Welcome to the Colorado AR-15 Shooters Club Discussion Forums.
We prefer the term 'Gypos' aka thieving bastards. Typically when they move into an area things start to go missing and they turn the area into a shithole.Originally Posted by Hoosier
Pikies is also acceptable since the movie Snatch.
I remember the story about Tony Martin. Reading the link again this morning ... just pisses me off again
I will never ever understand how a criminal breaking into a house has more rights than the homeowner who is defending themselves. I just don't get it.
16 years old, 29 convictions, released that day on bail yet it's the farmer's fault. I don't get it.
Everyone wants to be a frogman on Friday
You can't beat a woman who shoots - RW Swainson
Because the farmer was a greater threat to The State than the felon. Repeat this mantra - 'Guns are Bad. Government is Good.' Armed citizens, especially ones willing to resist and use their arms, are dangerous to the Tyrants that would seek to rule over them. Those with the willingness to act must be broken and made an example to all the other sheep. The desired goal was to make other people second guess defending themselves and to instead rely on The State. Goal achieved.
Yep, look what happened to the Crown's troops in The Colonies back in the 1700's.Armed citizens, especially ones willing to resist and use their arms, are dangerous to the Tyrants that would seek to rule over them.
Sss
I have no great love for burglars (I've been burgled myself) but the Tony Martin case isn't a good example to cite. First of all, he didn't shoot in self defence - he shot them in the back while they were running away. I'm pretty sure that would get most of us into trouble too.
Secondly, he used an illegally held shotgun. Note that it wasn't illegal because "guns are illegal in the UK" or anything like that - he had his firearms certificate revoked several years earlier (before the 1997 Firearms Act) for shooting at cars driving on public roads that bordered his farm.
Thirdly, part of the basis of his own appeal against his murder conviction was that he was mentally ill with the mind of a ten-year-old so whether he was even fit to own a shotgun is a moot point.
"A lot of people seem obliged to have a viewpoint."
I know nothing about this case but I do have some observations just from the very high level:
The concept that you must prove you were under imminent life or death threat when someone has invaded your home is nonsense. There used to be a time that one had the right to defend their home and property without having to fear automatic persecution by their own government. I'm not advocating people just start shooting anyone who steps on their lawn, but if someone breaks into your home, they intend you some sort of harm. You should have the right to defend your person and property without fear of your government. As it is now, your home isn't your castle. People can break in without fear of reprisal from you. It's the victim who has to fear the consequences of any actions they may take, short of just choosing to cower in the corner as a victim. How is that even sane?
Not arguing he may have had some mental issues. Shooting at cars is never good. The fact UK citizens, at that time, required a Govt sanctioned firearms certificate that could be revoked whenever the Govt so chose, I take issue with. Govt permission eventually leads to Govt prohibition. It happened in England. It will probably happen here eventually. We're already well down the slippery path of 'Govt Permission'
He may very well have been that mentally ill. However, I got a feeling that appeal/defense was used to simply get the poor bastard out of jail. I doubt he was that nuts. But since I don't know the facts, I won't go any further with my conjecture.
In the end, IMHO, he had the right to defend his property, especially after being robbed multiple times (probably by these same punks). Criminals, not law abiding citizens, should be the ones who are afraid. If you invade someone's house, you should run the real risk of getting shot. I don't care if you chose to turn tail and run when it's clear you chose the wrong house to invade. Your original intent was clear.
Not cool. Police are idiots. Enforcing unjust laws are just as bad as those that made it law.
Who are you to want to escape a thugs bullet? That is only a personal prejudice, ( Atlas Shrugged)
"Those that don't watch the old media are uninformed, those that do watch the old media are misinformed." - Mark Twain
This is why most people are opposed to mandatory gun registration. No gun was involved in that incident. She had a couple of break action shotguns in her home in a locked cabinet with the key hidden -- even other family members didn't know where the key was kept. Police computer said she had shotguns, so they confiscated them and revoked her permit.
That is the same reason why many folks I know refuse to apply for a CCW permit. It is legal for them to have a handgun in their home, place of business, or vehicle and they rarely feel the need to carry so they forgo paying fees to be entered into a database so every time they get pulled over for a minor traffic offense there is a chance the cop might consider him "armed and dangerous" as has happened on occasion with others who've posted in this forum.
I have English friends who constantly criticize the US for their written Constitution. They claim they are just as free as we are without anything written...I beg to differ
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote