Dekers Posted October 4, 2017 Report Share Posted October 4, 2017 Hypothetical minefield! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
beanieboy Posted October 5, 2017 Report Share Posted October 5, 2017 As long as the concepts of 'reasonable force' and 'proportionate response' are used to determine ones actions, these types of debate will go on and on. Ultimately, what is deemed reasonable/proportionate in each case, will be determined by the court. These concepts are, by their very nature, quite vague and are often open to interpretation and discretion by the courts. It is therefore difficult to achieve consistency when dealing with such matters. Personally, if a guy gets shot whilst trying to forcibly steal a firearm from it's lawful owner, I would have little sympathy for him. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kaunda Posted October 5, 2017 Report Share Posted October 5, 2017 (edited) As your mate reported this to the police,presumably this is being investigated as " attempted aggravated robbery",at the very least. Edited October 5, 2017 by kaunda Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hamster Posted October 5, 2017 Report Share Posted October 5, 2017 Does anyone seriously think they'd have time to unzip, load and fire the gun in self defence in such a scenario ? In the extremely unlikely Hollywood version when an initial scuffle results in you knocking one temporarily dazed and then roll down some convenient hill locked in a tug o war with his friend where you happen to fish out the ammo, bolt and magazine in some Chuck Norris sleight of hand and blast the chap off his feet just as he's reaching for his knife..........................................what the law says would be the last thing on your mind. If you lose your license then at least you know deep down you prolly saved your own life. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AULD YIN Posted October 5, 2017 Report Share Posted October 5, 2017 I think i would have made the rife unusable by bending the barrel over his head. johnnie Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
daveboy Posted October 6, 2017 Report Share Posted October 6, 2017 12 jury members from PW and you would be fine... 12 jury members from the Anti hunting mob.......? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
deejay Posted October 6, 2017 Author Report Share Posted October 6, 2017 (edited) As your mate reported this to the police,presumably this is being investigated as " attempted aggravated robbery",at the very least. He's just shown me the letter he received from Criminal justice system .He's clearly pleaded guilty to the lesser charge of aggrevated bahavoir with intent to cause fear of/provoke unlawful violence Edited October 6, 2017 by deejay Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Davyo Posted October 6, 2017 Report Share Posted October 6, 2017 So if threatened,you hand your gun over ...only to possibly be shot with it . I'm with Stuartboy on this. I agree it's a tough scenario , but have to say I'd happily take my chances with the courts , rather than thugs with a gun. They had previous convictions of robbery. Not that this makes any difference. So if your mate knows they had previous,then he must know them or of them. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Whitester Posted October 10, 2017 Report Share Posted October 10, 2017 A scary situation, not sure what I would do, probably hang on to my rifle for dear life like your mate did . Not sure I would shoot them even if I did have a loaded gun, very dodgy ground that . Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
walshie Posted October 10, 2017 Report Share Posted October 10, 2017 So they've been arrested then? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TIGHTCHOKE Posted October 10, 2017 Report Share Posted October 10, 2017 Mixed views on this, which is what i expected . However he wasn't aware of what laws there were, with regards to this , I mean who would be , it's not a regular occurrence, he said he just froze, all he could do was pick his phone up and cal 999 ... they come at him again , wanting the gun, and threatening him , however soon backed off once they heard police on the other end of the phone. No one knows what there brains would tell them to do unless it actually happened to them .. we're all different and react differently. YET! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Whitester Posted October 10, 2017 Report Share Posted October 10, 2017 A scary situation, not sure what I would do, probably hang on to my rifle for dear life like your mate did . Not sure I would shoot them even if I did have a loaded gun, very dodgy ground that . Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dibs85 Posted October 11, 2017 Report Share Posted October 11, 2017 This brings the question that IF you did have to shoot to defend yourself, would say a shoot to the leg be classed as proportionate defence? or would it not matter where you shot him if it was him or you? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Benthejockey Posted October 11, 2017 Report Share Posted October 11, 2017 (edited) It reminds me of a story someone told me once. Judge: Mr Smith we accept your plea of self defence. Having been over powered and fearing for your life you grabbed the nearest thing - a brick - to subdue your attacker. We agree that this is reasonable force. What we are questioning Mr Smith, is how did your attacker come to be suffering from his other injuries including bruises a similar shape to your boots? Mr Smith: He must have fallen badly when I clobbered him. Edited October 11, 2017 by Benthejockey Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rim Fire Posted October 11, 2017 Report Share Posted October 11, 2017 At what point did they get arrested was it later or at the scene of the crime Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scully Posted October 11, 2017 Report Share Posted October 11, 2017 Ive looked in and out of this thread, now and then. Isnt it a bit meaningless regarding the shooting of anyone? With the bolt and magazine in the guns slip, all that was likely to happen in the scenario as described, is the OPs friend was going to have his gun taken from him? