Or you know, we can defend are self upto and including using lethal force.
It just has to be reasonable force, shooting someone in the backlash they run away isn't deemed reasonable.
Don't get burgled!
- Thread starter Uther
- Start date
Or you know, we can defend are self upto and including using lethal force.
It just has to be reasonable force, shooting someone in the backlash they run away isn't deemed reasonable.
Soldato
A neighbour of mne phoned the police about a gang of youths who were hanging about outside of her house, making a mess of her garden. About 20 mins later a pair of PCSO rocked up and were promptly ran off by the group of teenagers.
They're about as useful as a carpet fitter's ladder.
Soldato
The bit that caught my attention was this line:
"There are a lot less burglaries than there used to be, a lot less car crime, but the sorts of crimes that are on the increase - sexual offences, concerns about terrorism, cyber crime - that's where we really need to focus."
So, what is she saying? Concerns about terrorism is something they need to focus on? They're going to go around posting pamphlets telling people they're more likely to be hit by lightning than fall victim to terrorism? Because that's how you tackle rising concerns about terrorism, and you don't need to tie up police time with that. Very confusing.
"There are a lot less burglaries than there used to be, a lot less car crime, but the sorts of crimes that are on the increase - sexual offences, concerns about terrorism, cyber crime - that's where we really need to focus."
So, what is she saying? Concerns about terrorism is something they need to focus on? They're going to go around posting pamphlets telling people they're more likely to be hit by lightning than fall victim to terrorism? Because that's how you tackle rising concerns about terrorism, and you don't need to tie up police time with that. Very confusing.
Thinking about it, just fifty pence a month from everyone in my village would pay for a security guard to wander around the village at night, and a bit of money from the parish council could stick CCTV up on the roads in and out of the village.
I can see why people in America and South Africa move into gated communities, it makes casual crime so much easier to protect against.
Soldato
- Joined
- 8 Mar 2007
- Posts
- 10,938
The problem with that is it relies on people acting calmly and rationally at the moment when they, through no faulty of their own, find themselves to be a victim of crime.
This, in my opinion, is an unreasonable expectation of human behaviour. It is easy in hindsight to say someone should have hidden under the stairs and waited for the all clear before ranging the police or that when in a fight or die situation they should have acted like well-trained bouncer and only used approved restraining techniques to subdue the situation; but when you're faced with it, I guess that kind of foresight goes out of the window.
Don't get be wrong, of course vigilantism and 'seeking revenge' after the fact should be legislated against, but I do think British laws need to be more lenient to what people do in the heat of the moment.
Soldato
- Joined
- 8 Mar 2007
- Posts
- 10,938
So why was Tony Martin charged with murder and convicted of manslaughter then?
Because he shot someone in the back, when they posed zero threat. And as such deserved everything he got.
The laws are based on the state you were in at the time, you dint need ti be rational or thinking straight, but there's still limits to this and for good reason. Your augment is stupid.
Man of Honour
Soldato
- Joined
- 8 Mar 2007
- Posts
- 10,938
You're proving my point. You are judging what he did on a rational basis, after the fact, rather than what natural emotions he had at the time.
He didn't wait for weeks, hiding in the bushes outside their house long after the burglary to shoot one of the perpetrators, he shot one of them during the act. In my opinion, whether he was running at Tony Martin like a screaming Banshee or running away should have been irrelevant.
That is my opinion, and whether you think it is "stupid" or not, I'm entitled to hold it.
His mistake was informing the police at all. He should have just threw them in the pit and said dam all. Pure scum if you ask me.
Soldato
My thoughts exactly.
I was walking along the street last week and passed a chav with a girl. She was very short, probably 4'10 or less.
I overheard him say "if this window isn't locked, I'm going to send you in".
I'm pretty sure they were robbing the place but didn't look twice. Goes to show how opportunist burglars are, and how the smallest opening could be a weak point.
I overheard him say "if this window isn't locked, I'm going to send you in".
I'm pretty sure they were robbing the place but didn't look twice. Goes to show how opportunist burglars are, and how the smallest opening could be a weak point.
Soldato
- Joined
- 8 Mar 2007
- Posts
- 10,938
He shot them during the act. That in my OPINION should be deemed as legal by default unless proven it was entrapment.
I'm not arguing what the current law says, I'm saying what I THINK it should say. You're acting as if I'm claiming there was no legal basis under current legislation to convict him when I'm not.
Trayvon Martin's parents might disagree with you on that one.
As I said, it is my opinion on what they law SHOULD be, you can disagree with it all you like but you can't dismiss it as if I'm saying black is blue.
Maybe you could have stopped and check and called the police?
Commissario
Perhaps not.
But I'd double the payment section of my council tax which goes on policing, if I could actually get some decent policing out of it - I wonder how many other forum members here would?
Instead, all we get are cuts, cuts, cuts?
Our local force/county council had a referendum as part of the general and local elections, something "like would you be willing to pay an extra 17% on top of the part of the council tax for policing" (I forget the exact wording).
I was one of the relatively low number that voted yes for it.
Commissario
Police on foot looks nice, but is pretty useless when you don't have that many officers to start with, as a foot patrol can only operate in a very small area, whilst a patrol in a car can cover an entire town or larger.
We have a dedicated police parking spot at the bottom of the town centre and every now and then we'll spot the car, and then the officers, which suggests they're trying to do both police on foot, but with the ability to respond fast.