UK: RAF veteran suicide over multiple burglaries

Status
Not open for further replies.

Glock-A-Roo

Member
Joined
May 1, 2003
Messages
57
How can this be? I thought Britain was now a Utopia since the banning of guns, knives,.... and fox hunting.

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,2-1518967,00.html

March 10, 2005

RAF veteran is found hanged after burglars ruined his world
By Simon de Bruxelles

Despairing elderly victim killed himself after being raided by thieves for the third time

A FRAIL RAF veteran was driven to suicide after his home was burgled for the third time.

Herbert Buckland, 84, was afraid to leave his house or even open his front door after being robbed by doorstep conmen twice last year.

When he came face-to-face with burglars for the third time, Mr Buckland apparently decided that enough was enough. He told relatives that the world was no longer a place he wanted to live in. Three days later he was found hanged in the bungalow that he shared with his wife, Barbara, in Wroughton, near Swindon, Wiltshire.

His granddaughter, who did not want to give her name, said yesterday: “He no longer felt safe in his home and was too proud a man to move out. After the last burglary, he became anxious and worried.

“Even when they thought they were safe by not answering the door and keeping the windows and doors locked, these scumbags still managed to get into their home. If it wasn’t for them, my Grandad would be alive today.â€

The Bucklands’ bungalow was targeted by “distraction†thieves twice last year. On the first occasion, a man claiming to be from a water company kept the elderly couple talking in the bathroom while another man entered the house.

A few months later, a man knocked on the door, claiming that children had been interfering with roadworks outside. While the man kept the couple occupied, an accomplice walked in and stole cash.

The couple stopped answering their front door and kept all their doors and windows locked. On February 24, a burglar forced a locked, double-glazed bedroom window. Mr Buckland, a former engineer who was watching television with his wife, confronted the thief. He ran off after stealing some cash.

Mr Buckland hanged himself while his wife was watching television. She was unaware of what had happened until a carer visited later in the day and found his body.

Marilyn Dowson, 55, his niece, said yesterday: “They thought they had done everything to protect themselves from burglars, but when it happened again he was absolutely petrified. These burglars have no conscience at all they don’t worry about what happens to old people. Scum is too nice a word for them.â€

Detective Sergeant Don Stirton, of Swindon CID, said: “Distraction burglaries cause untold misery to the elderly and vulnerable members of our communities. This type of crime is regarded as serious and we recognise that it causes enormous psychological distress to the victims.â€

Norman Brennan, of the Victims of Crime Trust, said that the Government, as well as judges and magistrates, should take partial responsibility for the death. He said: “What does it say about the criminal justice system when someone who has been a law-abiding member of the public all his life, in his twilight years is burgled so many times that he’s taken the option to kill himself rather than carry on? What does it take to wake this Government up? “Burglary is devastating and I challenge anyone in the Government to put forward any excuse as to why burglars should not be severely punished, because this surely indicates the worst that can happen to someone who is victimised.â€

A spokesman for Help the Aged said: “Something like a burglary can really knock confidence in terms of how the elderly feel about themselves and their environment.

“It can affect their ability to socialise, it can make people frightened to leave the house, it can affect the way they interact with their environment, which can have knock-on effects for their health.â€

He added that older people sometimes had a disproportionate sense of how likely they were to be victims of crime. “I think it’s important that people aren’t unduly worried,†he said.

“Older people are much less likely to be victims of crime than young men so you need to be very careful about how you approach the subject.†The charity urges old people to put door chains on before opening the door to callers, as well as ensuring they have identification.

Paul Fawcett, of Victim Support, said: “The reality is that crime disproportionately affects some people and some people just live with an ongoing nightmare,†he said.“It can haunt somebody from one month or week to the next.â€
 
And an even deeper circle in Hell for the power-mad Socialist bureaucrats who leave people defenseless.


And, finally, an eternal pit of despair for the sheeple who elect those bass turds into office.
 
we can only hope that these criminals wish to come to america through our porous borders and meet up with some texan who is not so frail or afraid as that elderly gentleman in the UK. a rude awakening is what these scumbags need. i invite them to come to my house and try this crap :evil:
 
At least the burglars were not subjected to 'vigilantism'. That's the important thing. :rolleyes: :barf:
 
Except that, despite the Times and its tirade of shock-words, the issue of self defence would not have worked against any of these thieves - the first two were distraction thefts (artifice burglaries), and when the third occured the homeowner challenged the man and he ran off.

