Paul taylor Posted January 24, 2014 Report Share Posted January 24, 2014 Fair enough, but I never mentioned 'firearms'. There are many many ways in which law abiding people can arm themselves other than with firearms.no not you mate it was four wheel drive who mentioned all home owners having a shotgun to defend their homes. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Liamey Posted January 25, 2014 Report Share Posted January 25, 2014 Reasonable force needs redefining drastically. Personally I think the gentleman was quite right to inflict that kind of damage on that chav (as did his peers) as in the cold light of day no one knows what it's like to have adrenalin coursing through their body in a stressful situation such as this one. Sitting in my favourite armchair cozy warm I might say looks like an overreaction and taking things too far, on that night in question however I may have done even more. Pity the other one didn't end up with the same treatment. Like most I was always taught not to touch or take anything that didn't belong to me unless offered. This has stood me well. Only when thieves have a hand chopped off will things start to change - maybe then those broken legs aren't too bad after all! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scully Posted January 25, 2014 Report Share Posted January 25, 2014 no not you mate it was four wheel drive who mentioned all home owners having a shotgun to defend their homes. In that case my apologies. In theory I'm not against the idea of homeowners being allowed to own a shotgun for home defence ( I think it was Churchill who first lauded the idea) so long as they go through the same carp we do and satisfy all the current criteria us shooters do with the exception of land to shoot on obviously. How it would work in reality isn't really a practical situation though. If your shotgun is locked in a cabinet downstairs and you're in bed and you can hear someone going through your knife drawer in the kitchen then basically you're stuffed. Either your cabinet needs to be upstairs in your bedroom or you need some kind of defensive weapon which can be on you at all times, like mace or pepper spray. The trouble with arms for self defence is that they cease to be so if they're locked away in another room. Not practical. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
four-wheel-drive Posted January 25, 2014 Report Share Posted January 25, 2014 (edited) In that case my apologies. In theory I'm not against the idea of homeowners being allowed to own a shotgun for home defence ( I think it was Churchill who first lauded the idea) so long as they go through the same carp we do and satisfy all the current criteria us shooters do with the exception of land to shoot on obviously. How it would work in reality isn't really a practical situation though. If your shotgun is locked in a cabinet downstairs and you're in bed and you can hear someone going through your knife drawer in the kitchen then basically you're stuffed. Either your cabinet needs to be upstairs in your bedroom or you need some kind of defensive weapon which can be on you at all times, like mace or pepper spray. The trouble with arms for self defence is that they cease to be so if they're locked away in another room. Not practical. First I would think that the best place for shotgun cabinet would be in the main bedroom perhaps in a cupboard wardrobe out of sight. Another point that I would like to make is the cartridges that could be used for home defence you do not have to use full power ones there are lots of options for the amount of powder used and the type of shot ie the old rock salt idea but I do not now what would be the best option the other option would be to allow people to own hand guns but that is another story. Edited January 25, 2014 by four-wheel-drive Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dekers Posted January 25, 2014 Report Share Posted January 25, 2014 ................................................. I'm all for self defence mate, but don't get me wrong, put me in a position where I feel it necessary to physically defend myself or my family, swift and effective will be the keywords. Minimum damage to my opponent will not. It isn't the movies, its real life! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
overandunder2012 Posted January 25, 2014 Report Share Posted January 25, 2014 Compare this verdict to the thug who got a suspended sentence for kicking a lad in the face - whilst the lad was bent down, tying his shoelace. For every proper verdict, there appears to be another which defies belief. all violent crime should a mandatory custodial that would stop the **** heads fighting First I would think that the best place for shotgun cabinet would be in the main bedroom perhaps in a cupboard wardrobe out of sight. Another point that I would like to make is the cartridges that could be used for home defence you do not have to use full power ones there are lots of options for the amount of powder used and the type of shot ie the old rock salt idea but I do not now what would be the best option the other option would be to allow people to own hand guns but that is another story. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ordnance Posted January 25, 2014 Report Share Posted January 25, 2014 The trouble with arms for self defence is that they cease to be so if they're locked away in another room. That's why its specified that they are kept in a cabinet when not in use. Not in case they are stolen , but to make it less likely that a homeowner would or could use it for self defence. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
