How close are we to this... ?

[SAMBUSA]

You're sound asleep when you hear a thump outside your bedroom door.

Half-awake, and nearly paralyzed with fear, you hear muffled whispers. At

least two people have broken into your house and are moving your way. With

your heart pumping, you reach down beside your bed and pick up your

shotgun. You rack a shell into the chamber, then inch toward the door and

open it. In the darkness, you make out two shadows.

One holds something that looks like a crowbar. When the intruder brandishes

it as if to strike, you raise the shotgun and fire. The blast knocks both

thugs to the floor. One writhes and screams while the second man crawls to

the front door and lurches outside. As you pick up the telephone to call

police, you know you're in trouble.

In your country, most guns were outlawed years before, and the few that are

privately owned are so stringently regulated as to make them useless. Yours

was never registered. Police arrive and inform you that the second burglar

has died. They arrest you for First Degree Murder and Illegal Possession of

a Firearm. When you talk to your attorney, he tells you not to worry:

authorities will probably plea the case down to manslaughter.

"What kind of sentence will I get?" you ask.

"Only ten-to-twelve years," he replies, as if that's nothing. "Behave

yourself, and you'll be out in seven."

The next day, the shooting is the lead story in the local newspaper.

Somehow, you're portrayed as an eccentric vigilante while the two men you

shot are represented as choirboys. Their friends and relatives can't find

an unkind word to say about them. Buried deep down in the article,

authorities acknowledge that both "victims" have been arrested numerous

times. But the next day's headline says it all: "Lovable Rogue Son Didn't

Deserve to Die." The thieves have been transformed from career criminals

into Robin Hood-type pranksters. As the days wear on, the story takes wings.

The national media picks it up, then the international media. The surviving

burglar has become a folk hero.

Your attorney says the thief is preparing to sue you, and he'll probably

win. The media publishes reports that your home has been burglarized several

times in the past and that you've been critical of local police for their

lack of effort in apprehending the suspects. After the last break-in, you

told your neighbor that you would be prepared next time. The District

Attorney uses this to allege that you were lying in wait for the burglars.

A few months later, you go to trial. The charges haven't been reduced, as

your lawyer had so confidently predicted. When you take the stand, your

anger at the injustice of it all works against you. Prosecutors paint a

picture of you as a mean, vengeful man. It doesn't take long for the jury to

convict you of all charges.

The judge sentences you to life in prison.

This case really happened.

On August 22, 1999, Tony Martin of Emneth, Norfolk, England, killed one

burglar and wounded a second. In April, 2000, he was convicted and is now

serving a life term.

How did it become a crime to defend one's own life in the once great

British Empire ?

It started with the Pistols Act of 1903. This seemingly reasonable law

forbade selling pistols to minors or felons and established that handgun

sales were to be made only to those who had a license. The Firearms Act of

1920 expanded licensing to include not only handguns but all firearms except

shotguns.

Later laws passed in 1953 and 1967 outlawed the carrying of any weapon by

private citizens and mandated the registration of all shotguns.

Momentum for total handgun confiscation began in earnest after the

Hungerford mass shooting in 1987. Michael Ryan, a mentally disturbed Man

with a Kalashnikov rifle, walked down the streets shooting everyone he saw.

When the smoke cleared, 17 people were dead.

The British public, already de-sensitized by eighty years of "gun control",

demanded even tougher restrictions. (The seizure of all privately owned

handguns was the objective even though Ryan used a rifle.)

Nine years later, at Dunblane, Scotland, Thomas Hamilton used a

semi-automatic weapon to murder 16 children and a teacher at a public

school.

For many years, the media had portrayed all gun owners as mentally unstable

or worse, criminals. Now the press had a real kook with which to beat up

law-abiding gun owners. Day after day, week after week, the media gave up

all pretense of objectivity and demanded a total ban on all handguns. The

Dunblane Inquiry, a few months later, sealed the fate of the few sidearm

still owned by private citizens.

During the years in which the British government incrementally took away

most gun rights, the notion that a citizen had the right to armed

self-defense came to be seen as vigilantism. Authorities refused to grant

gun licenses to people who were threatened, claiming that self-defense was

no longer considered a reason to own a gun. Citizens who shot burglars or

robbers or rapists were charged while the real criminals were released.

Indeed, after the Martin shooting, a police spokesman was quoted as saying,

"We cannot have people take the law into their own hands."

All of Martin's neighbors had been robbed numerous times, and several

elderly people were severely injured in beatings by young thugs who had no

fear of the consequences. Martin himself, a collector of antiques, had seen

most of his collection trashed or stolen by burglars.

When the Dunblane Inquiry ended, citizens who owned handguns were given

three months to turn them over to local authorities. Being good British

subjects, most people obeyed the law. The few who didn't were visited by

police and threatened with ten-year prison sentences if they didn't comply.

Police later bragged that they'd taken nearly 200,000 handguns from private

citizens.

How did the authorities know who had handguns? The guns had been registered

and licensed. Kinda like cars.

Sound familiar?

[fusion]

I stopped at it being a crowbar and me not being a pussy and needing a gun to take down a couple of intruders.

[SAMBUSA]

mmmkay tough guy:rolleyes:

[Casper]

I stopped at it being a crowbar and me not being a pussy and needing a gun to take down a couple of intruders.

He was 55 yrs old, versus a 29 yr old and a 16yr old.

