When thugs run the country

NoADSLyet said:
Nope a formal investigating docket is opened in normal society and if cause for concern is detected then it is referred to the director general for a decision whether to prosecute the "victim" or the "defender" of the property, hell who is the victim here? Once a murder docket is opened then that means the "defender" is alleged to have committed murder and is open to all kind of interpretations by whoever the judge is for the day and depending what nationality and group the "defender" belongs to. IMHO this is also wrong as murder is normally define as a pre-planned action with the intent to take the life of the person. Hell even the so called "botched up robberies" where farmers is killed is not murder in the eyes of this freak government. They class it different to skew the stats. Manslaughter is the correct alternative but to describe that to the police will be like trying to determine the sex of a snail. It was recently reported that the head of police do not even know the laws.
Click to expand...
Hey, a docket is a docket. Once one is opened, nobody can close it except the prosecutor. If this person is 'cleared' the docket can resurface if he has to defend himself again. That opens a can of worms and he is labelled a vigilante, no matter whether they declared the first one self-defence or not.

IMHO, the police have no clue about discretion or common sense, which explains their huge workload and the collapse of the judicial system.
 
Leitmotif said:
There is much more than meets the eye, indeed... I just tend to take the side of a person defending their home. Yes, there could have been a number of reasons. Still, from what we're looking at in the story, this is a case of harrassment of people defending themselves.

Not sure what you mean by cops looking the other way... but the thing is, it's inconsistent. Occasionally - very occasionally - you'll hear of a self-defense case where the defender wasn't charged. More often you'll hear of a clear-cut self-defense where a murder charge is opened.

I like guns, and I love to shoot. This doesn't mean I only support self-defense when guns are involved.
Click to expand...

I also love to shoot guns. And so many people tell me guns are stupid ... but there is nothing wrong with gun ... what about the kitchen knife they use ... its also dangerous :P.

Is anyone reading this a hobby shooter willing to let me come with you on shoots ... I used to go to Reds Range / Dave Sheers ... until recently when they were robbed of 100 guns and the guy I used to deal with was shot dead execution style :( ... I knew him for years ... the other guys there don't know me ... they're all new.

I used to love going on shoots with them, AK 47's, R5's, R6's, R4's, Dragunov ... I shot so many guns ... and I really love shooting guns ... its fun, and sort of gives you an adrenaline rush ... no one said shooting guns can't be fun and responsible.
 
I heard that the law is under consideration and it is proposed that police officers should not carry weapons anymore. I heard it from a law student, my gf, can anyone confirm it?
 
lsuacner said:
I heard that the law is under consideration and it is proposed that police officers should not carry weapons anymore. I heard it from a law student, my gf, can anyone confirm it?
Click to expand...
I dont know what the situation is here but back in NY the police were required to carry their firearms 24/7 because they didn't stop being cops when they finished their shift.

They need to get the urban cops out of their vehicles and make them patrol on foot - that's visible policing -as opposed to them just writing "visible policing" on the side of their vehicles (like that is going to make a difference).

@Fudzy - what search string did you use to get that fool as your first link? The Wikipedia link - en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Castle_Doctrine - is the first I get.
 
Ah, the left wing prediction that the right to carry arms and to stand your ground will result in gunfights. The "it stands to reason" argument. Except that this argument has already lost, because since states in the US started enacting shall-issue carry permits, crime has gone *down*. Every. Single. Time. Firearm deaths have actually gone *down*. Yet anti-gun organizations have been predicting shootouts over shopping carts and similar hysterical nonsense since the first law was enacted.

Please don't try and counter a good principle with emotional nonsense that assumes that the entire population is incapable of exercising responsibility. That people are at heart children who need to be controlled. It's insulting and manipulative.
 
bwana said:
@Fudzy - what search string did you use to get that fool as your first link? The Wikipedia link - en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Castle_Doctrine - is the first I get.
Click to expand...

Gotta love Google :cool:

The concept is simple. Confronted with violence, once is always expected to retreat. Retreat is the rule, not the exception. Then an exception was carved out allowing the use of deadly force if reasonably used in self-defense. But always, there was first an obligation to retreat.
Click to expand...

http://www.waxingamerica.com/2006/02/the_castle_doct.html

How very liberal :sick: Run away :o
 
Fudzy said:
So if you see someone breaking into you're car you shoot him?

Incidentally, I wanted to do more research into this Doctrine and this was the first link that Google spat out:

http://www.waxingamerica.com/2006/02/the_castle_doct.html
Click to expand...

You can believe this and promote it if you want to. However, in reality if you even point a gun at someone (who is a threat, who has stolen from you, is drawing a knife) the police will open a case against you.

They will also try immediately to confiscate your firearm - and call it "normal procedure".
 
Skeptik said:
You can believe this and promote it if you want to. However, in reality if you even point a gun at someone (who is a threat, who has stolen from you, is drawing a knife) the police will open a case against you.

They will also try immediately to confiscate your firearm - and call it "normal procedure".
Click to expand...

The solution:

keep a stolen firearm in your home (typical 9mil available for around 250 bucks). shoot the b@stard who enters your premises without your permission using said firearm. place firearm in tresspassers' hand and fire off a couple shots. tell the cops you don't own a gun... b@stard must have brought it with him and in the struggle between the two of you, said firearm accidentally discharged resulting in said tresspasser coming off second best.

...suggestion from a crim lawyer mate of mine
 
Do you mean the part where it's easier to get an illegal firearm than a legal one, the part where crime is bad enough that people have to contemplate keeping illegal firearms, or the part where this lawyer is giving illegal advice?

Skeptik: if you use your firearm, even in self-defense without firing it, it becomes evidence. It is then standard procedure for the police to take it in.

McSack: I'd rather fight the morons who are doing their damnedest to prevent people from having effective means of self-defense. The fools forcing people to become criminals in order to defend themselves and those important to them.
 
Leitmotif said:
Skeptik: if you use your firearm, even in self-defense without firing it, it becomes evidence. It is then standard procedure for the police to take it in.
Click to expand...
They take it in and send it to Pretoria, leaving you defenseless for how long (6 months). You may then end up in court to explain why you used it. All in all, a deterrant to use of firearms, which fits nicely in the theory that the government wants to disarm citizens.

Also when it comes to renewing your license, they ask whether you have any cases opened against you.

Result: People don't use it and risk getting stabbed.
 
People would be better off learning how to use a knife in combat. You don't need to license them now do you?
 
Fudzy said:
People would be better off learning how to use a knife in combat. You don't need to license them now do you?
Click to expand...

Yeah I'm sure a person with a knife has a chance against a person armed with gun :o

:rolleyes:
 
Fudzy said:
People would be better off learning how to use a knife in combat. You don't need to license them now do you?
Click to expand...

Until the government outlaws them. A person was arrested earlier in the week for using a lamp to defend himself. It's not about guns alone - it's about the right to self-defense. Oh, and it is in fact illegal to carry a fixed blade over a certain size. Also, while a knife may work fine against one opponent, even armed - yes, I'm aware of the 7-meter rule - it'll be damned near useless against multiple attackers unless they're also unarmed or you're Jet Li.

We'll give your knife to a 50kg woman and see if she can hold off a 100kg rapist, shall we? Or to a wheelchair-bound paraplegic, and we'll see if he can outrun criminals or defend himself with a knife. Or to a 70 year old facing off against two young men in his home.

Don't bring a knife to a gunfight.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top
Sign up to the MyBroadband newsletter
X