A Ban on Guns?

CrazyCruizChick · Post by **CrazyCruizChick** » Thu Apr 19, 2007 1:45 am

With the latest murders in Virginia and the murders before that and the ones that don't even make the big media.

Why is it so easy or necessary to carry on buying guns & bullets over the counter if there is such a high risk of matter of even more unnecessary murders.

Should it be time there was a change in the Law? Even a review on the matter would bring up new ideas on how to make it more safer for every body else.

Sweet Tooth · Post by **Sweet Tooth** » Thu Apr 19, 2007 7:05 am

Ya know, I am really torn on this subject. I support private firearms, considering I have a couple myself. I grew up around guns, my grandparents where competive skeet shooters, and my other grandparents are big hunters. I have never feared guns, probably from the respect that I have for them.

But when do you make clear the line of someone who should have one or not? Everyone has a bad day and goes to a mental hospital at least 1 day in their life, does that mean they shouldn't own a gun? Because, there are alot of really bad people out there with no record who shouldn't own a gun!

I know that it is law in VA to do a background check and even have a 7 day waiting period to buy a gun, so to blame it on the people who sell them is silly. To say that it is t he g uns fault silly! As my dad says, "To say that guns kill people is like saying that a spoon made Oprah fat!"

So, where do you draw the line??

YZGI · Post by **YZGI** » Thu Apr 19, 2007 7:11 am

Sweet Tooth;595921 wrote: Ya know, I am really torn on this subject. I support private firearms, considering I have a couple myself. I grew up around guns, my grandparents where competive skeet shooters, and my other grandparents are big hunters. I have never feared guns, probably from the respect that I have for them.

But when do you make clear the line of someone who should have one or not? Everyone has a bad day and goes to a mental hospital at least 1 day in their life, does that mean they shouldn't own a gun? Because, there are alot of really bad people out there with no record who shouldn't own a gun!

I know that it is law in VA to do a background check and even have a 7 day waiting period to buy a gun, so to blame it on the people who sell them is silly. To say that it is t he g uns fault silly! As my dad says, "To say that guns kill people is like saying that a spoon made Oprah fat!"

So, where do you draw the line??

Um, I just need to know if you have done your day in the mental hospital yet?:wah:

Sweet Tooth · Post by **Sweet Tooth** » Thu Apr 19, 2007 7:14 am

YZGI;595927 wrote: Um, I just need to know if you have done your day in the mental hospital yet?:wah:

umm.... not yet- hoping to stay outta there! This place might drive me there though!

WonderWendy3 · Post by **WonderWendy3** » Thu Apr 19, 2007 7:39 am

I saw this thread this morning and almost wrote..."pass the popcorn", only because this is a touchy subject in the US right now....but I will put my 2 cents worth, while it's not my day to be in the mental hospital! (:wah: that was too funny to pass up Sweet Tooth and Wisey)....

Okay...

This is a very touchy subject for me...I am one of those that believe in having the right to bear arms....but not be stupid about it. I, personally am afraid of guns, but in the event I need to protect my family and feel I need to buy a gun, I like to know I have that freedom to do so.

As for the recent shooting at VA tech....The fact is that the young man was disturbed, as are many in this crazy world we live in. If he wasn't able to get his hands on guns, don't you think he would've meditated and thought out another way to kill people, like bombs or stabbing even? A person that wants to make a statement will do it, no regards for the legalalities....I heard on the news this morning how teachers are being overwhelmed with emails and messages from other teachers about "disturbed students". So, now we have to be on the look out for depressed and upset kids, cause they are gonna "snap" at any moment?!?

Where is the Individual responsibiltiy?

