Quantcast
  1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

A British subject speaks out.

Discussion in 'Legal' started by MicroBalrog, Jul 12, 2003.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. MicroBalrog

    MicroBalrog member

    Joined:
    Dec 25, 2002
    Messages:
    2,896
    Location:
    The State of Israel - aka Gun Nut Hell
    This was originally posted by a guy called "Western Shinma" on www.nationstates.net

     
  2. SDC

    SDC Member

    Joined:
    Jan 8, 2003
    Messages:
    3,116
    Location:
    People's Republic of Canada
    I'm sure Ag will tell you that these incidents are merely figments of your imagination; after all, he KNOWS that you're safer when you're unable to protect yourself :rolleyes:
     
  3. agricola

    agricola Member

    Joined:
    Dec 30, 2002
    Messages:
    1,928
    Location:
    Office of the Holy Inquisition, Vatican City
    hey, the lack of guns are the answer to everything thats wrong with British society today, and if we were all tooled up nothing bad would happen to us, ever. :rolleyes:
     
  4. makarov1

    makarov1 Member

    Joined:
    Jul 12, 2003
    Messages:
    115
    This is my first post on THR. I've been lurking for a long time. I hate to admit it, but Ag is correct in that there is no simple solution for The UK's rising crime rate. "Social engineering" by means of attempting to regulate(or ban) firearms will help reduce gun crime in the UK just as it has reduced gun crime in our beautiful U.S. Capitol, Washington D.C. Just take a stroll(If you dare) on a balmy summer night in our nation's capitol, and you'll hear the report of pistol fire, strictly forbidden in D.C. The pistol ban in D.C. is not just a failure, but a catastrophic failure engineered by socialist do-gooders that should be a model for all the world to see that moral standards and decency cannot be elevated through legislation. Ag is 100% correct here. There is no pat answer to the UK's societal ills, however, as with the D.C. gun ban, The UK gun ban seems to ignore that people have a right to self defense, and should not be expected to yield to the whims of armed thugs. Make no mistake about it, THE ONLY THING ARMED THUGS UNDERSTAND IS FORCE. When a bullet is headed in the direction of an armed thug, suddenly he sees the light. Everything becomes clear again, because we are speaking his language. The sooner the powers that be allow the "commoners" and " subjects" to defend themselves, the sooner that good citizens will stop feeling like helpless victims. Coddling criminals will not help reduce crime.
     
  5. Preacherman

    Preacherman Member

    Joined:
    Dec 20, 2002
    Messages:
    13,309
    Location:
    Louisiana, USA
    Makarov1, good first post! Welcome to THR.
     
  6. Standing Wolf

    Standing Wolf Member in memoriam

    Joined:
    Dec 24, 2002
    Messages:
    24,041
    Location:
    Idahohoho, the jolliest state
    Well said.
     
  7. HBK

    HBK member

    Joined:
    Apr 21, 2003
    Messages:
    1,430
    Location:
    A liberal hellhole: Olympia, WA.
    Nice post. Welcome.
     
  8. seeker_two

    seeker_two Member

    Joined:
    Dec 26, 2002
    Messages:
    3,616
    Location:
    Deep in the Heart of the Lone Star State (TX)
    Welcome & thank you, makarov1....
     
  9. Travis McGee

    Travis McGee Member

    Joined:
    Jan 12, 2003
    Messages:
    1,790
    Location:
    NE Florida
    Makarov1

    Welcome aboard!
     
  10. Zedicus

    Zedicus Member

    Joined:
    Jun 30, 2003
    Messages:
    1,976
    Location:
    Idaho
    Exlent Post!

    I am an American Citizen currently living in the UK so I have fist had experence with the way many things are viewed here.

    One thing that realy urks me that I was once told By a Local Police Officer was that in the UK "You have no Right to Defend yoursellf or Others" (not an exact quote, as I can't remember his exact wording)
    At first I thought he was playing some kind of cruel joke and had the reply I'm sure many of you would have had... "Youre Joking Right?"
    But to my shock he wasn't joking.

    To this day nearly 4 years later I still cannot fathom what posessed a country with as much history & expereance behind it as the UK to Outlaw such a Basic Instinct as that of the Preservation of the Helth and or Life of Onesellf, Famly or Innocent bystanders...

    In my time here I have also noticed a extreemest approach by the police in this general area aganst civillians posessing any form of weapon (I wonder if the Ground applys yet...) I have no idea about other areas, but here to say it is hightly restrictive would be the understatement of the decade...

    and turning to the laws for clarification only makes things more confusing.
    How? well, part has to do with the fact that many ancent laws from medeivel times are still in effect and roughly 90% of the ones that i have seen all contradict each other...

    EG: there is still a Law which is in Effect that States that No Brittish Subject or Resedent, Can be found in public not bearing His Sword and Daggar on his person, and the penalty is either a week in jail or a days wages...
    However, According to one of the current more recent laws It is Illegal to be in posession of a bladed object in a "Public Place".
    But to make matters even more confusing, what a "Public Place" is, is left entirely up to the Interpritation of the Indevidual Police Officer, wich in turn leaves you with the age old problem of "Ask 100 people the definition of the same word, an you will get 100 completely diffrent answers...
    there are atleast 3 other contradictory laws I have found that relate to this and have not been amended or retired that only serve to confuse the matter further...

