JURIES - Not boaty

[nicho]

The advice from police "insiders", is NOT to have a gun, baseball bat or similar overtly dangerous weapon in the house, but have a nice heavy, cast iron lamp standard standing by to do the damage. Trouble with baseball bats is that they show a measure of "intent", and for that you can be done. If you hit the intruder with a lamp standard, well, "it was the first thing that came to hand M'Lord!!"

<hr width=100% size=1>

 

[tripleace]

with any thought of using it for any other purpose:

I am told you can buy the metal cased night watchman torchs (about 2ft long)which are very useful and of course could be used for self defence.


Byron: excllent thread, well started



<hr width=100% size=1><A target="_blank" HREF=http://www.boating-ads.co.uk> Boating Website</A>

 

[nautigirl]

I am appalled that what was, for the most part, a legitimate and reasonable debate shoud have degenerated into a platform for extremist and near-Fascist views. It is quite obvious that beneath a veneer of boating bonhomie there lurks in some of you a very unpleasant dark side. And how anyone can glory in the death of a teenager, no matter what sort of toerag he was is, quite beyond me. You ought to be thoroughly ashamed of yourself

<hr width=100% size=1>

 

[byron]

I am, I really am, I'm ashamed that I should feel that with the kid's death other people will not be put to grief in the future. Similarly I wish others like Moira Hindley had died at 16 and Fred West too. If that makes me a Nazi.... Sieg Heil.

<hr width=100% size=1>http://www.alexander-advertising.co.uk

 

[tripleace]

you have obviously

never had anything stolen,

never telephoned the policy to report a crime and been given a number which then immediately closes the file

never been subject to the double standards that go on within our society with regard to us tax payers and the other lot who live off our taxes. (I am not talking about geniune individual claiming benefit but the "black market")

whilst I am sure everyone on the forum would never support the loss of any life, its has been very clear that the present system of law is not working and needs to be altered

The general thread of this whole debate is that if you step outside the law, the law should not be 100% there to protect the anti social person to a level which makes the law abidding citzen fearful of just living.

It is clear that legal aid would / could be used against individuals such as Tony Martin and to be frank, why should a criminal get legal aid against the individual he wanted to steal from.




<hr width=100% size=1><A target="_blank" HREF=http://www.boating-ads.co.uk> Boating Website</A>

 

[nautigirl]

quote from your post 'I'm sure everyone on this the forum would never support the loss of any life' doesn't sit too well with 'I'm glad the little Git died and wish the other one had died too' from one of your most frequent contributors. Indeed in my view the sentiment expressed is totally sick.

Material posessions before human life? Where's the morality in that?

<hr width=100% size=1>

 

[Bejasus]

In this case Siobhan, it was the intruders life, how many times does it happen the other way, whether fatal or not. The intruder should not have been there and in doing so, must have realised that there was an element of risk involved. Or is every theiving scumbag to automatically accept that every victim is just going to always turn the other cheek, because the 'do-gooders' in this world say that he should. Smite me etc, etc.

I personally, have been burgled twice. The 1st time I was asleep upstairs with my wife & 2 small children. Luckily we slept through the intrusion. What may have been the cosequences if I had awoken and went to investigate. The following trauma suffered by my wife involed us having to move.

The 2nd time I was overseas and luckily neither my wife or teenage girls heard them at work this time either, but the thought of the consequences of what may have happened with 3 young women in the house, sickens me. In this case the perpetrators were undoubtedly 'pikeys' who had recently been in the area. A suspicion agreed to by the police who eventually attended. Nothing done but a crime number issued. Even though a bit of detective work done by myself revealed 2 names which were pretty conclusive to those in the know, the Police could/would not take the matter further.

Sorry, no sympathy here for his fate. Tony Martin was in the wrong borrowing a shotgun and allegedly sitting waiting in the dark. However, suppose the gun had been his and he had been disturbed in the night and confronted 2 individuals robbing him. What then.

<hr width=100% size=1><A target="_blank" HREF=http://www.arweb.co.uk/argallery/h00>http://www.arweb.co.uk/argallery/h00</A>

 

[ari]

Agree. If I break into someones house tonight in the dead of night and end up beaten up, stabbed, shot, whetever then that has happened as a direct consiquence of my actions!

the deceased is hardly the innocent party is he!?

<hr width=100% size=1>

 

[martynwhiteley]

But supposing you'd broken down in a remote spot, no signal on your mobile, and you walk up the drive of a local farm house where unknown to you, a 'scared-out-of-his-wits' farmer is waiting with his gun for the next robber to arrive.

BANG !!!!!!