I like Sweet Tooths' Dad's saying...and I agree, I have no control over Oprah's Spoon!:D

Uncle Fester · Post by **Uncle Fester** » Thu Apr 19, 2007 7:58 am

I think what it is with us on this side of the pond we can not grip with the fact of how easy it is to get a gun in the USA , When Dunblane happened over here gun control was really tightened up . I have a gun licence ( rifle ) but I don't own a gun anymore ( at my age I don't need one anymore ) I am unable to tell you why I had guns but suffice to say I was classed a first class Marksman

RedGlitter · Post by **RedGlitter** » Thu Apr 19, 2007 8:31 am

Absolutely not. Every time something like this happens people flip out and start clamoring for gun control laws. NO. If he couldn't have gotten a gun he would have used a pipe bomb or something. He was bent. Guns not being accessible aren't going to stop the crackpots from doing things.

YZGI · Post by **YZGI** » Thu Apr 19, 2007 8:36 am

Did ya hear Chris Rocks take on this.

No need to ban guns. Just make every bullet cost $5,000. That way if ya get pissed at someone you have to figure out if its worth $5,000 to shoot them.:wah:

K.Snyder · Post by **K.Snyder** » Thu Apr 19, 2007 8:44 am

I'm for whatever works...

As for things being where they are right now it would take some time before we were to actually observe the affects of mandating a gun law here in the US...Mainly because there are alot of guns already within it's borders...

I myself would love to own alot of guns,..but obviously considering that there are actually people out there capable of doing things that like what has happened at Virginia Tech I'm willing to sacrifice my own preferences for the sake of everyone's well being...

But to be honest,..even with mandating gun laws I seriously don't see people who are willing to do the unthinkable having a hard time in getting illegal guns on the street if guns were restricted...

sunny104 · Post by **sunny104** » Thu Apr 19, 2007 8:47 am

If guns were banned the only thing that would mean is that people who use them responsibly would not be able to own them but the 'bad guys' would still find a way. Just like drugs. They're illegal but that doesn't stop people from using and abusing them.

zinkyusa · Post by **zinkyusa** » Thu Apr 19, 2007 10:54 am

I don't care if guns are banned or not, but I don't think that is a viable political option in this country. There are already to many out there and we have a very strong gun lobby in this country. I do think there should be some basic steps implemented like:

1. A background investigation

2. One week waiting period

3. Registration of all guns

4. Ban on assault weapons

5. Ban on concealed weapons

6. Permits and gun saftey class required for handguns.

These things do not infringe on anyones rights and would be of some benefit to law enforcement as well as screening out some of the obvious pyschos..

CrazyCruizChick · Post by **CrazyCruizChick** » Thu Apr 19, 2007 11:35 am

I guess like most of you have said (would there be any difference if there was a ban)

Like what Uncle Fester had said about what happened in Dunblane we tighten the gun laws but that doesnt stop all the youngsters stabbing themselves to deaths which we have had a lot off lately.

Guns, knifes, bombs etc where dose it all end maybe not or ever, come to think of it.

Parker_scramble · Post by **Parker_scramble** » Thu Apr 19, 2007 12:47 pm

criminals are always gonna get guns. there's too many guns here in america.

i could get a gun without a backgrouind check tonight if i wanted to.

i support guns for everybody. imagine everybody in class having guns.

you think if ur a killer ur gonna walk into a class and start shooting knowing that there are 5 or 6 people in the class that's gonna shoot back?

i mean really.

Post by **spot** » Thu Apr 19, 2007 1:59 pm

As Parker says, the problem isn't the number of privately owned handguns in the US, it's the inconsistency of the laws. If that many guns are in the hands of the public then it's madness to ban students and staff from carrying them freely on campus. The widespread possession of easily acquired handguns poses the threat, the ban on students and staff carrying their own provides any morbid self-publicist with invulnerability for the time needed to execute his plan.

guppy · Post by **guppy** » Thu Apr 19, 2007 2:22 pm

I own a gun...so you know where i stand on this....

Parker_scramble · Post by **Parker_scramble** » Thu Apr 19, 2007 2:27 pm

oh trust me, when i get enough money , im buying a real gun and you bet im gonna apply for a license to carry a gun concelead here in texas... and you bet, if i see somebody threatening somebody with a gun , i will shoot them.

