Soldato
- Joined
- 14 Dec 2013
- Posts
- 2,590
The legal limit in the UK is 12 ft lbs without an FAC. It is not uncommon for people to (illegally) modify them to well beyond that though.
Tony Martin 'held over gun possession'
- Thread starter djshauny1
- Start date
Soldato
- Joined
- 8 Apr 2008
- Posts
- 3,076
- Location
- a galaxy far far away
Apologies. It looks like if you have ever been imprisoned you cannot own one.
http://www.bfto.org.uk/law.htm
Secti
Last edited:
So buy a few air-bomb repeater fireworks and woodwork a "pistol" style thingy that you can lakky band them onto.
They'll run.
btw... As stupid teenagers we used to load up a .177 air pistol with blue-tack and shoot each other in the legs.
It..... ****** hurts like you wouldn't believe !!
First one to give in buys the kentucks !!
They'll run.
btw... As stupid teenagers we used to load up a .177 air pistol with blue-tack and shoot each other in the legs.
It..... ****** hurts like you wouldn't believe !!
First one to give in buys the kentucks !!
Soldato
- Joined
- 8 Mar 2007
- Posts
- 10,938
Not literally they ain't. A FIREarm is by definition a weapon that expels a projectile using combustion.
That's the dictionary and logical definition. Not the legal one in the UK.
Exactly. In the UK a firearm is anything covered in the various bits of firearms legislation.
I think I would be on the side of Tony Martin in the original incident overall.
While I do think it's very grey ground to shoot someone in the back, it remains likely as some others have said if left alone Tony Martin would likely been peaceful and friendly to society in general unlike the burglars.
To be honest if you instigate a crime then you deserve the consequences of that. Of course those consequences should be reasonable however.
I do not think it is unreasonable to incapacitate someone that has instigated a crime to prevent risk to yourself or others. And by that I mean doing enough 'damage' to be relatively sure they cannot fight back which would be more than just restraining them. And I do not see any issue with doing so even if you give chase, after all they might get away otherwise.
But of course you cannot do something like shoot or stab them which has them incapacitated and then continuing shooting multiple times or stabbing multiple times etc when there is no need to and they are already incapacitated and not likely to be able to fight back and cause any danger.
While I do think it's very grey ground to shoot someone in the back, it remains likely as some others have said if left alone Tony Martin would likely been peaceful and friendly to society in general unlike the burglars.
To be honest if you instigate a crime then you deserve the consequences of that. Of course those consequences should be reasonable however.
I do not think it is unreasonable to incapacitate someone that has instigated a crime to prevent risk to yourself or others. And by that I mean doing enough 'damage' to be relatively sure they cannot fight back which would be more than just restraining them. And I do not see any issue with doing so even if you give chase, after all they might get away otherwise.
But of course you cannot do something like shoot or stab them which has them incapacitated and then continuing shooting multiple times or stabbing multiple times etc when there is no need to and they are already incapacitated and not likely to be able to fight back and cause any danger.
He was previously convicted of firearms offences, so it's really no surprise that they have particular interest in him especially when he starts bragging about having weapons again.
I think these are illegal too, darned good fun firing them out of tubes as they act just like a weapon projected grenade when not firing vertically.
Associate
- Joined
- 15 Jan 2009
- Posts
- 1,056
- Location
- On the wagon
Clearly there were extenuating circumstances in the original case, and I can see why Mr Martin felt unsafe and unsupported by the local police force. Equally clearly the youth he shot was on his property with the intention of committing a crime. However that doesn't excuse Mr Martin shooting to kill someone who presented no immediate threat to his life or to the lives of others, and he was rightly convicted.
To allow press reports of him owning a weapon illegally to go uninvestigated would be negligence on the part of the local police force, and having discovered a crime being committed, they rightly acted. It's hardly harassment.
To allow press reports of him owning a weapon illegally to go uninvestigated would be negligence on the part of the local police force, and having discovered a crime being committed, they rightly acted. It's hardly harassment.
lol at the upgrade from burgling your house to raping you mum!
Anyway in the situation above you would be allowed to use reasonable force to stop the intruder, that reasonable force may result in their death (It would not necessarily be unreasonable to hit them once or twice with a cricket bat) and then if deemed necessary a jury of 12 of your peers will decide if your actions were reasonable.
If however you break up the act and then kill the attacker deliberately (ie carrying on hitting them with a cricket bat until their brains are all on the outside) once they no long pose a threat to you or your mum then you will be charged with manslaughter and once again tried in front of a jury of your peers to decide if what you did was reasonable.
Those who can't see the difference between acting in self defence and being judge, jury and executioner are the people with an issue in this thread. This is how our justice system works and generally speaking it works pretty well.
Oh and look at that, the law now clarifies you can use disproportionate force!
Guess anyone who does that is a psycho now amigafan?
lol
Did you read what the judges said?
"The High Court has warned that the ruling does not mean that home owners will be given "carte-blanche" to attack intruders, but must believe the force is necessary under the circumstances"
So explain to me how someone running away from you is "necessary"
Wouldn't have helped Tony
But yeah if an unarmed burglar came at you you might well get away with stabbing or shooting them even if it was disproportionate and such force wouldn't be appropriate when say being attacked in the street