot true and absolutely no scruples about the preciousness of human life when it comes to criminal scum.
It seems to me, and has for a long time, that criminals gain more and more `human rights` each year whilst law abiding people see theirs eroded.

source, the Daily Record online.


Dad who ran down armed thug has jail term halved
Nov 22 2008

A DAD who ran down an armed thug who menaced him outside his home had his jail sentence almost halved yesterday.

Stephen Armstrong, 47, should now be released from jail within weeks.

Appeal judges in Edinburgh ruled the trial judge had not properly considered the provocation suffered by former publican Armstrong, who has eight children.

They cut his sentence of three years and eight months, imposed in February, to two years.

The original sentence caused an outcry at the time and a 28,000-signature petition was presented to justice minister Kenny MacAskill.

In court yesterday, Lord Carloway said insufficient weight had been given to the provocation Armstrong faced before losing his temper.

He was leaving his home in a cul-de-sac in South Park Village, in the south of Glasgow, for a shopping trip when he discovered a man he had earlier caught painting gang slogans back in the street.

The 22-year-old pulled a knife and baton out and swung them towards Armstrong, who struck him with his people-carrier.

He admitted assault to severe injury but claimed he had only been trying to frighten the thug.

[Vulpix]

It is deplorable this man even got a jail sentence at all :(:mad:! Criminal scum should forsake their "human rights" as soon as they decide to invade someone else's property!

[Psychonaut]

Things like this make me damn glad I live in the US. Our Castle Doctrine (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Castle_Doctrine), in most states, allows you to use deadly force against an intruder. In my opinion, that's the way it should be. If someone breaks into your home, the only sensible recourse is to kill them as swiftly as possible. You cannot possibly know whether their intent is to steal your TV or to rape and murder your family. In a situation such as that, it is always preferable to err on the side of safety.

[Alison]

There should be no charges brought against anyone who is protecting their home or their life from thugs.

[Arrow Cross]

Without a firearm, an average, solitary person is usually at a considerable disadvantage against two or more, possibly well-sported intruders. If he or she doesn't even have the right to use that gun for inflicting wounds, the attackers would disarm, beat up and rob him or her with ease. I would certainly rather face a penalty than to endure this. My pride wouldn't allow me not to oppose the intruders with full force.

That being said, my country too has sadly restricted gun laws. One thing I envy Americans for.

[Groenewolf]

It's a shame he was convicted in the first place. Reminds me of case here where a woman who was robbed of her bag was brought to court because she used her car to capture the thief between her car and a tree. The tree survived from what I know, for those worried. Howver she had to live in hiding out of fear of retaliation.

[Alison]

Without a firearm, an average, solitary person is usually at a considerable disadvantage against two or more, possibly well-sported intruders. If he or she doesn't even have the right to use that gun for inflicting wounds, the attackers would disarm, beat up and rob him or her with ease. I would certainly rather face a penalty than to endure this. My pride wouldn't allow me not to oppose the intruders with full force.

That being said, my country too has sadly restricted gun laws. One thing I envy Americans for.

And why shouldn't you protect what is yours and those you love? If the authorities can't do it, then you have to.

[Alison]

It's a shame he was convicted in the first place. Reminds me of case here where a woman who was robbed of her bag was brought to court because she used her car to capture the thief between her car and a tree. The tree survived from what I know, for those worried. Howver she had to live in hiding out of fear of retaliation.

Aaah, here we go. SHE had to live in fear of retaliation? Sums it up.

[Skandi]

Should be that you can defend your own property however you see fit, especially when it comes to people breaking into houses, anyone can become lost and wander onto someone else's land, but it's hard to accidentally break into a house

[Óttar]

Our Castle Doctrine (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Castle_Doctrine)

Did the Castle Doctrine not survive in England? Wiki says it's a concept inherited from English Common Law. (The second basis of the American Legal System behind the Constitution).

I've heard people face jail time in German if they use a gun to defend themselves.

What system is the basis for laws on the continent? I assume Roman Law or the Code Napoleon, but most likely social democrat parties have mangled the European legal systems.

[Phlegethon]

I've heard people face jail time in German if they use a gun to defend themselves.

Probably because they are owned illegally. Apart from that a gun permit does not entitle you to carry a gun. Only about 300 people in Germany have a permit to carry a gun.

Apart from that it is a pretty stupid idea to use a gun in closed quarters. Unlike the U.S. German houses have concrete walls and steel frames. You may get yourself killed by a ricochet.

[Karaten]

This guy never deserved to be in jail at all.

[Lulletje Rozewater]

It is deplorable this man even got a jail sentence at all :(:mad:! Criminal scum should forsake their "human rights" as soon as they decide to invade someone else's property!

In my house and plot I firmly believe in human rights.
He has a human right to enter my premises and steal and rape and murder.
I have the human right to put him 6 foot under.
A human right includes death,a right to die,because death is a part of living.
We,all, should and must exercise the right to excrete human filth.

Universal Declaration of Human Rights


Covenant on Civil and Political Rights

This covenant details the basic civil and political rights of individuals and nations. Among the rights of nations are:

* the right to self determination note that Africa's borders are drawn on imaginary borders and not according to tribes(Tutsi-Hutu-Nguni)
* the right to own, trade, and dispose of their property freely, and not be deprived of their means of subsistence Note the expropriation laws in various countries.