Post by **spot** » Thu Apr 19, 2007 2:30 pm

Why would you want it concealed, Parker?

guppy · Post by **guppy** » Thu Apr 19, 2007 2:42 pm

from what i understand even if you are carrying the gun in your glove compartment it is considered concealed....

Bill Sikes · Post by **Bill Sikes** » Thu Apr 19, 2007 2:46 pm

WonderWendy3;595948 wrote: This is a very touchy subject for me...I am one of those that believe in having the right to bear arms....but not be stupid about it. I, personally am afraid of guns, but in the event I need to protect my family and feel I need to buy a gun, I like to know I have that freedom to do so.

This is an interesting thread. I hope non-paranoid ("the extreme gun lobby") answers will be forthcoming, so:

Why is it a touchy subject, I wonder?

What is the use of "the right to bear arms for?

WonderWendy3;595948 wrote: As for the recent shooting at VA tech....The fact is that the young man was disturbed, as are many in this crazy world we live in. If he wasn't able to get his hands on guns, don't you think he would've meditated and thought out another way to kill people, like bombs or stabbing even?

Yes, he could have stabbed the original pair to death - however, the rest? Very unlikely! regarding other methods, for a moment - killing people by such does not seem to be as popular as killing people by shooting them to death - does it?

WonderWendy3;595948 wrote: A person that wants to make a statement will do it, no regards for the legalalities....I heard on the news this morning how teachers are being overwhelmed with emails and messages from other teachers about "disturbed students". So, now we have to be on the look out for depressed and upset kids, cause they are gonna "snap" at any moment?!?

Where is the Individual responsibiltiy?

Unfortunately "disturbed", or even depressed, people are not necessarily in control of themselves as a "normal" person would see themselves.

Bill Sikes · Post by **Bill Sikes** » Thu Apr 19, 2007 2:48 pm

Uncle Fester;595984 wrote: I am unable to tell you why I had guns but suffice to say I was classed a first class Marksman

What's one o' they there, then, UF? Pistols? Small/full bore? Go on - tell me your last average and at what (PM is OK) !

Bill Sikes · Post by **Bill Sikes** » Thu Apr 19, 2007 2:49 pm

RedGlitter;596033 wrote: Guns not being accessible aren't going to stop the crackpots from doing things.

Don't most of the major incidents involve guns, rather than other means?

Post by **spot** » Thu Apr 19, 2007 2:51 pm

guppy;596268 wrote: from what i understand even if you are carrying the gun in your glove compartment it is considered concealed....
The way Parker wrote it, he sounded as though he wanted to shoot someone legally rather than deter them. "Concealed" seems remote from deterrent, that's all.

Bill Sikes · Post by **Bill Sikes** » Thu Apr 19, 2007 2:56 pm

zinkyusa;596116 wrote: I do think there should be some basic steps implemented like:

1. A background investigation

2. One week waiting period

3. Registration of all guns

4. Ban on assault weapons

5. Ban on concealed weapons

6. Permits and gun saftey class required for handguns.

These things do not infringe on anyones rights and would be of some benefit to law enforcement as well as screening out some of the obvious pyschos..

1) That happens here (in the UK). One must be "of good character", and not a known nut-case.

2) To prevent immediate outrages/suicides? To a degree, I should think. Make it 6 months, with some sort of "fast track" possible, e.g. in case of need for self-defence?

3) There is an absolute ocean of unregistered and untraceable guns today. These would have to be registered somehow, with penalties for having unregistered guns. To get the requirement through to everyone would take ages!

4) There are not many valid reasons to posess these, so AOL.

5) Unsure why.

6) Yup. Good ideas.

Bill Sikes · Post by **Bill Sikes** » Thu Apr 19, 2007 2:59 pm

spot;596217 wrote: the ban on students and staff carrying their own provides any morbid self-publicist with invulnerability for the time needed to execute his plan.

Wasn't there talk here of "students" carrying guns a while ago?