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gordon R Posted October 11, 2017 Report Share Posted October 11, 2017 Where the dogs called Walter and Mitty? I agree. "facts" seem to be drip fed into the tale. To save the OP posing the question "Meaning??" - it isn't hard to work out. Later he was told by certain member of the force that he was within his rights to use the gun in self defence. Seemingly one had a knuckle duster which he told me assumed was a knife at first. two blokes with knuckle dusters They had previous convictions of robbery. Forgot to mention, they had also tried to have there pitbulls set about and kill his dog. he said he just froze, all he could do was pick his phone up and cal 999 ... they come at him again , wanting the gun, and threatening him , He's just shown me the letter he received from Criminal justice system . He's clearly pleaded guilty to the lesser charge of aggrevated bahavoir with intent to cause fear of/provoke unlawful violence Just getting a bit confused. One had a knuckleduster, which turned out to be two men with knuckledusters. How did he know they had previous convictions for robbery? He managed to fight off two men with knuckledusters and pit bulls, which they tried to set upon him and his previously unmentioned dog, whilst freezing and managing to call the Police. It was good of his would-be robbers / assailants to wait until he phoned the Police and engaged them in conversation. Also good of them to hang around until their arrest. He seems to have been fed a steady stream of information from the Police - advising him he could have used the gun, letting him know about previous robbery convictions and sending him a letter saying that only one of the would-be robbers was being prosecuted. Why only one? I love these tales - full script on first post - not in a million years. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Davyo Posted October 11, 2017 Report Share Posted October 11, 2017 (edited) Its rather worrying when we get posts about UK licence holders asking if it's ok to use their guns in self defence.However if licenced UK gun owner's thought they had been given the right to use a firearm in defence and not suffer the consequences.Getting more like America every ruddy day. Edited October 11, 2017 by Davyo Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dekers Posted October 11, 2017 Report Share Posted October 11, 2017 Any time we have a topic along these lines it is about machismo and balls, I suspect a LOT of people here would have an issue pulling the trigger on a person regardless. Just the same David Cameron enlarged the self defence option on firearms, and despite the fact it still isn't easy, you are nowhere near as guilty these days if you use them. Move on, there is no answering this topic! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scully Posted October 11, 2017 Report Share Posted October 11, 2017 I agree. "facts" seem to be drip fed into the tale. To save the OP posing the question "Meaning??" - it isn't hard to work out. Just getting a bit confused. One had a knuckleduster, which turned out to be two men with knuckledusters. How did he know they had previous convictions for robbery? He managed to fight off two men with knuckledusters and pit bulls, which they tried to set upon him and his previously unmentioned dog, whilst freezing and managing to call the Police. It was good of his would-be robbers / assailants to wait until he phoned the Police and engaged them in conversation. Also good of them to hang around until their arrest. He seems to have been fed a steady stream of information from the Police - advising him he could have used the gun, letting him know about previous robbery convictions and sending him a letter saying that only one of the would-be robbers was being prosecuted. Why only one? I love these tales - full script on first post - not in a million years. Mmmmm.....all seems a bit disjointed really. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Me matt Posted October 11, 2017 Report Share Posted October 11, 2017 Where's UKpoacher these days??? He was always the legal eagle being ex 5'o Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FairImogen Posted October 11, 2017 Report Share Posted October 11, 2017 Better to learn self defence Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gordon R Posted October 11, 2017 Report Share Posted October 11, 2017 Better not to post half a tale - at best. :hmm: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
geordieh Posted October 12, 2017 Report Share Posted October 12, 2017 Not a lot really without the bolt and magazine. THEY WERE IN THE SIDE POCKET OF THE GUNSLIP or are you saying they were too stupid to search the gunslip Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scully Posted October 12, 2017 Report Share Posted October 12, 2017 THEY WERE IN THE SIDE POCKET OF THE GUNSLIP or are you saying they were too stupid to search the gunslipNo, I was referring to how difficuilt it would have been to use the gun in self defence with the bolt and magazine ( Im assuming an empty magazine ) in the gunslip. 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.