Among the rights of individuals are:

* the right to legal recourse when their rights have been violated, even if the violator was acting in an official capacity a burglar is in an official capacity to steal
* the right to life abortion,the baby knocks on a knocked up womb and shouts" I want my milk, it is my right.
* the right to liberty and freedom of movementEntering the White House's outhouse is an excreting offense.
* the right to equality before the law I want a widgy and 36 D cup at all times.
* the right to presumption of innocence till proven guilty.even if you have been caught with your prick in the cookie jar.
* the right to appeal a conviction.hanging by default.
* the right to be recognized as a person before the law.That is applicable to a shadow government.
* the right to privacy and protection of that privacy by law.ie.making love with your coat on.
* freedom of thought, conscience, and religion. Must be the Silence of the Lamb.
* freedom of opinion and expression The Dutch queen is a slut,piss on her
* freedom of assembly and association.The KKK in a naked romp outside the Vatican.

The covenant forbids torture and inhuman or degrading treatment, slavery or involuntary servitude, arbitrary arrest and detention, and debtor's prisons. It forbids propaganda advocating either war or hatred based on race, religion, national origin, or language.But hatred based on ball size is ok

It provides for the right of people to choose freely whom they will marry and to found a family, and requires that the duties and obligations of marriage and family be shared equally between partners. It guarantees the rights of children and prohibits discrimination based on race, sex, color, national origin, or language.Long live the Pedophile homo marriages.


After almost two decades of negotiations and rewriting, the text of the Universal Covenant on Civil and Political Rights was agreed upon in 1966. In 1976, after being ratified by the required 35 states, it became international law. Start rewriting again,you idiots,it does not work


Convention on Elimination of Discrimination Against Women
This convention bans discrimination against women.

Convention on the Rights of the Child
This convention bans discrimination against children and provides for special protection and rights appropriate to minors.

[Eldritch]

Things like this make me damn glad I live in the US. Our Castle Doctrine (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Castle_Doctrine), in most states, allows you to use deadly force against an intruder. In my opinion, that's the way it should be. If someone breaks into your home, the only sensible recourse is to kill them as swiftly as possible. You cannot possibly know whether their intent is to steal your TV or to rape and murder your family. In a situation such as that, it is always preferable to err on the side of safety.


Agreed in principle, but I think the intruder should be given ONE warning to desist and surrerder before being blown away.

[Psychonaut]

Agreed in principle, but I think the intruder should be given ONE warning to desist and surrerder before being blown away.

Is a locked door not warning enough? The moment you announce yourself to an intruder is the moment you give up any element of surprise that you might have. It takes but a fraction of a second to pull a trigger, and when it's down to you having a slight advantage over a criminal, you ought do nothing to negate that. Whenever we do tactical training (with paintballs), it's almost always an issue of surprise and strategic use of cover that determines who gets shot.

[Phlegethon]

Well, in most countries you get into a bit of a kerfuffle if you just shoot unarmed people dead. A certain reciprocity is expected, defined as "simple physical force". Everything else is called self-defense excess and will get you before a judge. It is assumed that household items are easier to replace than human lives and that intruders usually enter your home to steal and not to kill.

[Vulpix]

Did the Castle Doctrine not survive in England?

The short answer is no.

[Psychonaut]

Well, in most countries you get into a bit of a kerfuffle if you just shoot unarmed people dead.

Glad I'm not from any of those countries. :thumb001:

A few states here in the US are the same, but it's not uncommon in most of the South to be able to exercise lethal force the moment someone illegally enters your home.


It is assumed that household items are easier to replace than human lives and that intruders usually enter your home to steal and not to kill.

Even if that is the norm, how do you know that's the situation you're facing? You can assume that you're facing a simple burglar only to be gunned down when you announce yourself to him. Even if violence is only the result of 10% of home invasions, is it worth it to risk the safety of your family so that you can give someone, who has already proven themself to be a criminal by breaking into your house, the benefit of the doubt?

[Phlegethon]

Violence is the result of close to 0% of all home invasions, and there is not one reported case in which a burglar was armed with a firegun. This is Germany, not the U.S. And in Britain the situation is similar, regardless of what the recent media scare may suggest. in Britain the weapon of choice is a knife, and this is basically used in the streets.

[Ulf]

Violence is the result of close to 0% of all home invasions, and there is not one reported case in which a burglar was armed with a firegun. This is Germany, not the U.S. And in Britain the situation is similar, regardless of what the recent media scare may suggest. in Britain the weapon of choice is a knife, and this is basically used in the streets.

Wrong.

[Phlegethon]

And in the kitchen, of course. And if you look at the English cuisine then every kitchen knife indirectly is a lethal weapon.

[Ulf]

Wrong.

I was just posting this so my name appeared in all the 'Latest Posts' on the front page. I actually have no idea what is going on here.

[Psychonaut]

Violence is the result of close to 0% of all home invasions

I'd love to see some documentation on that.


there is not one reported case in which a burglar was armed with a firegun.

Really? I can't find the statistics on homicides that resulted from a home invasion, but according to the 2002 statistics put out by UN 28.5% of German homicides were committed with guns. I seriously doubt that none of these occurred in anyone's home, especially since there were 1,055,812 burglaries that year. Also, it's not only a gunman you you'd need to be thinking about. What about rapists? In my book, attempted rape is as good a reason as any to shoot someone.

Source (http://www.nationmaster.com/red/country/gm-germany/cri-crime&all=1)

[Phlegethon]

As I said, the whole concept of home invasion and rape at home is basically an American thing. Intruders usually are looking for cash or some comsumer electronics they can trade in for some heroin. Or it is a horde of Balkan or Kurdish gang members. But none of them have firearms. Homicides usually take place between different gangs, far away from unconcerned citizens.

You have to understand that murder isn't as commonplace outside the U.S. There are police troops in Europe which do not even have firearms with them on normal duty.