I cannot remember whether there was a satisfactory objection

Bill Sikes · Post by **Bill Sikes** » Thu Apr 19, 2007 3:01 pm

guppy;596245 wrote: I own a gun...so you know where i stand on this....

Psssst! How big is yours?? Mine is *this* big - " " - !!!

Bill Sikes · Post by **Bill Sikes** » Thu Apr 19, 2007 3:04 pm

Parker_scramble;596255 wrote: you bet, if i see somebody threatening somebody with a gun , i will shoot them.

How do you know it *is* a gun, rather than a banana, or a table leg? What if you miss, and kill the threatened person, or a passer-by, or whoever is in the path of the round? What if someone sees *you* shoot or threaten someone, and "shoots your goddam ass off"?

minks · Post by **minks** » Thu Apr 19, 2007 3:08 pm

zinkyusa;596116 wrote: I don't care if guns are banned or not, but I don't think that is a viable political option in this country. There are already to many out there and we have a very strong gun lobby in this country. I do think there should be some basic steps implemented like:

1. A background investigation

2. One week waiting period

3. Registration of all guns

4. Ban on assault weapons

5. Ban on concealed weapons

6. Permits and gun saftey class required for handguns.

These things do not infringe on anyones rights and would be of some benefit to law enforcement as well as screening out some of the obvious pyschos..

I agree with you there Zee, I thought (purely rumor) it was mandatory everywhere down there to take a gun safety class before you could own a gun..legally??

Our gun control here works great, our knifing incidents are quickly on the rise..... (tongue in cheek here)

I too am stumped on a solution. A 100% ban on guns will never work, as mentioned above there will still be ways to get guns.

Jamesblonde · Post by **Jamesblonde** » Thu Apr 19, 2007 9:46 pm

CrazyCruizChick;595867 wrote:

Why is it so easy or necessary to carry on buying guns & bullets over the counter if there is such a high risk of matter of even more unnecessary murders.

It is not neccessary except as a means of self defense. Therefore if there are guns in a society then people should have the right to arm themselves for this purpose. I say make it compulsory to carry one and let natural selection take it's course, after an initial spike in gun related deaths you will see an enourmous decline to levels far below what they are now.

nvalleyvee · Post by **nvalleyvee** » Thu Apr 19, 2007 9:52 pm

CrazyCruizChick;595867 wrote: With the latest murders in Virginia and the murders before that and the ones that don't even make the big media.

Why is it so easy or necessary to carry on buying guns & bullets over the counter if there is such a high risk of matter of even more unnecessary murders.

Should it be time there was a change in the Law? Even a review on the matter would bring up new ideas on how to make it more safer for every body else.

Guns do not kill people................

PEOPLE KILL PEOPLE.

Go attack the illegal gun trade before you talk to me about my right to own a gun.

CrazyCruizChick · Post by **CrazyCruizChick** » Fri Apr 20, 2007 1:30 am

nvalleyvee;596470 wrote: Guns do not kill people................

PEOPLE KILL PEOPLE.

Go attack the illegal gun trade before you talk to me about my right to own a gun.

I wrote this Thread as I was very interested to know what every body else's thoughts were, as it is head line news I know many people would have something to say about the matter.

I was hoping I wouldn't look like I was trying to comply my views against Guns I just wanted to start a good conversation about real people & real life. :-6

Most of you have come up with some really interesting thoughts & come backs on the Gun matter.

gmc · Post by **gmc** » Fri Apr 20, 2007 3:04 am

There will always be nutters around that will attack others for whatever reason. The simple fact is the ready availability of guns make it easier for them to go on killing sprees. The argument is that without a gun they would use a knife is spurious. If someone attacks you with a knife at least you have a chance and they will not be able to kill people while they are running away. Pulling a trigger is a lot easier than stabbing someone.

posted by red glitter

Absolutely not. Every time something like this happens people flip out and start clamoring for gun control laws. NO. If he couldn't have gotten a gun he would have used a pipe bomb or something. He was bent. Guns not being accessible aren't going to stop the crackpots from doing things.