(Now ask the questions)

<hr width=100% size=1><font color=blue> Real boaters do it on the Humber </font color=blue>

 

[Col]

Do burglars ring the doorbell now?? 'cause thats what I would be doing if I went to a farm for help.
You seem to have forgotton that these oiks broke in.

<hr width=100% size=1><A target="_blank" HREF=http://www.arweb.co.uk/argallery/colspics> Cols Picture Album</A>

 

[Bejasus]

C'mon Martyn, your not going to walk up to his house & break in, are you? A knock on the door or a ring on the bell does not constitute habitual burglary.

<hr width=100% size=1><A target="_blank" HREF=http://www.arweb.co.uk/argallery/h00>http://www.arweb.co.uk/argallery/h00</A>

 

[martynwhiteley]

The benefits of us living in a 'well developed' 'mature' society is that we have RULES.

The rules are not necessarily there to protect a law breaker, but to protect those not breaking the law.

The problem is is that if we go back to a 'less civilised' system of everyone protecting their own property on their own terms, a large number of innocent people will be caught up in the cross fire.

OK, so we all know that 'society' was failing Martin, but our energies should go into rectifying that problem, not just in the 'gun-slinging' direction.

This thread is taking on a 'lynch mob' type persona, and IMHO it is near justifying the little padlock icon.

<hr width=100% size=1><font color=blue> Real boaters do it on the Humber </font color=blue>

 

[tripleace]

No its personal opinions


In the UK we are still allowed to talk and type.

this is how laws are changed


<hr width=100% size=1><A target="_blank" HREF=http://www.boating-ads.co.uk> Boating Website</A>

 

[jhr]

I wasn't going to say anymore on this post, because I've had a couple of bites at the cherry already, but I agree with Nautigirl and I am depressed at the opinions being expressed here by people whose wisdom and wit I normally greatly admire.

My flameproof suit is now ready for collection, so I'm off to get it.

<hr width=100% size=1>

 

[ari]

I think this thread clearly demonstrates the thinking of the vast majority of people in regards to this matter!

And lets not forget, the majority of people on here are intelligent sensible people able to hold jobs good enough to allow them to indulge in an expensive pastime, not Daily Star reading "hang em high" white van drivers...

<hr width=100% size=1>

 

[Bejasus]

The rules are not necessarily there to protect a law breaker, but to protect those not breaking the law.

Strange, I thought the rules were meant to apply to everyone and punishment to be administered to those who chose to break them.

No wonder I get pissed off. I've been under a misapprehension all this time.

Seriously though, perhaps it is indeed time to close this thread.
Clearly, there are those who have suffered at the hands of the criminal fraternity, and whose concerns are real, and those who have not. Therefore agreement will never be mutual.


<hr width=100% size=1><A target="_blank" HREF=http://www.arweb.co.uk/argallery/h00>http://www.arweb.co.uk/argallery/h00</A>

 

[zefender]

Agreed

Mr Martin had a pump action shotgun - something gangsters use to kill people. His shotgun licence was not renewed because apparently Police feared he was not mentally stable. It is well documented that the man was somewhat obsessed with defending his property. There is little doubt that the n'er do wells ought to have been punished but there is also no doubt either that Tony Martin was in breach of the law well before the break-in. The fact that he chose to fire anywhere near a person, rather than in the air, shows that he was either deranged or callous. Of course he had to go to jail. There may be some merit in the 'protect yourself' argument, but not with a pump action shotgun surely. This case is not a good one to base a coherent argument to support more reasonable people's efforts to defend themselves (and their property). IMHO!

<hr width=100% size=1>

 

[nautigirl]

Don't get me wrong. I'm in agreement with many of the points made in the main thread of this debate. Sure, the law enforcement, crime detection and judicial systems are failing the individual citizen. They have been for some time and its one of the reasons we left the UK. But the answer isn't to take the law into your own hands. There lays the road to anarchy. One of the arguments regularly deployed against arming your police is the problem of creating an on-the-spot judge and jury. And I suppose that the logical entension of condoning Martins actions is to introduce the death penalty for those house-breakers who are caught and convicted.

<hr width=100% size=1>

 

[martynwhiteley]

Sorry I did word that badly /forums/images/icons/smile.gif

What I meant was that many of our laws are there to protect innocent people being caught up in events, due to over-zelous application of force.

Still doesn't sound right (perhaps I've been reading the Daily Star too long /forums/images/icons/wink.gif)

<hr width=100% size=1><font color=blue> Real boaters do it on the Humber </font color=blue>

 

[TomIsitt]

Re: Me too

Couldn't have put it better...it's all deeply depressing. Can't helping thinking about the Life of Brian and the bloke in chains who keeps shouting "hanging's too good for 'em. Nail some sense into them!" or words to that effect.

<hr width=100% size=1>