-Mongrel- Posted January 26, 2014 Report Share Posted January 26, 2014 It isn't the movies, its real life! Perfectly aware of that mate, and perfectly aware of how to slow people down quickly. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CharlieT Posted January 26, 2014 Report Share Posted January 26, 2014 I'm not saying anything. You were the one who suggested every householder should have a shotgun. I just pointed out that would just mean everyone could have a shotgun, kinda negating the threat. You were also the one who said that breaking two legs with a fence post was excessive, but that it was OK to shoot them in the legs with your shotgun. I just pointed out the contradiction and suggested it might not be as easy as you might hope to shoot someone without potentially upping the ante and killing them. It's not the 60's anymore, you can't leave your door unlocked, or let your kids play out late in the dark anymore, time to drag yourself forward 50 years. I'm all for self defence mate, but don't get me wrong, put me in a position where I feel it necessary to physically defend myself or my family, swift and effective will be the keywords. Minimum damage to my opponent will not. It will come as rather a shock to you then that I can't remember the last time I locked my door or took the keys out of my car and my grandchildren play outside till bed time with complete safety.............. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
-Mongrel- Posted January 26, 2014 Report Share Posted January 26, 2014 It will come as rather a shock to you then that I can't remember the last time I locked my door or took the keys out of my car and my grandchildren play outside till bed time with complete safety.............. For once Charlie, I envy you. There is absolutely no way I'd walk out of the house in sunny Brighton at any time of the day or night and not lock it. Same goes for the car. I'd politely suggest that would be valid across most UK towns and cities. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Penelope Posted January 27, 2014 Report Share Posted January 27, 2014 Andrew Woodhouse gave a good interview on R4's Today on Saturday with John Humphreys. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dekers Posted January 27, 2014 Report Share Posted January 27, 2014 It isn't the movies, its real life! Perfectly aware of that mate, and perfectly aware of how to slow people down quickly. For clarification I was agreeing with you, in situations like this you don't get to shoot the knife out of his hand or put one in his leg, it is a matter of stopping quickly and efficiently. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
geordieh Posted January 27, 2014 Report Share Posted January 27, 2014 Close range with a shotgun? What are you going to aim at? Their feet? Hands? This would effectively be an amputation and anywhere else would likely cause death. What if they wrestled the gun off you? Amputation sounds fine to me,it should be an option for the court as a punishment Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
old rooster Posted January 27, 2014 Report Share Posted January 27, 2014 First I would think that the best place for shotgun cabinet would be in the main bedroom perhaps in a cupboard wardrobe out of sight. Another point that I would like to make is the cartridges that could be used for home defence you do not have to use full power ones there are lots of options for the amount of powder used and the type of shot ie the old rock salt idea but I do not now what would be the best option the other option would be to allow people to own hand guns but that is another story. Rock salt wouldn't be reliable, I'd want to stop anybody in their tracks as if I'd reached the point of feeling threatened enough to shoot things would be looking pretty dodgy! I've got some 42 gramme No.3's that are handy for foxes, they should do the trick. As the law offers no sensible deterrent to people breaking in to other peoples property tooled up and willing to kill or maim them the home owner owes it to himself and his family to put his/their safety first. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dekers Posted January 27, 2014 Report Share Posted January 27, 2014 Rock salt wouldn't be reliable, I'd want to stop anybody in their tracks as if I'd reached the point of feeling threatened enough to shoot things would be looking pretty dodgy! I've got some 42 gramme No.3's that are handy for foxes, they should do the trick. As the law offers no sensible deterrent to people breaking in to other peoples property tooled up and willing to kill or maim them the home owner owes it to himself and his family to put his/their safety first. Unfortunately this is the situation, any talk of lower powered loads or rocksalt or shooting in the arm etc., etc., are daft, as I sad earlier this is not the movies. IF you end up in a situation where you feel that threatened, your heart is on overtime and you are scared ****less, there is virtually nobody here that would be thinking calmly enough to do anything but shoot to stop, but that is what you need to do anyway! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
-Mongrel- Posted January 27, 2014 Report Share Posted January 27, 2014 For clarification I was agreeing with you, in situations like this you don't get to shoot the knife out of his hand or put one in his leg, it is a matter of stopping quickly and efficiently. Sorry, being PW I automatically assumed it was a negative comment . It's surprisingly easy to stop someone who isn't expecting a strategised response....get's a bit more interesting if you're both adopting a similar approach! Only happened once and seeing as I lived and socialised around South London and Croydon in particular for quite a while, that's a surprise even to me. When we both realised what was going on, we fairly quickly decided it was best to walk away...which is always the best result anyway. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kes Posted January 27, 2014 Report Share Posted January 27, 2014 I am concerned here that if one hides 'defensive' weapons in various places, it is considered that YOU are preparing a violent response. In such cases do not the police consider the homeowners to be responsible? Hence my wish to see the law clearly defined so that, for example, if you have a baseball bat in the wardrobe its not considered an 'offensive weapon', or the equivalent of 'going equipped'. I have what might be considered weapons in almost every room in the house (kitchen knives etc) - so do many. Would that mean we are guilty if a baseball bat was used in 'self-defence', simply because it was 'handier' than a shotgun locked in a cabinet ? Answers please on pads of A4. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
henry d Posted January 27, 2014 Report Share Posted January 27, 2014 Amputation sounds fine to me,it should be an option for the court as a punishment I wouldn`t let some on here know that, they will assume you want full sharia law! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.