He probably wouldn't. That takes planning and patience if you're a nutter much easier to get an automatic weapon and just shoot people. If doing things like that was so easy you would have terrorist bombs going off all over the place. But you don't do you? At one point in the UK there were no litter bins on the street and there still aren't in railway stations as the IRA had a habit of dropping bombs in them. Metal bins make a lot of shrapnel so nowadays they are all plastic which burn nicely to the amusement of vandals.

This is a peculiarly American problem that they will have to sort out for themselves.

It's really irritating when the American gun lobby tell us that we are not free because guns have been taken from us and can't seem to grasp that very few in this country want to see guns readily available-the ones that do are viewed as the lunatic fringe-and it is our choice not one foisted on us. We don't want to see our police armed either.

I guess like most of you have said (would there be any difference if there was a ban)

Like what Uncle Fester had said about what happened in Dunblane we tighten the gun laws but that doesnt stop all the youngsters stabbing themselves to deaths which we have had a lot off lately.

We have a very different culture here. Post Dunblane the reaction was such the gun lobby had to run for cover. A ban on air rifles is one of the election issues here. It would be a very brave politician that didn't support such a ban, being gubbed by a Scottish mother that wants them banned is something no politician wants to face.

There are so many guns in America perhaps it is an insoluble problem. The UK would be just as bad as America if we had the same access to guns. Knife crime in the past was a lot worse than it is now, so was gang warfare, it was curbed then and can be again. Thankfully we don't have the same problem with gun culture that the US does.

Being able to own guns won't keep you free.

http://usinfo.state.gov/usa/infousa/fac ... illeng.htm

Amendment IV

The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.

Amendment V

No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a grand jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the militia, when in actual service in time of war or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offense to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.

You've already given up these rights with the patriot act albeit-you apply it mainly to foreign types and will lose more if you are not careful so why should it be such a jump to do something about guns. Worrying about the right to own a gun is the least of your worries IMO.

The next thing will be calls for those deemed potentially capable of such acts being locked up without trial as mentally incompetent.

Interestingly enough The English bill of rights 1689 also had a provision that citizens should have the right to bear arms.

http://www.webmesh.co.uk/englishbillofrights1689.htm

That the subjects which are Protestants may have arms for their defence suitable to their conditions and as allowed by law;

Attitudes change perhaps legalistic arguments about laws and rights are counter-productive in some circumstances.

Post by **spot** » Fri Apr 20, 2007 3:19 am

nvalleyvee;596470 wrote: Guns do not kill people................

PEOPLE KILL PEOPLE.

Go attack the illegal gun trade before you talk to me about my right to own a gun.

Let's get this bit straight for once.

If the guy at Virginia Tech was going for a high score - which he was - why didn't he use a satchel full of fragmentation grenades in those classrooms and hit a three figure total?

Because he couldn't get his hands on any.

Why did he use a pair of pistols?

Because he could get pistols.

Could he have killed thirty people without them? No, he couldn't.

It's the availability of guns which enable people like that to kill on such a scale, just as it would be the availability of fragmentation grenades which enabled people like that to kill on a larger scale if it were possible for him to buy them.

Bill Sikes · Post by **Bill Sikes** » Fri Apr 20, 2007 5:18 am

Pinky;596404 wrote: lets face it, guns aren't allowed here

Oh yes they are....

Bill Sikes · Post by **Bill Sikes** » Fri Apr 20, 2007 5:23 am

gmc;596486 wrote:

Interestingly enough The English bill of rights 1689 also had a provision that citizens should have the right to bear arms.

http://www.webmesh.co.uk/englishbillofrights1689.htm

Quote:

That the subjects which are Protestants may have arms for their defence suitable to their conditions and as allowed by law;

That's still the case!

Chookie · Post by **Chookie** » Fri Apr 20, 2007 10:54 am

What hasn't been said is that the Second Amendment refers specifically to members of state militias.