Artifice burglars are perhaps the most despicable of thieves and they should be beaten with sticks by as many strong men as can be found in a village.

Of course, the endless stories ran by the likes of the Times which helped terrify this man bear no responsibilty for his death, nor will they accept the effect of that story on the next poor soul that believes the language of the journalist.
 
Artifice burglars are perhaps the most despicable of thieves and they should be beaten with sticks by as many strong men as can be found in a village.

Would that be legal in post-modern Britain?

Once in awhile, on the History International channel, I see a BBC Channel 4 show titled The Weapons That Made Britain.

I think I have seen most of them:

Sword
Longbow
Lance
Shield
Armour


I keep a look-out for Firearms and Weapons Legislation, but these last two seem to have not been made, probably as both would be too scary for British consumption.
 
Agicola is correct. The crimes that drove this poor man to hang himself would not have been prevented or even detered by the presence of a firearm. The very same crimes take place every day in the US and they prey upon the very same type of people, pensioners living quiet lives in what they hoped would be their golden years.
 
I'm disturbed by this for two reasons.

One - it is a very sad story.

Two - that some would seek to use this man's death as another opportunity to rag on British gun laws. How was this story related to British gun bans?
 
Agicola is correct. The crimes that drove this poor man to hang himself would not have been prevented or even detered by the presence of a firearm. The very same crimes take place every day in the US and they prey upon the very same type of people, pensioners living quiet lives in what they hoped would be their golden years.

I've been doing this for 12 years now. In my twelve years if I've worked if there's been a 'distraction burglary' on my beat in Texas, I don't remember it.

I do remember, however, multiple interviews with burglars in my custody who state that they will not do a daylight burglary on an occupied house because of the fear that they might get shot.

Unoccupied houses, they'll burgle. Occasionally an occupied house at night, if they're desperate, but not a house occupied by a homeowner who is awake, alert and might possibly have a gun.

I find myself agreeing with Agricola more often than not, but not on this one.

Those burglars bloody well knew that no one had a gun in that house, so they blithely entered an occupied domicile in the secure knowledge that there was no way they were going to get shot in the process. Thanks be unto their Government.

My 97 year-old grandmother hasn't locked her front doors ever. Nobody just walks in on her. Why not? Because this is Texas, and they're liable to get shot.

God rest the soul of this elder, and your Government should hang its collective head in shame that they treated one of their warriors like a child or a slave: not to be trusted with a weapon.

Feh.

LawDog
 
The couple stopped answering their front door and kept all their doors and windows locked. On February 24, a burglar forced a locked, double-glazed bedroom window. Mr Buckland, a former engineer who was watching television with his wife, confronted the thief. He ran off after stealing some cash.

Well, speaking as one of those ghouls exploiting the ocassion of Mr. Buckland's suicide to bash British firearms laws, I would note one thing:

The rate of so-called "hot burglaries" in the United States is but a minor fraction of that in the UK. Justifiably so, most burglaries here are performed when the occupants are gone, in recognition of the very realistic fear of being killed as they "work."

So in a sense, the permissive criminal environment that is apparently tolerated in Britain has, among other causes, pistol banning as a very direct contributor. Pistols? Yes, lest you think an 84 year old man will be handy with the typical long gun, especially should he feel like going armed in his own living room. So yes, in my opinion, the lack of effective self defense is fair game when regarding Mr. Buckland's suicide.

Making people live like they are chattel of the state tends to raise suicidal ideation one would think. Orwell thought so in 1984.
 
How was this story related to British gun bans?

It's not directly related, but goes to the general attitude of helplessness that disarming everyone "for their own good" creates. People able to defend themselves and their families are not going to be nearly as likely to sucumb to despair to the level necessary to commit suicide. Ticked off people fight back. Ticked off HELPLESS people seem to turn their anger on themselves.

Artifice burglars are perhaps the most despicable of thieves and they should be beaten with sticks by as many strong men as can be found in a village.

I understood that quarterstaffs were covered by the Offensive Weapons Laws? If not, lets conjure up the ghost of Little John and let him have a go. :neener:


I do completely agree with your punishment perscription.
 
lawdog,

Two of those arent burglaries in the sense of the word that most people would understand. Basically the usual scam is that one person distracts the mark by pretending to be any number of callers (one of the most common is to be from the water utilties).

