View Single Post
  #5  
Old April 4th 04, 03:01 AM
Jim Yanik
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Peter Kemp wrote in
:

On Sat, 03 Apr 2004 21:47:07 GMT, Chad Irby wrote:

In article ,
Peter Kemp wrote:

Oh, and defending your home is not illegal, the emphasis in the UK is
defending your *life*, and to use reasonable force (where reasonable
force does *not*include waiting for burglars with an illegally held
shorgun, then shooting one of them in the back).


...in the dark, in the wee hours of the morning, in a remote area, when
the police wouldn't do much of anything...


Which is a policing problem, not a legal one.


Truly free countries realize that police cannot be everywhere,and protect
everyone.They allow citizens the means to defend themselves and their
homes.

Nice of you folks to protect violent burglars like that (look at the
wonderful followups of what the "victimized" burglar has done since).


Which one - the one without *any* violent convictions who is
mouldering in his grave after being murdered? Or the other one (and I
can't recall any violent convicitons for him either) whose is
admittedly a miserable git?
---
Peter Kemp

Life is short - drink faster


Why are you so concerned about criminals shot while committing a crime,and
not for the poor guy who suffered repeated burglaries?
What does "violent convictions" have to do with it?

Shooting the crims was a public service.

--
Jim Yanik
jyanik-at-kua.net