10 replies to this topic

[mss]

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 becomes 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.



You are sentenced to life in prison.



This case is not imaginary – it 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 received an automatic life sentence in prison.



How did it become a crime to defend one's own life and property 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 sidearms 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?



WAKE UP AMERICA! THIS IS WHY OUR FOUNDING FATHERS PUT THE SECOND AMENDMENT IN OUR CONSTITUTION, TO PREVENT “1984” and “BIG BROTHER” FROM EVER HAPPENING.



WISE UP – OR YOU WILL BE SORRY.



"..it does not require a majority to prevail, but rather an irate, tireless minority keen to set brush fires in people's minds.."



--Samuel Adams



For more info on this matter, check these links:



http://news.bbc.co.u...olk/3009769.stm



http://en.wikipedia....Martin_(farmer)

[stocks]

Rioting for Fun and Profit

"If a robber meets me in the street, and commands me to surrender my purse, I have a right to kill him without asking questions.”
John Adams, 2nd president of the USA

In Britain, fewer than ten percent of burglaries are solved and that, of those who are convicted, fewer than ten percent do time. In effect, there is no law and there is no order in Britain. You cannot bear arms. You are denied the means of self-defense. It is illegal to use force to defend your property. If you use “disproportionate force” in defending your person, you can and will be jailed. It is demanded that you leave all such matters to the police, and law enforcement is ineffectual. Not surprisingly, even before the riots that Britain is suffering right now, theft and violent crime were considerably greater there than in the United States.

In the US, we are generally better off. For one thing, we incarcerate criminals.

We are better off in other ways as well. The right to bear arms is not only given lip service here. In recent years, it has been reasserted by the Supreme Court. Moreover, in many states, one has a right to defend one’s property. In those states, if someone breaks into my home, I can kill him with impunity.

Guns

[Dex]

Maybe there needs to be another lend lease program for British citizens.

[Rogerdodger]

I think it all started here: LINK

[stocks]

On August 22, 1999, Tony Martin of Emneth, Norfolk, England, killed one burglar and wounded a second. In April, 2000, he was convicted and received an automatic life sentence in prison.

The Story Continues:

2001 Martin's murder conviction was replaced by manslaughter carrying a five year sentence

2003, The chairman of the parole board, Sir David Hatch, described Martin as "a very dangerous man" who may still believe his action had been right.

2003 Probation officers on Martin's cases said there was an "unacceptable risk" that Martin might again react with excessive force if other would-be burglars intruded on his Norfolk farm. Martin was released after serving three years of his five-year sentence

2003 The burglar applied for, and received, an estimated £5,000 of legal aid to sue Martin for loss of earnings due to the injuries he had sustained

2003 The burglar was recalled to jail after being charged with the theft of a vehicle while on probation on a conviction for dealing heroin

2003 The burglar put a bounty on Martin's head of several tens of thousands of pounds


Wikipedia

[Rogerdodger]

And Michael Savage is banned in Britain?
Talk radio host Michael Savage is considering legal action against Britain's top homeland security official after she released today a list grouping him with terrorists and neo-Nazi murderers banned from entry because the government believes their views might provoke violence. She has since resigned under a cloud of misdeeds, but the ban remains.

Those screwy Brits are probably correct because he might promote violence, as in self defense.
O the humanity!

Edited by Rogerdodger, 19 August 2011 - 07:47 PM.

[voltaire]

Rioting for Fun and Profit

"If a robber meets me in the street, and commands me to surrender my purse, I have a right to kill him without asking questions.”
John Adams, 2nd president of the USA

In Britain, fewer than ten percent of burglaries are solved and that, of those who are convicted, fewer than ten percent do time. In effect, there is no law and there is no order in Britain. You cannot bear arms. You are denied the means of self-defense. It is illegal to use force to defend your property. If you use “disproportionate force” in defending your person, you can and will be jailed. It is demanded that you leave all such matters to the police, and law enforcement is ineffectual. Not surprisingly, even before the riots that Britain is suffering right now, theft and violent crime were considerably greater there than in the United States.

In the US, we are generally better off. For one thing, we incarcerate criminals.

We are better off in other ways as well. The right to bear arms is not only given lip service here. In recent years, it has been reasserted by the Supreme Court. Moreover, in many states, one has a right to defend one’s property. In those states, if someone breaks into my home, I can kill him with impunity.

Guns

[voltaire]

Did you know that untill a few decades ago police in Australia and England and elsewhere did NOT carry guns. There was no need. A gun culture did not exist. Yes guns are now more common. We can argue why!

[stocks]

For the Fans of British Crime Prevention

For the Fans of British Crime Prevention:

There are lots of burned out houses in London for sale -- cheap!

[stocks]

Ruger is the fourth-largest gun manufacturer in the U.S.

Ruger (RGR) has outperformed gold over the past one-month, three-month, six-month, one-year, three-year, and five-year periods.