The British called, they want their guns back!

**CrazyFinn** · 02-01-2009, 08:47 PM

**Sponsored Link** · 02-01-2009 08:47 PM

**Scott Card** · 02-01-2009, 09:00 PM

Wow, yikes, and thanks for posting. Some good quoteable stuff there at the end. "Freedom is only for those who have the guts to fight for it" I think was the one I liked.

**Don** · 02-01-2009, 09:10 PM

Great video, thanks.

**James_B_Wads2000** · 02-01-2009, 10:11 PM

Good to see that Britain had their own version of Joe Horn with Tony Martin.

At least the Brits had the good sense to convict the douche of murder.

James

**Scott Card** · 02-02-2009, 08:29 AM

Originally Posted by James_B_Wads2000

Good to see that Britain had their own version of Joe Horn with Tony Martin.

At least the Brits had the good sense to convict the douche of murder.

James

What is scary is I think you mean that. What are your views of your home and what is appropriate for protecting you and your family? Are you in favor of a total handgun ban? The stats in G. Britian seem to cut against the hand gun ban don't they?

Or are you just bored and stiring the Bogley pot?

**Don** · 02-02-2009, 08:37 AM

Originally Posted by Scott Card

Or are you just bored and stiring the Bogley pot?

My money is on bored and stiring the pot.

**James_B_Wads2000** · 02-02-2009, 09:13 AM

I am stirring a bit.

I don

**jumar** · 02-02-2009, 10:28 AM

Tresspassing/burgulary is not a justifiable use of deadly force IMO. Deadly force is justified when lives are in danger not property.

I agree

**Deathcricket** · 02-02-2009, 11:39 AM

Originally Posted by jumar

Tresspassing/burgulary is not a justifiable use of deadly force IMO. Deadly force is justified when lives are in danger not property.

I agree

Disagree! If only for the reason that getting shot is an effective deterrent. In the interest of not turning a "troll" into a 16 page post I will be quiet though.

**James_B_Wads2000** · 02-02-2009, 01:13 PM

Originally Posted by deathcricket

Disagree! If only for the reason that getting shot is an effective deterrent. In the interest of not turning a "troll" into a 16 page post I will be quiet though.

No worries here Jacob. I have no intention to go down that road with you again here. If anyone else wants to relive the James/deathcricket flame fest over this you can go here:

http://www.bogley.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=9476

And if anyone actually reads this they my be interested to know:
I have met deathcricket in person since and he didn

**Deathcricket** · 02-02-2009, 01:29 PM

I'm gonna have to go back and read that myself. I don't ever recall wanting to punch you in the face.

**trackrunner** · 02-02-2009, 07:22 PM

I get nothing exept that the video is not available because of a copy right claim from the NRA. Those SOBs

sticking up for the second amendment but taking away the first amendment.

**RedMan** · 02-02-2009, 07:27 PM

Originally Posted by Don

Originally Posted by Scott Card

Or are you just bored and stiring the Bogley pot?

My money is on bored and stiring the pot.

With every post he makes.

**Deathcricket** · 02-03-2009, 08:28 AM

Originally Posted by James_B_Wads2000

Deadly force is justified when lives are in danger not property.

Went back and read it, wasn't as interesting as I recalled.... The years must have enhanced my memories. I just wanted to commend you on this statement though. At least you admit deadly force is justified when lives are in danger. Most hippies I know will tell you in circular reasoning that "murder" is wrong no matter what. So at least you came part way there. I still have a little hope for you yet.

**Scott Card** · 02-03-2009, 09:22 AM

Originally Posted by deathcricket

Originally Posted by James_B_Wads2000

Deadly force is justified when lives are in danger not property.

Went back and read it, wasn't as interesting as I recalled.... The years must have enhanced my memories. I just wanted to commend you on this statement though. At least you admit deadly force is justified when lives are in danger. Most hippies I know will tell you in circular reasoning that "murder" is wrong no matter what. So at least you came part way there. I still have a little hope for you yet.

The scary thing about the phrase "when lives are in danger" is not necessarily an objective analysis. What if the person was running away from you and there was a butcher knife on the counter in the direction he/she was running? or a bat or someone waiting in the car with a gun? Again, why are they running? Is it to get a tactical advantage to pull their gun and fire back? I don

**Deathcricket** · 02-03-2009, 10:55 AM

Totally agreed! In fact I think very few people can argue your logic. I think the thing that made this "case" special though was that it was a neighbor watching another's property (vacation or something). He was on the phone with 911 saying that a house next door was being robbed. He went out of the safety of his house and shot the guys leaving with his neighbors cash.

So you can't argue he was in any danger at all, and also he knew his neighbor was not home. So he shot them to prevent them from getting away with "loot" as he called it. I guess since they were transporting the stolen goods through his yard, you could argue he was in some danger though legally. He also understood the law in texas allows people to defend property with lethal force and exercised that right. The entire 911 call was recorded and he mentioned it.

Anyways, me and Carpey had a nice conversation about it, he made some great points. James took some single sentence sniper attacks and posted half nekid pics as usual. It if was me, I would not have went out to engage criminals over material possessions myself. But I feel his actions were justified, most do not condone killing a person in the name of property defense. I think once you make the choice to harm another person physically or economically, they are justified to protect themselves with whatever the situation calls for. I think a strong message that says "if you are committing a crime and the homeowner points a gun and tells you to stop, comply immediately" is a good one.

**James_B_Wads2000** · 02-03-2009, 11:26 AM

Sheer comic gold as usual.

I will just interject a couple of points: The use of deadly force is not justified to defend property. In the heat of the moment it my not be clear what the

**Deathcricket** · 02-03-2009, 01:07 PM

Come on dude! You can do better than that. I liked the "land mines on my lawn" one better.

**ilanimaka** · 02-03-2009, 03:35 PM

Human life only possesses the value of our decisions. If somebody is going to break into my home, they obviously don't place much value on their own life. Therefore, why should I place any value on their life. They're just taking up space and resources that somebody more valuable could be using.

Having worked with mortuaries for a while, I've had a lot of experience with people who died from natural, and not-so-natural, deaths. I'm not looking to kill somebody, but I can't say that I'd think twice or lose any sleep over it.

I might be a little paranoid for a couple weeks, but I wouldn't grieve over them or my decision.

And you're right... Murder is ALWAYS wrong. Killing is not, though.

**James_B_Wads2000** · 02-03-2009, 03:52 PM

Originally Posted by ilanimaka

And you're right... Murder is ALWAYS wrong. Killing is not, though.

Killing, murder. Ta-may-toe, ta-ma-ta.

James

Thread: The British called, they want their guns back!

Thread Tools

Display

The British called, they want their guns back!

Similar Threads

British Noob!

British Man Banned from Girlfriend's Home Due to Noisy Sex

MR.T's Sinckers Ad Pulled From British TV

Very surprising singer on British Idol

Your wife called

Visitors found this page by searching for:

Posting Permissions