    Confused yet? :scrutiny:
     
  11. agricola

    agricola Member

    Joined:
    Dec 30, 2002
    Messages:
    1,928
    Location:
    Office of the Holy Inquisition, Vatican City
    zedicus,

    One thing that realy urks me that I was once told By a Local Police Officer was that in the UK "You have no Right to Defend yoursellf or Others" (not an exact quote, as I can't remember his exact wording)
    At first I thought he was playing some kind of cruel joke and had the reply I'm sure many of you would have had... "Youre Joking Right?"
    But to my shock he wasn't joking.


    if an officer did say that, he was entirely wrong.

    But to make matters even more confusing, what a "Public Place" is, is left entirely up to the Interpritation of the Indevidual Police Officer, wich..

    this is incorrect. Various different aspects of legislation take "public place" to mean different things, but they are all codified in law and it is not up to the individual officer as to what he/she defines it as.

    EG: there is still a Law which is in Effect that States that No Brittish Subject or Resedent, Can be found in public not bearing His Sword and Daggar on his person, and the penalty is either a week in jail or a days wages...

    the old laws are (obviously) not in force now - in Chester its legal to kill Welshmen at certain times of the day - and their existance means, frankly, nothing other than a curio.
     
  12. only1asterisk

    only1asterisk member

    Joined:
    Jun 13, 2003
    Messages:
    2,412
    A couple of years ago I came accross a pamphlet from the British Home Office on dealing with crime. After reading it, I decided that the UK was a lost cause. On dealing with criminals breaking in your home it offered suggestions such as "Stay quiet and still, maybe they will not notice you." and "Call to another person in a loud voice, even if you are alone, it may scare them away." Sad, very sad. If anyone has an interest in reading this dribble, I see if I dig it up.


    David
     
  13. only1asterisk

    only1asterisk member

    Joined:
    Jun 13, 2003
    Messages:
    2,412
    Taken from "Your Practical Guide to Crime Prevention"


    If you wake to hear the sound of an intruder, only you can decide how best to handle the situation. You may want to lie quietly to avoid attracting attention to yourself, in the hope that they will leave. Or you may feel more confident if you switch on the lights and make a lot of noise by moving about. Even if you’re on your own, call out loudly to an imaginary companion – most burglars will flee empty-handed rather than risking a confrontation. Ring the police as soon as it’s safe for you to do so. A telephone extension in your bedroom will make you feel more secure as it allows you to call the police immediately, without alerting the intruder.

    • If someone threatens you, shout and scream for help and set off your personal attack alarm if you have one. This may unnerve the attacker and frighten him or her off.

    • You have every right to defend yourself, with reasonable force, with items you might have with you, like an umbrella, hairspray or keys, which can be used against an attacker. However, the law doesn’t allow you to carry anything that can be described as an offensive weapon (e.g. knives, mace, etc).

    By the way, if you decide to defend yourself with resonable force, another pamphlet goes into detail aboout the criminals rights and the coals you will be roasted over after you violate them. (shouldn't this be the other way around) Another great one liner: 2 out of 10 robbers never use force against their victims. (gee, that only leaves 80% that do) Maybe I read that wrong wish I could find the site again, will try later.


    David
     
  14. Mr. Bombastic

    Mr. Bombastic Member

    Joined:
    Apr 10, 2003
    Messages:
    141
    Location:
    The United Kingdom Of Great Britain And Northern I
    Tell me agricola, if you are so free to defend yourself here, what exactly would you do if a person, or a number of persons tried to rob you in the street?

    If you can't run, do you trust the violent criminals to only take your hard-earned cash and leave you, a witness, unharmed? Do you gamble with your life by leaving it up to them to decide whether you live or die?

    Or do you defend yourself? And with what, since you are an unarmed subject?

    You think harsh language and your fists alone will prevail against numerous possibly armed criminals who have got the drop on you?

    :confused:

    Don't tell me; 'a violent crime won't happen to me'.
     
  15. agricola

    agricola Member

    Joined:
    Dec 30, 2002
    Messages:
    1,928
    Location:
    Office of the Holy Inquisition, Vatican City
    mr bombastic,

    i recall a thread on TFL about some guy who had been killed by armed criminals who frequented (i think) GlockTalk. one poster on the commemorative thread stated "you always think it will be enough, but it sometimes isnt". The point is, hypothetical scenarios with regards to armed mobs are pointless, because for every "well if i had a gun i could protect myself" there are as many "if they were all tooled up, i wouldnt have a chance" points.

    that scenario can play out any number of ways, sadly few of them, even if you were armed, would be likely to result in "a happy ending".
     