However, this story has a lot of twists and turns in it, and didn't happen exactly the way portrayed. First, both burglars were shot, one in the leg and one in the back. See, they were running away from the guy when they were shot. That's where the problem is. It wasn't self defense. They were trying to escape. The owner shot them anyways. The 16yr old died. The second problem is the owner ran. He knew he was in trouble. He didn't call the cops or stick around. The 29yr old ran and got help. The owner had hid the gun at his mother's farm then gone to a bar. FYI for those interested. I wrote a paper about this a long time ago. It's a prime example of both sides of an issue twisting a story to fight their needs.

I believe there would be a civil war here before the entire country would allow their guns to be taken away.

[SAMBUSA]

Could've at least waited till Justin got in here all riled up.

[Disclaimer]

I stopped at it being a crowbar and me not being a pussy and needing a gun to take down a couple of intruders.

Get all Jason Statham on them.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DQb-hqfZ-2E

[Casper]

Oh, and the 29yr old got 3yrs in jail for attempted burglary.

[SAMBUSA]

I see no problem with the guy shooting them as they were running away. They were in his house with intent to harm

[Casper]

I see no problem with the guy shooting them as they were running away. They were in his house with intent to harm

That's the problem, they weren't there to harm. They were there to steal. When he confronted them with the gun, they ran away. That's where the story should've ended. Instead, he chased them to a window they were trying to crawl out of and shot them. That's not self defense. That's murder.

[SAMBUSA]

That's the problem, they weren't there to harm. They were there to steal. When he confronted them with the gun, they ran away. That's where the story should've ended. Instead, he chased them to a window they were trying to crawl out of and shot them. That's not self defense. That's murder.

I see no problem with that either. It's not murder, he was protecting his "castle"

[Casper]

I see no problem with that either. It's not murder, he was protecting his "castle"

He'd already protected it by scaring them off. What he did was murder, plain and simple. It would be considered murder pretty much anywhere. He had no right to shoot. They were not trying to harm him and they were leaving.

[SAMBUSA]

He'd already protected it by scaring them off. What he did was murder, plain and simple. It would be considered murder pretty much anywhere. He had no right to shoot. They were not trying to harm him and they were leaving.

So if someone breaks into your house, you are just gonna say "Eh, they are just here to steal"? And let them leave?

[V4junkie]

yes

[Casper]

So if someone breaks into your house, you are just gonna say "Eh, they are just here to steal"? And let them leave?

No, I'm going to pull my gun I keep in the bedroom and aim. They run, I call the police. If they even think about attacking me, my wife, or my dogs, I shoot. The fact he shot the guy in the back is evidence enough to say it wasn't self defense. I don't see what you're trying to debate here. It wasn't self defense and he wasn't protecting his home. They were fleeing. He'd already protected himself and home.

[SAMBUSA]

No, I'm going to pull my gun I keep in the bedroom and aim. They run, I call the police. If they even think about attacking me, my wife, or my dogs, I shoot. The fact he shot the guy in the back is evidence enough to say it wasn't self defense. I don't see what you're trying to debate here. It wasn't self defense and he wasn't protecting his home. They were fleeing. He'd already protected himself and home.

Not trying to debate, just flat out stating that I would make sure that they left my house in an ambulance. If it happens and I go to jail for it, will you cum for a visit?

[Casper]

Not trying to debate, just flat out stating that I would make sure that they left my house in an ambulance. If it happens and I go to jail for it, will you cum for a visit?

I won't cum for you anywhere.

You'd really shoot someone in the back when they're running away?

[SAMBUSA]

I will cum for you anywhere.

You'd really shoot someone in the back when they're running away?

Fixed:D

If they were outside my house, no. If they were inside my house, I probably would. But I say this knowing how my house is laid out. If I knew they weren't running towards my kids' rooms, if I knew that my kids weren't already taken outside then no I prolly wouldn't. But I'm not gonna wait to know either.

[Cdubyah]

Sometimes there is no need for a gun.

I scared off two thugs with 300 lbs of angry hillbilly fury!!

I doubt I would shoot them in the back, I'm a pretty piss poor shot, prolly woould have hit em in the foot

I see your point though casper, it wasn't self defense. However, people do strange things under diress. Maybe it was the fear of retaliation from the thugs. He didn't want them doing it again. Which I'm sure you stated; is vigilante justice.

[cmoosego]

this is where I would have diverted, I would have chased them down and disabled them by breaking a knee or foot, dragged them back into the house and tied them to a chair and systematically broken every bone in each hand, then untied them and knocked them out with a swift dot to the head, rough up the house to make it look like a struggle happened, call the police to come get them and give the right story.... now that would keep them from trying again....

[John]

shit why even call the police? youve alread kidnapped and tortured them. why not just go all out and wear their skin or chop them up and bury them in the cellar?

[Casper]

shit why even call the police? youve alread kidnapped and tortured them. why not just go all out and wear their skin or chop them up and bury them in the cellar?

That's kinda what I was thinking.

[cmoosego]

nah I like teaching lessons... they go further then just the shear pleasure of torture... and murder ends the pain... they would walk with a permanent limp and unable to hold anything tightly in their hands for the rest of their lives... they would def. remember the lesson....

[cmoosego]

and murder is full of hate, I don't hate anyone....Ironic huh??

[V4junkie]

Of course, makes perfect sense *cough*disassociation*cough*

[cmoosego]

I didn't say I wasn't a sick deviant.... I just don't hate people... just the actions of said peeps....