That person will then make an excuse to enter the house, and do whatever it is he or she said they were going to do. Meanwhile a second person enters the house and steals whatever is to hand. The first then leaves, the homeowner doesnt realise anything is amiss until they find the property gone. Its not something that self-defence or firearms laws affect because the crime depends for its success on someone being home to dupe.
 
Lawdawg's point should be underscored. Modern Brits are being conditioned to BOHICA by their kinder, gentler government. Note how the social worker completely misses the point:
A spokesman for Help the Aged said: “Something like a burglary can really knock confidence in terms of how the elderly feel about themselves and their environment.
“It can affect their ability to socialise, it can make people frightened to leave the house, it can affect the way they interact with their environment, which can have knock-on effects for their health.â€
It can also apparently shame an honorable man into depression that he'll likely never be able to recover from.
 
Lawdog kind of stole my thunder, but....

I believe the point that makes this relevant to firearms, or the banning thereof, is that these criminals had no reason at all to believe that they would not walk out of that house the same way they came in, i.e. not in a body bag. Any burglar with any sense of self preservation will not just go willy-nilly into any domicile if they know there is a good chance of staring down the barrel of a gun.

What did these guys have to fear? I get the point that if they turn and run, it's probably not a good idea (in a legal sense) to shoot them in the back. The point is that if these douchebags knew they would face armed homeowners, there's a good chance this wouldn't have happened.

Weather they realize it or not, hoplophobes benefit from RKBA, because of the fear of confronting armed citizens-the crooks can't look at a house and tell if it is unarmed, especially in areas where RKBA is recognized.
 
I believe Ag is saying that this is a typical "Gypsy Robbery", not a cowboy "hot burglary." I.e., create a commotion in the back of the restaurant and then sneak over to the cash register.

As with LawDog, it is my experience that a high rate of firearms ownership in my community discourages home burglaries. How do I know? I get it from the horse's mouth. :)
 
Of course, if those "strong men" did actually beat the perps with staves, they'd promptly be arrested and charged with felony assault.

Not to mention being slandered and pilloried in the press and electronic media for being "vigilantes".

And then there'd be the the customary civil actions from the perps' solicitors.

As for whether the possibility that the victims had a firearm would've deterred this particular genre of criminality, I'd pose a rhetorical question: Absent that threat, what did the perps have to fear realistically from a pair of octogenarians had their actions been discovered in-progress?

I submit that the fact that there was virtually no chance that any means of effective counteraction would be available to the intended victims played a very real role in their selection.

When a government demands that its subjects relinquish the means by which they may effectively resist predation by the hyenas among them, they tacitly condone the victimization of the most vulnerable.

Limiting the means by which the old, the weak, and the infirm may protect themselves from those both stronger and less scrupulous to only that where superior strength of arm, speed of hand (or foot) or numbers can prevail virtually ensures that those hyenas will grow both bolder and more numerous.

To blandly assert to the contrary is the purest sophistry. To do so while blythely admitting that while said government claims the duty protect those to whom they forbid the means to effectively protect themselves, it is unable or unwilling to do so, is despicable.
 
Last edited:
Meanwhile a second person enters the house and steals whatever is to hand.

Certainly, and if the ruse that is put on by his compatriot fails the worse that is likely to happen to him is that he will be forced to overpower the elderly victims and depart, or simply flee. In the U.S. this person still runs a significantly hightened risk of getting shot.

There may also be some cultural differences at work to limit the instance of "distraction robberies" in the U.S. The culture here does not lend itself to inviting strangers into one's home for any reason. And everyone knows this. If a person starts to ask to be invited or take up too much time at the door the American response is immediate suspicion and a closed door in the face of the visitor. I think that Americans are generally more suspicious than our English counterparts. While firearms ownership MIGHT have made a difference I think that there is more at play here.
 
Sorta on-topic: Back about 25 or 30 years ago, the Santa Fe, NM, police had an attack of "blue flu". They couldn't, by law, go on strike so they all called in sick for about a week.

All over town, Old Farts like me were sitting on porches, watching their neighborhoods. Many had a shotgun handy.

The burglary rate fell to zero. Zilch, zip, nada.

A reporter had a policeman friend set up an interview with a known burglar in order to discover the reason for the lack of burglaries. The burglar told the reporter, "The police will only arrest you if they catch you. Those homeowners will kill you."

Draw your own conclusions...

:), Art
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top