Experts: Pistorius Violated Basic Firearms Rules

Albereth said:
So you don't have an example. Just say so. Because I am pretty sure that I didn't ask what was more common. But right now people breaking into houses and hiding when disturbed is far more common an occurrence than this mythical bread quest.
Click to expand...

I was being sarcastic - they're both unlikely scenarios. I really don't feel like going forwards and backwards on this matter - my personal opinion is that unloading four rounds into an en-suite bathroom toilet door without identifying an actual threat and not first making sure the one person also in the house is safe is the height of stupidity and shows extreme lack of judgement and recklessness.
 
Oscar screwed up, he should have never shot without positively identifying the threat.

He should have pulled back while covering the bathroom door, gotten Reva and then called security/police.
 
R/SGT said:
Oscar screwed up, he should have never shot without positively identifying the threat.

He should have pulled back while covering the bathroom door, gotten Reva and then called security/police.
Click to expand...

He didn't do that because he knew that Reeva was behind that door!
 
Albereth said:
No - you may lawfully use your firearm for hunting and target shooting too.
Click to expand...

Well obviously...but that was not the intention of the post which deals with the issue of lethal force in situations of self defense.


Albereth said:
As to using a firearm in self defence; that has to do with the state of mind and it is about the belief of an immediate, serious etc etc. Having someone in your house is a threat. And unfortunately those threats turn out to be deadly and/or cause grievous injury.
Click to expand...

Nope. the Law is pretty clear as SAGA spokesman Martin Hood describes
"an immediate, serious and direct attack or threat of attack that could either be deadly or cause grievous injury.
Click to expand...
Having an unwanted person in your house, holding a knife is not necessarily grounds to shoot them... If your life is not in immediate danger.


Albereth said:
I suppose that we'll have someone argue about appropriate force soon enough. I don't care if the perp has a knife and I have a gun. I most certainly am not interested in being fair. I am only interested in surviving and that is not good news for the perp.
Click to expand...

I am sure it will be argued in Court, but you can not place yourself above the law. It was only fairly recently that Police Officers could return fire - before the law changed, they had to literally be under fire by criminals before they could shoot back.
 
Last edited:
Hosehead said:
Life threatening danger as Martin Hood says "an immediate, serious and direct attack or threat of attack that could either be deadly or cause grievous injury.


Those are the ONLY acceptable reasons for the lawful use of your firearm .
Click to expand...

That's what I meant by "real". So a guy who throws ping pong balls at you should not be shot, but what about a guy who is larger than you and is coming at you in your own house. You warn him to back off, but a guy like that could kill you if he rips out your larynx or crushes your windpipe.

But anyway, that's what I meant - real danger. So a noise behind a door is not a real danger. It could be YOUR GIRLFRIEND or a friend or your maid or a fireman who entered your house because there is smoke on the roof.
 
My home is my castle. I will defend it with all my might.

I will arrest the intruder if possible. If he attack me in the proses, I will shoot. I will hold him prisoner at gun point. That is where the law does not agree with me. I will be arrested for pointing a firearm at someone. So what am I to do? Keep it concealed till attacked and thereby taking the chance to be overpowered before I can draw? I am also not allowed a warning shot. That is considered attempted murder. I see it as saving a live. But the law is forcing me to kill the intruder, on sight of a weapon.

So, when you are being burglarized, you have to flee your castle? Fleeing is seen by the law as the most efficient form of self protection. I call BS. It is my basic human right to protect my castle, with everything I have available. This story that a burglar have the right to come into my castle, help himself to my property, because he is hungry, is utter...
 
Xman said:
My home is my castle. I will defend it with all my might.

I will arrest the intruder if possible. If he attack me in the proses, I will shoot. I will hold him prisoner at gun point. That is where the law does not agree with me. I will be arrested for pointing a firearm at someone. So what am I to do? Keep it concealed till attacked and thereby taking the chance to be overpowered before I can draw? I am also not allowed a warning shot. That is considered attempted murder. I see it as saving a live. But the law is forcing me to kill the intruder, on sight of a weapon.

So, when you are being burglarized, you have to flee your castle? Fleeing is seen by the law as the most efficient form of self protection. I call BS. It is my basic human right to protect my castle, with everything I have available. This story that a burglar have the right to come into my castle, help himself to my property, because he is hungry, is utter...
Click to expand...

If you shoot and kill a suspect you need to be able to prove that you acted in self defense or defense of others who were in immediate danger

If you subdue and attacker and keep him at gunpoint until help arrives it is very unlikely that you will be charged with pointing a firearm. This charge is determined by the circumstances involved and I have yet to see it invoked in a situation such as you describe.

