Should the bobby's pack heaters?

[bn880 5]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Albert Schweizer @ Jan. 07 2003,17:03)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">okay no icecream and no Muppet-show for both of you this evening, you will go straight to bed so you got time to think about what you did wrong. This thread is getting to hot for me and I gonna go into a SOF2 MP session<span id='postcolor'>

Yeah, I'v already punished myself. I can't have a normal discussion with some very specific members today so I'm taking it easy.

[Paratrooper 0]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (morbid @ Jan. 07 2003,23:39)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">• In 1973 a young man running on a road at night was stopped by the police and found to be carrying a length of steel, a cycle chain, and a metal clock weight. He explained that a gang of youths had been after him. At his hearing it was found he had been threatened and had previously notified the police. The justices agreed he had a valid reason to carry the weapons. Indeed, 16 days later he was attacked and beaten so badly he was hospitalized. But the prosecutor appealed the ruling, and the appellate judges insisted that carrying a weapon must be related to an imminent and immediate threat. They sent the case back to the lower court with directions to convict.

• In 1987 two men assaulted Eric Butler, a 56-year-old British Petroleum executive, in a London subway car, trying to strangle him and smashing his head against the door. No one came to his aid. He later testified, "My air supply was being cut off, my eyes became blurred, and I feared for my life." In desperation he unsheathed an ornamental sword blade in his walking stick and slashed at one of his attackers, stabbing the man in the stomach. The assailants were charged with wounding. Butler was tried and convicted of carrying an offensive weapon.

• In 1994 an English homeowner, armed with a toy gun, managed to detain two burglars who had broken into his house while he called the police. When the officers arrived, they arrested the homeowner for using an imitation gun to threaten or intimidate. In a similar incident the following year, when an elderly woman fired a toy cap pistol to drive off a group of youths who were threatening her, she was arrested for putting someone in fear. Now the police are pressing Parliament to make imitation guns illegal.

source : http://www.wmsa.net/pubs/reason/reason_nov02_crime_in_uk.htm<span id='postcolor'>

These cases are not so much examples of bad laws, but bad legal practice.

[madmedic 0]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (madmedic @ Jan. 07 2003,23:37)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE"></span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (denoir @ Jan. 07 2003,23:18)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE"></span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (madmedic @ Jan. 07 2003,23<!--emo&)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">A gun in the home is "X"% more likely to kill a family member, than to be used against an intruder"...

WELL,...the problem with that quote is that it is absolutely, statistically false (the gun control groups still tout it, because people tend to believe things if they hear it enough times, and they never check the scources)

The quote comes from the "Kellerman study"...that was done in (I believe) 1984,...and very shortly afterward proven to be wrong by several institutions INCLUDING KELLERMAN, HIMSELF<span id='postcolor'>

The 58% is from a gun control source. The 17% is from a pro-gun source. (Pro Gun source)¨

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">

The myth is usually based on two claims: 1) 58 percent of murder victims are killed by either relatives or acquaintances and 2) anyone could be a murderer.

With the broad definition of "acquaintances" used in the FBI's Uniform Crime Reports, most victims are indeed classified as knowing their killer. However, what is not made clear is that acquaintance murder primarily includes drug buyers killing drug pushers, cabdrivers killed by first-time customers, gang members killing other gang members, prostitutes killed by their clients, and so on. Only one city, Chicago, reports a precise breakdown on the nature of acquaintance killings: between 1990 and 1995 just 17 percent of murder victims were either family members, friends, neighbors and/or roommates

<span id='postcolor'>

Even if you believe their biased view, 17% is an alarming number. The truth is probably somewhere between 58 and 17 percent. Not that this doesn't include gun related accidents, only homicides.<span id='postcolor'>

All that says is that between 17%, and 58% of murder victims know their attacker.

And I dont doubt that they do.

Many murders are the result of domestic violence, drug dealers ripping each other off, ect. ect.

It has nothing to to do with "gun statistics",...only "murder".

meaning it includes guns, knives, baseball bats, and any other implement that could be used to kill someone.<span id='postcolor'>

Actually, after re-reading what you posted.

This study states that 58% of murder victims are killed by "acquaintances" </span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">(acquaintance murder primarily includes drug buyers killing drug pushers, cabdrivers killed by first-time customers, gang members killing other gang members, prostitutes killed by their clients, and so on)<span id='postcolor'>

And in Chicago  17% of murder victims were either family members, friends, neighbors and/or roommates

This is neither an argument for, or against a gun in the home.

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">The 58% is from a gun control source. The 17% is from a pro-gun source.<span id='postcolor'>

Actually, they both come from the SAME source.