  16. Mr. Bombastic

    Mr. Bombastic Member

    Joined:
    Apr 10, 2003
    Messages:
    141
    Location:
    The United Kingdom Of Great Britain And Northern I
    So you'd rather have no chance of defending yourself, than some chance of defending yourself? And you wish to forcefully make others as impotent in the face of adversity as yourself?

    What kind of twisted logic is that?
     
  17. agricola

    agricola Member

    Joined:
    Dec 30, 2002
    Messages:
    1,928
    Location:
    Office of the Holy Inquisition, Vatican City
    its the same sort of logic that says "imagining fake situations to make a pseudo-point is stupid".
     
  18. Mr. Bombastic

    Mr. Bombastic Member

    Joined:
    Apr 10, 2003
    Messages:
    141
    Location:
    The United Kingdom Of Great Britain And Northern I
    'Fake situations' like violent crime? :confused:
     
  19. trooper

    trooper Member

    Joined:
    Feb 19, 2003
    Messages:
    700
    Location:
    A small police station out in the German countrysi
    C'mon guys,

    can we please just agree that guns don't solve all of Britain's (or America's) current social problems, but definitely improve your personal odds a great deal?

    That's what you both say, if you put your thoughts in order ;)


    Regards,

    Trooper
     
  20. Zedicus

    Zedicus Member

    Joined:
    Jun 30, 2003
    Messages:
    1,976
    Location:
    Idaho
    I'm not meaning to be rude, but, Let's see you try and tell them that...

    As for the other things I said I have decided not to comment on them further to avoid arguements.

    I agree that Guns are a usefull Tool that the use of by Civillians for Defending Ones self, Property, famly or others can be Nessisary.
    and that the right to choose if you want to own such a tool for that or Recreational Purposes should not be denyed.

    Illistration: Excessive Consumption of Alcohol has been Proven various times to be one of the main causes of Violent Crimes in the UK, so why don't they just ban the use & mabie even the sale of Alcohol?

    Or why not Cars while were at it, thay are used in a lot of crimes that result in death or Grievous injury...

    But that would be stupid Banning something Just Because of the Way that "Some People" use it would be Illogical now wouldn't it?;)
     
  21. agricola

    agricola Member

    Joined:
    Dec 30, 2002
    Messages:
    1,928
    Location:
    Office of the Holy Inquisition, Vatican City
    zedicus,

    those are two bad parallels to choose, because both alcohol and cars are regulated by law, just as firearms are.
     
  22. Zedicus

    Zedicus Member

    Joined:
    Jun 30, 2003
    Messages:
    1,976
    Location:
    Idaho
    true

    but Regulation is not banning something.

    Just a thought.:)
     
  23. agricola

    agricola Member

    Joined:
    Dec 30, 2002
    Messages:
    1,928
    Location:
    Office of the Holy Inquisition, Vatican City
    but firearms arent banned - some are unregulated except by reason of age, some by licencing and some are almost banned, but not quite.
     
  24. DRC

    DRC Member

    Joined:
    Mar 10, 2003
    Messages:
    275
    Location:
    Texas
    Guns aren't much good for close range contact...

    If you want a truly defensive tool a knife is actually a better choice IMO. I'm a knife collector and know how to use them quite effectively (hobby only) and do have to say I would fear a person with a knife far more than one with a gun in close quarters. I don't mind guns as self defense (I am both a CHL holder and an instructor) if there is a barrier between me and the other party but I would much rather have a knife on me to be honest.

    Agricola you may and or may not hear this enough but I appreciate your demeanor and intellect. While I agree with your sentiment I don't necessarily agree with passive resitance. The fact of the matter is that those that do or donnot use force of any kind make that decission and must accept the consequences of said actions. Hopefully the outcome is one that all involved can live with but it won't be a joyous occasion by any means.

    Will guns make citizens safer? From the government? Yes. From the criminal eliment? Who knows, but a dead criminal is one that won't be committing any more crimes and I'm all for that personally.

    Take care folks and watch your topknot.

    DRC
     
  25. makarov1

    makarov1 Member

    Joined:
    Jul 12, 2003
    Messages:
    115
    I found the notes on "Your Practical guide to Crime Prevention" interesting. Self defense advice from a European pespective certainly does seem odd to Americans. The use-of-force protocol in Western Europe does make life much easier for criminals, particularly in a "hot" burglary, when residents are at home. Cultural differences "across the pond" could help explain the "soft approach" in dealing with an armed intruder.

    Compare and contrast this to a burglar breaking into an occupied farmhouse in the bean fields of West Alabama. Home invasions are relatively rare in the American South, but they do happen occasionally.
    First of all, the poor sap attempting to brake in needs to have his head examined(most likely after an autopsy). The homeowner will not be a bit concerned about the welfare of the criminal. The criminal's well-being will most certainly come secondary. There is a time and a place for everything, and this scenario is NOT the time nor the place for feel-good liberalism.

    Breaking and entering an occupied dwelling is a very dangerous occupation in the U.S.A. The fact that there are people bent on trying to change this doesn't border on lunacy, it is lunacy.
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page