Military Camp

Funny Picture - Video Thread III

The #1 community for Gun Owners in Texas

Member Benefits:

  • Fewer Ads!
  • Discuss all aspects of firearm ownership
  • Discuss anti-gun legislation
  • Buy, sell, and trade in the classified section
  • Chat with Local gun shops, ranges, trainers & other businesses
  • Discover free outdoor shooting areas
  • View up to date on firearm-related events
  • Share photos & video with other members
  • ...and so much more!
  • tinplas

    TGT Addict
    Rating - 100%
    2   0   0
    Nov 22, 2017
    2,549
    96
    San Antonio
    20190112_194613125.png
     

    Attachments

    • 20190112_194613125.png
      20190112_194613125.png
      372.1 KB · Views: 436

    C_Hallbert

    Color Commentator
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    Nov 18, 2017
    1,318
    96
    McAlester, OK

    All of Britain would not be able to explain why it is best for the private individual to be unarmed in the face of a deadly assailant because this has been determined by the authorities to be safer for the rest of the subjects in the general public.


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
     

    sdismukes

    Bending nails and making sawdust
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    Nov 26, 2014
    1,526
    96
    Erath County
    All of Britain would not be able to explain why it is best for the private individual to be unarmed in the face of a deadly assailant because this has been determined by the authorities to be safer for the rest of the subjects in the general public.
    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

    It's because since around 1700 or so, the Crown has demanded it be in control of the death of its citizens, God's will excepted. So if you are attacked, you must retreat until "your back is at the very wall" before you defend yourself, and even then only using commensurate force. If you are merely at risk of being bruised, then you may only bruise in return. If you are in demonstrable peril of losing your life, then taking the life of your attacker is "excused", but not "justified". The only justifiable death is an execution at the hands of the Crown.

    This concept is absolutely foreign to the non-progressives amongst us. "Stand your Ground" originated in the 1800;s in new Hampshire, and it took both an Ohio- and an Indiana-based Supreme Court decision in the late 1800s to codify it in the USA. Someone comes at me with a baseball bat intending to merely bruise, well the commensurate bruising will be around the bullet hole(s) in his body.

    The Brits don't get this - they treat each individual component of a confrontation as an individual and distinct act. They guy comes at you with a stick... It's "Assault". You poke him with a knife in self defense... "Aggravated assault". Too much force in defence of self. At trial you can use the assault as an excuse for your action, but the Crown will still want its control over the actual death of the guy. They may or may not agree your actions were "excusable" in the circumstances.

    While Blair was PM, a farmer had been burgled many times. One night he was home, and heard someone breaking in. He grabbed his birding shotgun ("illegal" Winchester pump), loaded it with birdshot, and went downstairs. He confronted the 2 burglars. They approached him, so he shot them both; killing one, wounding the other. He was sentenced to 30 years for premeditated murder. "Premeditated" because - get this - he loaded the shotgun. The surviving burglar had over 30 prior arrests.... He sued and won 5000 pounds for his suffering and injuries.

    https://www.learnaboutguns.com/2008...s-in-your-own-home-and-go-to-jail-for-murder/

    https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/5977731/tony-martin-shooting-fred-barras-norfolk-farmer/

    After Brown took over as PM, he commuted the guy's sentence to 3 YEARS over claims the farmer had mental issues affecting his ability to NOT shoot the burglars. That's how serious they are about usurping the Crown's authority over life and death of its ... note the careful use of word here ... SUBJECTS.

    Sorry no funny picture to go with this absurdity!
     
    Last edited:

    C_Hallbert

    Color Commentator
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    Nov 18, 2017
    1,318
    96
    McAlester, OK
    It's because since around 1700 or so, the Crown has demanded it be in control of the death of its citizens, God's will excepted. So if you are attacked, you must retreat until "your back is at the very wall" before you defend yourself, and even then only using commensurate force. If you are merely at risk of being bruised, then you may only bruise in return. If you are in demonstrable peril of losing your life, then taking the life of your attacker is "excused", but not "justified". The only justifiable death is an execution at the hands of the Crown.

    This concept is absolutely foreign to the non-progressives amongst us. "Stand your Ground" originated in the 1800;s in new Hampshire, and it took both an Ohio- and an Indiana-based Supreme Court decision in the late 1800s to codify it in the USA. Someone comes at me with a baseball bat intending to merely bruise, well the commensurate bruising will be around the bullet hole(s) in his body.

    The Brits don't get this - they treat each individual component of a confrontation as an individual and distinct act. They guy comes at you with a stick... It's "Assault". You poke him with a knife in self defense... "Aggravated assault". Too much force in defence of self. At trial you can use the assault as an excuse for your action, but the Crown will still want its control over the actual death of the guy. They may or may not agree your actions were "excusable" in the circumstances.

    While Blair was PM, a farmer had been burgled many times. One night he was home, and heard someone breaking in. He grabbed his birding shotgun ("illegal" Winchester pump), loaded it with birdshot, and went downstairs. He confronted the 2 burglars. They approached him, so he shot them both; killing one, wounding the other. He was sentenced to 30 years for premeditated murder. "Premeditated" because - get this - he loaded the shotgun. The surviving burglar had over 30 prior arrests.... He sued and won 5000 pounds for his suffering and injuries.

    https://www.learnaboutguns.com/2008...s-in-your-own-home-and-go-to-jail-for-murder/

    https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/5977731/tony-martin-shooting-fred-barras-norfolk-farmer/

    After Brown took over as PM, he commuted the guy's sentence to 3 YEARS over claims the farmer had mental issues affecting his ability to NOT shoot the burglars. That's how serious they are about usurping the Crown's authority over life and death of its ... note the careful use of word here ... SUBJECTS.

    Sorry no funny picture to go with this absurdity!

    I have thought back through the mists of time and do not recall ever notifying any member of the British Monarchy that the option to control the life or death of any subject within their domain belonged solely unto the reigning monarch. I do (however) recall granting that power to Caesar Augustus of Rome.....


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
     
    Every Day Man
    Tyrant

    Support

    Forum statistics

    Threads
    116,119
    Messages
    2,953,347
    Members
    34,941
    Latest member
    Irowland1994
    Top Bottom