[morbid 0]

A true tale, I'm afraid I'm the only source (aside from my parents of course).

When I was young, very young - around 5 maybe or 6 years old someone broke into our house.

At the time my sister and I shared a room, she was probably around 3.

My dad (from whom I heard of this incident) heard a noise and entered our room. Now this room was on the bottom floor and our house was an old tenement type thing with flimsy windows with weak iron frames.

Someone had forced the window open, went from my room in to the front room and attempted to steal various items, when my dad came into my room after hearing the noise he saw this person exiting through the room window.

From the way he tells this I honestly believe he would have been sent to jail for murder or manslaughter if he had caught the intruder before he left. Such is the protectivenes of parents when their children are in potential danger.

(please take my word for it when I say my dad is not a violent person, but this would have tipped him over the edge I think)

I wonder, how many of you Americans keep firearms at home for this very reason? What would you have done if you found an intruder in your home as your young children and your wife slept nearby?

[Assault (CAN) 1]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">What would you have done if you found an intruder in your home as your young children and your wife slept nearby? <span id='postcolor'>

Well, I'd probably get my gun, point it at the guy and say: "What the fuck are you doing?" If he ran, I would let him. If he went after me or my family I would put him in a world of hurt.

Those were some interesting stories you posted, I found it shocking that the police would actually charge someone for defending themselves. What a croc.

Tyler

[madmedic 0]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (morbid @ Jan. 07 2003,23:53)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">A true tale, I'm afraid I'm the only source (aside from my parents of course).

When I was young, very young - around 5 maybe or 6 years old someone broke into our house.

At the time my sister and I shared a room, she was probably around 3.

My dad (from whom I heard of this incident) heard a noise and entered our room. Now this room was on the bottom floor and our house was an old tenement type thing with flimsy windows with weak iron frames.

Someone had forced the window open, went from my room in to the front room and attempted to steal various items, when my dad came into my room after hearing the noise he saw this person exiting through the room window.

From the way he tells this I honestly believe he would have been sent to jail for murder or manslaughter if he had caught the intruder before he left. Such is the protectivenes of parents when their children are in potential danger.

(please take my word for it when I say my dad is not a violent person, but this would have tipped him over the edge I think)

I wonder, how many of you Americans keep firearms at home for this very reason? What would you have done if you found an intruder in your home as your young children and your wife slept nearby?<span id='postcolor'>

Well, like I stated before.

That is exactly why some Americans keep a gun in their homes.

However...If you were to shoot the intruder as he was making his escape, or when he was no threat to the life/safety of anyone....you would/could certainly be charged with murder.

There are very strict rules governing the use of deadly force.

[morbid 0]

When its night, and there is an intruder in your home you I seriously doubt you will have much time to determine if the intruder is a threat or not.

If I encounter an intruder in my home who isn't in the act of escaping (ie, is in an room with no exit, or is making no attempt to exit) then I most certainly WILL NOT stop to ask "pardon me Mr.Burglar sir, but are you a threat to me?". It is a chance not worth taking, in my opinion it is far better to put him down then ask questions than to take the chance that he his going to beat/stab/shoot the hell out of you.

Despite the fact we cannot have firearms in the UK there are many household implements with which to render an assailant incapable of harming you.

On the other hand if he is already half way out of a window well just let him go - actually no , give him a helping hand, I live one up so a push should help him find the ground .

[Paratrooper 0]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (morbid @ Jan. 08 2003,00:07)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">When its night, and there is an intruder in your home you I seriously doubt you will have much time to determine if the intruder is a threat or not.

If I encounter an intruder in my home who isn't in the act of escaping (ie, is in an room with no exit, or is making no attempt to exit) then I most certainly WILL NOT stop to ask "pardon me Mr.Burglar sir, but are you a threat to me?". It is a chance not worth taking, in my opinion it is far better to put him down then ask questions than to take the chance that he his going to beat/stab/shoot the hell out of you.

Despite the fact we cannot have firearms in the UK there are many household implements with which to render an assailant incapable of harming you.

On the other hand if he is already half way out of a window well just let him go - actually no , give him a helping hand, I live one up so a push should help him find the ground .<span id='postcolor'>

I have to agree, while I don't advocate allowing guns accross the whole nation, I think there should be massivley reduced sentences for violence against intruders, who in my opinion have forfited their rights.

I would get the Holland and Holland and blow the bastard clean away.

[Shabadu 0]

I wish I had never read this thread.

Is it meant to be a poll on arming the police over here(Britain) or removing firearms from US police? I think some people have got this confused.

[bn880 5]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Shabadu @ Jan. 07 2003,18:36)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">I wish I had never read this thread.

