VillageIdiot Posted February 19, 2011 Share Posted February 19, 2011 Not warning him that you have a gun is another no-no - assuming you have time to before the assailant clubs you to death. But since a man running away from you is not an assailant, that's a trivial omission from your statement. You read too many papers my friend.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
spindrift Posted February 19, 2011 Share Posted February 19, 2011 He was defending his home.... Not even Martin's defence team could claim this in face of the evidence. Tony Martin shot a young boy in the back as he was running away. Martin had tied up his dogs, refused to fit alarms or CCTv and removed the stairs to set a trap. After he shot the lad, Martin disposed of his illegally held shotgun (his shotgun licence had been removed by the police because he had a history of gun violence) and then went to the pub. He called neither the police nore the ambulance. It was only after Martin boasted to horrified bar staff that the police were called, by which time Fred Barras had died. Householders have the right to defend their homes. Tony Martin is a deeply disturbed violent nutjob. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Snook Posted February 19, 2011 Share Posted February 19, 2011 Sorry but it does not. You seem to be happy to quote the excessive force card but dont seem to be able to put your own mark to your opinion. Furthermore you appear to be defending the rights of intruders, i expect you would make burglars in your home a cup of tea.... As i pointed out before Mr Martins shot ricochet into the victim, so i guess it is pure supposition as to whether or not he was, or was not running away and what the intentions of Mr Martin were. The verdict of the court are clear tho as the verdict was replaced by a lesser conviction i suggest that the appeal judge was not totally in agreement with the origional verdict... I don't understand what you want to know? What is 'putting your own mark to your opinion'? Please quote one single thing I have posted that indicates that I would 'make burglars in your home a cup of tea'? The one time somebody tried to break into my house I appeared in the door with my baseball bat (and yes, I used to play baseball so that is why I have one) and he ran off. If he had come at me I would have used reasonable force to defend myself. But yes, I do defend the right of a burglar not to be murdered in cold blood, just as I defend the rights of a homeowner to defend themselves and their house. I don't see things in black and white to the degree that I believe all criminals should be put to death. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
spindrift Posted February 19, 2011 Share Posted February 19, 2011 . As i pointed out before Mr Martins shot ricochet into the victim, Shotgun pellets do not usually ricochet, certainly not with enough power to still kill, and Barras was shot at least twice, and the question of a ricochet was never raised at the trial or in any of the reports. Where did you hear about this "ricochet"? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Greybeard Posted February 19, 2011 Share Posted February 19, 2011 Just read this : http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1357901/Burglar-dialled-999-shot-air-rifle-breaking-family-home.html I find it typical that the <REMOVED> rang the police - they think they can do whatever they want and can get away with it. What are your thoughts ? If you want an horrific 'justice' story from the Mail, try this for size - http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1358499/The-couple-betrayed-officials-doing-civic-duty-thrown-wolves-shopping-benefits-scrounger.html Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
saxon51 Posted February 19, 2011 Share Posted February 19, 2011 If you want an horrific 'justice' story from the Mail, try this for size - http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti...scrounger.html Sounds about right:loopy: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
saxon51 Posted February 19, 2011 Share Posted February 19, 2011 If you want an horrific 'justice' story from the Mail, try this for size - http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1358499/The-couple-betrayed-officials-doing-civic-duty-thrown-wolves-shopping-benefits-scrounger.html I have experienced similar 'law enforcement stupidity' in the past. Several years ago I witnessed two lads in their late teens firing off air pistols in the street in front of our house. They were firing at birds on house roofs, bottles placed on walls, and I am almost certain they fired at a passing car or two. Not wanting my house nor me to become a target, I phoned the police and asked them if the call could be treated as anonymous even though I had given my details when asked. "No problems", they said. The police car approached so the lads threw their pistols over my neighbour's wall into the front garden. The police searched them, found nothing so began to get back into their car. I phoned Ecclesfield, told them who I was, and told them that if they were in touch with the officers they should instruct them by radio to look in the nextdoor garden for the pistols. The officers told the lads to stay where they were. Next they had a quick look over the neighbour's wall. Seeing nothing, the pillocks came to my front door, knocked, and when I answered they asked - out loud - "Whereabout did these two throw their airpistols exactly?" I was gob-smacked. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.