The Second Amendment, as passed by the House and Senate, reads:

“A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.

Nowhere does it say that guns should sold like tins of beans.

To deal with this point....

Guns do not kill people................

PEOPLE KILL PEOPLE.

This is a tautology - A gun is a tool with a specific purpose. That purpose is to kill. No ifs, no buts, no maybes. A gun is a tool for killing.

Mia · Post by **Mia** » Fri Apr 20, 2007 3:13 pm

There is an old saying that goes around what happens in America today will be sure to follow in the UK.

Yes we have lot's of gun crime here in the inner cities,but mostly between drug gangs. If someone broke into my home I have a knife and also plenty of aerosol sprays that you could direct to the eyes.I am a none violent person and if someone just wanted what cash was around I would prefer to give it to them than get into a situation of violence.

Not many people here have guns in their homes and it can only be a good thing as if they did then the crim would surely have one.

I do feel so sorry for you all that you have to keep a gun to protect yourselves, but as |I say it won't be long before the same thing happens over here

dunkin · Post by **dunkin** » Fri Apr 20, 2007 8:38 pm

I have a gun.

If someone tries to kill me or mine,I will protect them with any means I have at hand.

K.Snyder · Post by **K.Snyder** » Fri Apr 20, 2007 8:44 pm

dunkin;597105 wrote: I have a gun.

If someone tries to kill me or mine,I will protect them with any means I have at hand.

Well I think we've got the gist of by what means you're capable of...

dunkin · Post by **dunkin** » Fri Apr 20, 2007 10:31 pm

K.Snyder;597107 wrote: Well I think we've got the gist of by what means you're capable of...

Been to hell & back once ,I won't let it happen to my family again.

You don't know what you will do until you come up against a madman with a gun,who is out to hurt your family.

That is why I will defend mine anyway I possibly can.

Until you have been in that position you don't know what you are capable of.

CrazyCruizChick · Post by **CrazyCruizChick** » Sat Apr 21, 2007 2:59 am

dunkin;597119 wrote: Been to hell & back once ,I won't let it happen to my family again.

You don't know what you will do until you come up against a madman with a gun,who is out to hurt your family.

That is why I will defend mine anyway I possibly can.

Until you have been in that position you don't know what you are capable of.

I can very much understand your point of protecting your family, but some how thinking to myself what are the police suppose to be there for?

The law over here has very tight rules over how you protect yourself in your home.

There has been many a court case over here where some one has broken in to some ones home , The home owner then protecting himself & his family even maybe having to knock out the intruder in the process of protecting himself call the police and end up having to serve time because we have a law system that protects the criminals.

Would you say that more & more people end up putting the Law into there own hands?

Do you think we are let down by the Law?

Post by **spot** » Sat Apr 21, 2007 3:28 am

CrazyCruizChick;597148 wrote: There has been many a court case over here where some one has broken in to some ones home , The home owner then protecting himself & his family even maybe having to knock out the intruder in the process of protecting himself call the police and end up having to serve time because we have a law system that protects the criminals.

When? A few instances would be useful. I don't believe what you wrote.

gmc · Post by **gmc** » Sat Apr 21, 2007 3:58 am

CrazyCruizChick;597148 wrote: I can very much understand your point of protecting your family, but some how thinking to myself what are the police suppose to be there for?

The law over here has very tight rules over how you protect yourself in your home.

There has been many a court case over here where some one has broken in to some ones home , The home owner then protecting himself & his family even maybe having to knock out the intruder in the process of protecting himself call the police and end up having to serve time because we have a law system that protects the criminals.

Would you say that more & more people end up putting the Law into there own hands?

Do you think we are let down by the Law?

That is quite frankly a load of bollocks.

saffy · Post by **saffy** » Sat Apr 21, 2007 4:52 am

I can very much understand your point of protecting your family, but some how thinking to myself what are the police suppose to be there for?

The law over here has very tight rules over how you protect yourself in your home.