As for having to flee no, if the attacker enters your space and threatens your life or those of people around you, you can use all possible means up to deadly force to protect yourself and them

But remember the burden of proof falls upon you
 
Xman said:
My home is my castle. I will defend it with all my might.

I will arrest the intruder if possible. If he attack me in the proses, I will shoot. I will hold him prisoner at gun point. That is where the law does not agree with me. I will be arrested for pointing a firearm at someone. So what am I to do? Keep it concealed till attacked and thereby taking the chance to be overpowered before I can draw? I am also not allowed a warning shot. That is considered attempted murder. I see it as saving a live. But the law is forcing me to kill the intruder, on sight of a weapon.

So, when you are being burglarized, you have to flee your castle? Fleeing is seen by the law as the most efficient form of self protection. I call BS. It is my basic human right to protect my castle, with everything I have available. This story that a burglar have the right to come into my castle, help himself to my property, because he is hungry, is utter...
Click to expand...

So you dont have a problem with shooting your wife/gf/child when they wake up to go take a piss ?
 
zippy said:
So you dont have a problem with shooting your wife/gf/child when they wake up to go take a piss ?
Click to expand...

Where do you fall out? I fail to see how you can possibly come to that conclusion from my post. Good thing this is not a comprehension test, hey?
 
the ******** was woken up by the sound of someone in the bathroom. He doesnt have he artifical legs on. His first reaction is not to check that the women he supposedly loves is ok. Not to ask her to help him or to ask her to phone the security/police. No he screams(he said this) something at whoever is in the bathromm, then fires 4 shots through a closed door WITHOUT having verified where she was.

I have been in this type of situation. My VERY FIRST reaction was to wake my wife up and get her under the bed. When I made my way down the passage with my 9mm, the thought going through my mind, was to keep my wife BEHIND my flipping gun, with me between the burglar and her. And I was scared ****less.

This twat should rot in jail.
 
zippy said:
the ******** was woken up by the sound of someone in the bathroom. He doesnt have he artifical legs on. His first reaction is not to check that the women he supposedly loves is ok. Not to ask her to help him or to ask her to phone the security/police. No he screams(he said this) something at whoever is in the bathromm, then fires 4 shots through a closed door WITHOUT having verified where she was.

I have been in this type of situation. My VERY FIRST reaction was to wake my wife up and get her under the bed. When I made my way down the passage with my 9mm, the thought going through my mind, was to keep my wife BEHIND my flipping gun, with me between the burglar and her. And I was scared ****less.

This twat should rot in jail.
Click to expand...

So, zippy, that does not explain at all how you arrive at below comment.

zippy said:
So you dont have a problem with shooting your wife/gf/child when they wake up to go take a piss ?
Click to expand...

Care to explain, or is it some narcotic talking? See you have a 9mm. In the UK? Thought no one there have firearms? A worrying thought, never the less.
 
R/SGT said:
If you shoot and kill a suspect you need to be able to prove that you acted in self defense or defense of others who were in immediate danger

If you subdue and attacker and keep him at gunpoint until help arrives it is very unlikely that you will be charged with pointing a firearm. This charge is determined by the circumstances involved and I have yet to see it invoked in a situation such as you describe.

As for having to flee no, if the attacker enters your space and threatens your life or those of people around you, you can use all possible means up to deadly force to protect yourself and them

But remember the burden of proof falls upon you
Click to expand...

Actually you don't have to prove a thing. The state needs to prove it's case.
 
Hosehead said:
Well obviously...but that was not the intention of the post which deals with the issue of lethal force in situations of self defense.




Nope. the Law is pretty clear as SAGA spokesman Martin Hood describes Having an unwanted person in your house, holding a knife is not necessarily grounds to shoot them... If your life is not in immediate danger.




I am sure it will be argued in Court, but you can not place yourself above the law. It was only fairly recently that Police Officers could return fire - before the law changed, they had to literally be under fire by criminals before they could shoot back.
Click to expand...

Despite what Martin Hood may say the law is not clear. There is no absolute measure of what constitutes immediate danger.
 
quovadis said:
I was being sarcastic - they're both unlikely scenarios. I really don't feel like going forwards and backwards on this matter - my personal opinion is that unloading four rounds into an en-suite bathroom toilet door without identifying an actual threat and not first making sure the one person also in the house is safe is the height of stupidity and shows extreme lack of judgement and recklessness.
Click to expand...

In the cold light of day your statements are true. But in the heat of the moment something else was going on inside his mind.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top
Sign up to the MyBroadband newsletter
X