Is it meant to be a poll on arming the police over here(Britain) or removing firearms from US police? I think some people have got this confused.<span id='postcolor'>

Looks like it just branched off into something that can be discussed in more length. Not many people are going to discuss the bobby's.

[madmedic 0]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (morbid @ Jan. 08 2003,00:07)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">When its night, and there is an intruder in your home you I seriously doubt you will have much time to determine if the intruder is a threat or not.

If I encounter an intruder in my home who isn't in the act of escaping (ie, is in an room with no exit, or is making no attempt to exit) then I most certainly WILL NOT stop to ask "pardon me Mr.Burglar sir, but are you a threat to me?". It is a chance not worth taking, in my opinion it is far better to put him down then ask questions than to take the chance that he his going to beat/stab/shoot the hell out of you.

Despite the fact we cannot have firearms in the UK there are many household implements with which to render an assailant incapable of harming you.

On the other hand if he is already half way out of a window well just let him go - actually no , give him a helping hand, I live one up so a push should help him find the ground .<span id='postcolor'>

Agreed, that is not the point.

(BY LAW in most U.S. states) If someone is reasonably percieved as a threat, you are justified in using deadly force.

That means if they are in a position to harm you, or someone else.

But,...lets say someone armed with a baseball bat is "acting in a threatening way"...however, he is standing 20 feet away from you, you would not be justified in shooting him, and by law,...could be prosecuted.

(unless that person actually charged toward you)

You could also be prosecuted if the jury finds that you had an avenue for escape or retreat, and chose instead to stand your ground, and open fire.

(The "duty to retreat if possible" does not apply to your home) you do not have to retreat from your house, but a legitimate threat must still exist.

It is a legal "grey area",...and it is obviously dictated by circumstance

But, I can guarantee you would be prosecuted if you were to shoot someone who was in the process of fleeing form you, or who had his hands up in surrender (and trust me It gets investigated)

That is part of the responsibility of owning a gun for personal protection...Knowing when deadly force is legally/morally justified.

[Guest]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (morbid @ Jan. 07 2003,23:53)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">What would you have done if you found an intruder in your home as your young children and your wife slept nearby?<span id='postcolor'>

IMO this is a typical hysterical question motivated by unreasonable fear.

The question you should ask yourself is how wise it is to have a gun in the house if you have young children.

[madmedic 0]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (bn880 @ Jan. 08 2003,00:41)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE"></span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Shabadu @ Jan. 07 2003,18:36)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">I wish I had never read this thread.

Is it meant to be a poll on arming the police over here(Britain) or removing firearms from US police? I think some people have got this confused.<span id='postcolor'>

Looks like it just branched off into something that can be discussed in more length.  Not many people are going to discuss the bobby's.<span id='postcolor'>

Agreed,...I think it evolved into this discussion when it became a question of the reasons for arming Bobbies.

It is all relevant to the situation though, I think. (albeit, slightly off topic)

[Shabadu 0]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (bn880 @ Jan. 08 2003,00:41)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE"></span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Shabadu @ Jan. 07 2003,18:36)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">I wish I had never read this thread.

Is it meant to be a poll on arming the police over here(Britain) or removing firearms from US police? I think some people have got this confused.<span id='postcolor'>

Looks like it just branched off into something that can be discussed in more length.  Not many people are going to discuss the bobby's.<span id='postcolor'>

I just got sick of reading something the length of the bible for each reply.

I'm only 56k, I don't have the time.

I resign from this thread. Was going to give a reason but couldn't b bothered, tis late and I'm tired.

[Shabadu 0]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (denoir @ Jan. 08 2003,00:47)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE"></span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (morbid @ Jan. 07 2003,23:53)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">What would you have done if you found an intruder in your home as your young children and your wife slept nearby?<span id='postcolor'>

IMO this is a typical hysterical question motivated by unreasonable fear.

The question you should ask yourself is how wise it is to have a gun in the house if you have young children.<span id='postcolor'>

This is the reason I quit this thread, Denoir showing sense, the other guy clearly not.

[madmedic 0]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (denoir @ Jan. 08 2003,00:47)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE"></span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (morbid @ Jan. 07 2003,23:53)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">What would you have done if you found an intruder in your home as your young children and your wife slept nearby?<span id='postcolor'>

IMO this is a typical hysterical question motivated by unreasonable fear.

The question you should ask yourself is how wise it is to have a gun in the house if you have young children.<span id='postcolor'>

"The question you should ask yourself is how wise it is to have a gun in the house if you have young children."

That question is entirely dictated by circumstance,...If you are a responsible adult, and willing to take the appropriate steps to properly educate your children, and keep them from access to your firearms...there is no problem with it at all.