There has been many a court case over here where some one has broken in to some ones home , The home owner then protecting himself & his family even maybe having to knock out the intruder in the process of protecting himself call the police and end up having to serve time because we have a law system that protects the criminals.

Would you say that more & more people end up putting the Law into there own hands?

Do you think we are let down by the Law?

Name them.

RedGlitter · Post by **RedGlitter** » Sat Apr 21, 2007 9:14 am

CrazyCruizChick;597148 wrote: I can very much understand your point of protecting your family, but some how thinking to myself what are the police suppose to be there for?

Sometimes you can't rely on the police and time is of the essence.

CrazyCruizChick · Post by **CrazyCruizChick** » Sat Apr 21, 2007 9:42 am

saffy;597202 wrote: Name them.

I cant remember the names of the people involved But I do know that I have seen the news and have taken in that there was a story while back that involved a young robber with some one a little older them himself breaking in to an old guys house and the old guy had shot the younger man and ending up killing him on the spot and ended up having to serve time until he was released some time ago now but I do remember the case but unfortunately cant remember every little detail.

I also remember a story about some one who had hit a robber over the head with an object and he got away but pressed chargers on the man whom he was trying to rob.

I have tried to find the news stories on the net but to no joy.

Im still trying to find some news on what I said!

Post by **spot** » Sat Apr 21, 2007 11:00 am

CrazyCruizChick;597308 wrote: I cant remember the names of the people involved But I do know that I have seen the news and have taken in that there was a story while back that involved a young robber with some one a little older them himself breaking in to an old guys house and the old guy had shot the younger man and ending up killing him on the spot and ended up having to serve time until he was released some time ago now but I do remember the case but unfortunately cant remember every little detail.

I also remember a story about some one who had hit a robber over the head with an object and he got away but pressed chargers on the man whom he was trying to rob.

I have tried to find the news stories on the net but to no joy.

Im still trying to find some news on what I said!

The "old guy" was Tony Martin, the write-up is at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tony_Martin_%28farmer%29

The trial jury and the court of appeal both rejected the suggestion that Martin had fired in self defence. The appeal court reduced his murder conviction to manslaughter on the grounds of diminished responsibility, noting that he had a "paranoid personality disorder specifically directed at anyone intruding into his home". Both courts agreed that you can't fire an illegal shotgun into the back of a fleeing burglar, having set a burglar trap in the hope of being able to bag one. This case has nothing to do with defending property, it's about a deliberate premeditated shooting of anyone who entered the trap he'd set for them.

What has your second case to do with someone defending his property being sentenced to jail, which is what was disbelieved?

The right to self defence of property or person in England is discussed on http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Self-defen ... nglish_law

el guapo · Post by **el guapo** » Sat Apr 21, 2007 11:07 am

when its a nut or a crim who wants to get a gun they dont need a license

they will get a gun from some ware

CrazyCruizChick · Post by **CrazyCruizChick** » Sat Apr 21, 2007 1:14 pm

spot;597344 wrote: The "old guy" was Tony Martin, the write-up is at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tony_Martin_%28farmer%29

The trial jury and the court of appeal both rejected the suggestion that Martin had fired in self defence. The appeal court reduced his murder conviction to manslaughter on the grounds of diminished responsibility, noting that he had a "paranoid personality disorder specifically directed at anyone intruding into his home". Both courts agreed that you can't fire an illegal shotgun into the back of a fleeing burglar, having set a burglar trap in the hope of being able to bag one. This case has nothing to do with defending property, it's about a deliberate premeditated shooting of anyone who entered the trap he'd set for them.

What has your second case to do with someone defending his property being sentenced to jail, which is what was disbelieved?

The right to self defence of property or person in England is discussed on http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Self-defen ... nglish_law

That was the person I was trying to find out more about on the net

and maybe I got to carried away with what he had done but in my eyes if he was trapping them in the first place why would you carry a gun knowing you would probably kill some one with it?