Ungland...
Posted on 09/18/2011 4:30:30 PM PDT by Daffynition
In Texas things are a bit different. If you are in my home, or running away with something of mine, or even if I THINK you are running away with something if mine, you can be shot in the back and the police will most likely congratulate me for helping to reduce the criminal element.
I don't need to give a criminal the opportunity to retreat, nor do I need evidence of imminent harm. Your uninvited presence inside my residence is enough to justify deadly force.
Gun control in Texas means "Use both hands."
Being arrested doesn't involve an assumption of guilt in British law. It simply means police can compel you to listen to their questions and try to get you to answer. Most people who are arrested are, in fact, never charged with a crime.
The victim owns two “luxury cars, a gold Maserati and a silver Range Rover both with personalised registration plates, and detectives will be investigating whether they were targeted by the raiders for their wealth.”
Hopefully they won’t waste a lot of time on this part of the investigation.
Much worse 60% of their new born are Muslims which means in just a generation or 2 or so the United Kingdom will be a Islamic country.
The United Kingdom has already committed cultural suicide, they just haven’t completely passed away yet. Short of radical forced conversion to Christianity there(never happen they don’t have the guts) is nothing that can save them at this point.
Thank God we vomited England and have no connection to that place anymore.
Whew. What a weak, pathetic little place.
From the article:>>The right to defend one’s property against intruders or burglars came to prominence in 1999 when farmer Tony Martin shot dead 16-year-old Fred Barras at his Norfolk home.
Barras and accomplice Brendon Fearon had disturbed Martin in the middle of the night.
Martin was jailed for life at Norwich Crown Court in April 2000 for murder, but his sentence was reduced by the Appeal Court to five years for manslaughter and he was released in 2003.
Fearon, who was wounded in the leg, was jailed for three years for conspiracy to burgle.
In June this year Peter Flanagan, 59, escaped charges after he was arrested on suspicion of murder when an intruder was stabbed to death in his house in Salford.
In July grandfather Cecil Coley, 72, was freed without charges after he stabbed an armed raider to death when a gang smashed their way into his florist’s shop in Old Trafford, Manchester.<<
A property owner is serving more time for protecting himself/family than the perp.
I know - and I happen to think Texas law is more sensible on this than British law.
But self defence is permitted under British law even to the level of deadly force in a case where you are at risk of death or serious injury.
Reasonable force can be used to prevent a crime and to apprehend a criminal, but deadly force is only reasonable if there is a risk of serious harm to somebody.
(IE, if somebody is burgling my house, and I try to apprehend him using reasonable force, and he pulls a knife on me - at that point, I probably could use deadly force. If, instead, he lies down on the ground passively, I’m not allowed to kick him to death and claim that was self defence.)
This cracks me up.
They refer to the cars they have exactly in the driveway as a caption.
Then they give a zoom-in aerial view so everyone knows exactly where this happened - and can go voyeurizing.
So different from here in the US.
I recall seeing a different article on the same event and that it said he was *charged* with murder.
Tony Martin shot criminals who were running away from behind. When interviewed by police, he admitted he no longer felt threatened by them at the time he shot them.
If he hadn’t admitted that, they probably couldn’t have made a case against him (he should have said “I was worried they would come back”). If he had shot them while they were threatening him, or even before he’d scared them into running, he probably would have been OK as well.
The Martin case is an unusual one. I could name a number of others where people shot burglars and were not charged - because at the time they shot them they were under threat.
What you say is essentially the way it is in most of our messed-up US. We’re familiar with that nonsense.
There is no reason the real victim should not be able to shoot the perp even if he’s running away. That makes no moral sense. I should damn well be able to at least disable the person who just accosted me, regardless if he’s trying to get away - all the more reason to stop him in his tracks so he isn’t lost forever to justice.
To the best of my knowledge, Vincent Cooke has not yet been charged with anything. Unless there are hidden aspects to this case, I doubt he will be. But it can take police days or even weeks to make the decision not to charge someone because they will investigate everything.
I expect he will be released on bail, pending further investigations and in a few days or weeks, police will announce no charges were laid - unless it turns out something else happened that we haven’t seen in the press.
This happens a few times a year in the UK.
ROFL - bingo.
This is just wrong.
“Much worse 60% of their new born are Muslims which means in just a generation or 2 or so the United Kingdom will be a Islamic country.”
It’s dangerous, of course, but not as bad as it seems between their kamikaze missions and honor killings.
Ungland...
...and a diamond car with platinum wheels.
(hidee-hidee-hidee-hidee-hidee-hidee-ho!)
Remember, folks, these are highly trained professionals. Under no circumstances should you attempt this on your own.
Yes, and as they were running away, they yelled, "We're coming right back to kill you, your wife and your children."
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.