| Forum Home | ||||
| PC World Chat | ||||
| Thread ID: 98611 | 2009-03-31 05:01:00 | Standing Up For Self Defence | Terry Porritt (14) | PC World Chat |
| Post ID | Timestamp | Content | User | ||
| 760969 | 2009-03-31 08:44:00 | the average gang member probably isn't better just has more firepower. Its coz they spend all day & night playing video games in-between servicing their drug habits ;) |
Chilling_Silence (9) | ||
| 760970 | 2009-03-31 09:43:00 | There are plenty of studies finding that the average cop isn't very accurate, the average gang member probably isn't better just has more firepower. if i remember rightly the reason was that gang members where involved in more gang-gang gun battles. they simply got more practice at the real thing. |
tweak'e (69) | ||
| 760971 | 2009-03-31 23:23:00 | Terry you have made a post without Cicero adding a smart arsed remark about you. The natural world order of things must be collapsing. | Dally (6292) | ||
| 760972 | 2009-03-31 23:47:00 | Terry you have made a post without Cicero adding a smart arsed remark about you. The natural world order of things must be collapsing. We have a history of ribbing each other, sometimes misunderstood by others, but now you mention it he hasn't, maybe because I couldn't think of an appropriate tune for the occasion for the Michael Laws Thread ? |
Terry Porritt (14) | ||
| 760973 | 2009-04-01 00:15:00 | Getting back to this self defence thing, I sense a growing mood amongst the populace that the law in regard to the use of force in self defence is beginning to be regarded as an ass. When sufficient 'ordinary' people start to ignore the law, or feel it is wrong then it is time for the law to be reviewed. Laws, I assume, going back to the dawn of history, were formulated for the good of society, to ensure continuance of the tribe, to protect the weaker from the stronger. Other laws have been drawn up by the all powerful for their own good and benefits, like in feudal times. Yet other laws have been imposed on us by do-gooders who think they know better than the hoi-polloi. The 'ordinary' person is just not trained to be able administer precise, minimum and sufficient force in self defence to stop an attacker, so as not to unduly injure the attacker. The only sensible course of action is to use the maximum force at your disposal if you are being attacked in your home, or even if there is just an intruder.......because most likely you will not get a second chance, if you only give the assailant a light tap. Let's get real for heavens sake. The current law, in effect, benefits the intruder, the assailant. As someone in my 70s I would have no option in the case of a home invasion but to get the razor sharp short handled slasher from under the bed and administer maximum force, I would not get a second chance, :banana |
Terry Porritt (14) | ||
| 760974 | 2009-04-01 01:03:00 | You should be within your rights to shoot anybody on your property uninvited. Its not like people rock on up after dark to weed your garden. Amen! If someone's on your turf, doing sone sneaky s#!+, get right up to him, then cycle the forend of your pump-action 12ga once. No sound is more widely recognized than loading a pump-action. As for what Terry said, there are some self-defence laws, but it's are so far up it's own ass that it's funny. And they're ignoged by the cops. It seems that a few times the cops have shown quite poor judgement in laying charges, and not always with this topic. Recently a rape case was thrown out of court on the basis of insufficient evidence. I think the woman also had a history of making false complaints. Yet they went ahead anyway. All I'm saying is that sometimes, they should think a bit more before charging a person. Just 'cos it's law, doesn't mean it's right. |
ubergeek85 (131) | ||
| 760975 | 2009-04-01 01:18:00 | Yeah, I wondered why the police charged the shop owner, unless he chased the robber outside of his premises and continued to attack. I personally would argue black & blue that I have the right to defend myself, family and property to the hilt,as a god given right. No law or PC approach will ever change my mind on this, especially in this day and age... |
SolMiester (139) | ||
| 760976 | 2009-04-01 02:19:00 | The right to defend yourself etc is not given to you by God. Which God is this. Rather, we in NZ, use common law and Acts etc. This being based on the Westminster system. Sometimes the Police have no alternative as they are sworn to uphold the law as it stands so therefore the alleged offence sometimes goes before a Court that has jurisdiction on the matter. The fact that the Shopkeeper case was dismissed creates a precedent and therefore the Police may be unlikely to prosecute if they feel they will not win. The Police (or Crown) in that matter have the right of appeal to a higher Court in the event they wish to pursue it further. |
Sweep (90) | ||
| 760977 | 2009-04-01 03:06:00 | Re: You should be within your rights to shoot anybody on your property uninvited. Was explained to me once by an older cop that it is best to hit the intruder when he is facing you. You can claim to be defending yourself etc. If he is facing the other way or moving away from you, it might be considered that the threat is over and your claim for self defence is past its prime. :cool: |
Scouse (83) | ||
| 760978 | 2009-04-01 03:59:00 | so you'd get charged with assault if you hit an intruder in the back of their head while they were rummaging through your belongings? | utopian201 (6245) | ||
| 1 2 3 4 | |||||