Help with thugs and the LAW

[Guest JohnGalway]

No probs, I just do not like seeing suggestions of shooting at vehicles or people, or confronting people while armed. It will only lead to the FAC holder getting into trouble when there's no absolute need for it.

[cyclonebri1 8]

Does anyone know the regs regarding the "land mine" thing?

 

Also to add, through a friend in the force I found out after the Tony Martin issue that the guy he killed was one of those knoun/souspected as having carried out a string of burglaries, including my garage, in our area a while before.

 

I wouldn't have pulled the trigger, but I had little sympathy

[claybusers al 9]

a trip gun/mine can be used on private property as long as it is only loaded with a black powder blank not a doctered live cartridge and you have visible warning signs

[cyclonebri1 8]

a trip gun/mine can be used on private property as long as it is only loaded with a black powder blank not a doctered live cartridge and you have visible warning signs

 

 

Sorry just imagining the warning sign

 

So, who are these black power blanks available to? assuming use on private land as said

[rabbit4tea 1]

you could of been done with intention to harm with a firearms even though you would nt have shot them get some paintball grenades or paintball claymores set them up outside the stables each night it will go bang and wake the farmer + u up and they will get covered in paint , or BBs BOOM!

[SportingShooter 0]

We are relatively unrestricted in where our Guns can be, and when they can be armed or loaded, yes?

 

So, it would be very easy for a situation such as this to be made 100 times worse by someone not using their judgment and reaching for a gun, just because it is there, when they have no justification.

 

Now let me spin the coin.

 

For an Armed Response Vehicle, with Firearms Officers on board, to be able to use a Tazer! They have to have threats to the public or officers which they deem the use of a Tazer would help prevent injury, that is just a Tazer, a non lethal weapon.

 

For F O's to be allowed to Arm Firearms, they need to have a weapon involved, i.e. a Knife, Firearm or other offensive weapon.

 

Now, you must think to yourselves, if it takes that much justification for the Police to arm, then we have no justification to just reach for the nearest rifle and go in fully cocked when we have no proof that the use of a firearm is both needed or justified.

 

Just an observation.

 

SS

[Mr_Logic 5]

SS, normally I agree with you, but not here.

 

Just because the police are hampered in their use of weapons by daft rules, doesn't mean we should be too.

 

In a situation where I have to confront someone like that, if I have a rifle with me it is more likely to mean that they don't attack me, for their own safety. That means that if I expect confrontation the weapon is a good thing to have - better to have and not need, than need and not have.

 

The law should permit this. I love the American attitude. In the sporting goods store, alongside sporting rifles and AR15s, there are f*** off great big tactical shotguns, specifically sold for home defense.

 

That's the right attitude IMHO, if someone gets to my property, they should be in for a shock. This pathetic situation where I have to let the burglars steal everything (and then presumably lose my FAC for daring to be a victim of crime) is utterly stupid. Oh wait, better hope they picked the lock because they can sue me if they hurt themselves breaking my window.

 

F****ing mad :realmad: :realmad: :realmad:

[hotel2zero 0]

We are relatively unrestricted in where our Guns can be, and when they can be armed or loaded, yes?.................-

 

Now, you must think to yourselves, if it takes that much justification for the Police to arm, then we have no justification to just reach for the nearest rifle and go in fully cocked when we have no proof that the use of a firearm is both needed or justified.

 

Just an observation.

 

SS

 

I can totally understand that point SS, UK gun law is so tight and restricted that the amount of both justification and luck you would need to construct an inadmissable defence case in the courts regarding firearms offences far outways the risk of involving a firearm in the first place.

Mad as it is - i think how ever the drama unfolded, i'd have a hell of a job to the the law on my side (and i don't want to give up my FAC!)

 

SS, normally I agree with you, but not here.

 

Just because the police are hampered in their use of weapons by daft rules, doesn't mean we should be too.

 

In a situation where I have to confront someone like that, if I have a rifle with me it is more likely to mean that they don't attack me, for their own safety. That means that if I expect confrontation the weapon is a good thing to have - better to have and not need, than need and not have.

 

this was something that was running through my mind at the time, ''I can't not act, but i cant tell if they have a shotgun or 300ft knife somewhere'', so i put myself in great danger by just confronting them empty handed.

 

SS, normally I agree with you, but not here.

 

That's the right attitude IMHO, if someone gets to my property, they should be in for a shock. This pathetic situation where I have to let the burglars steal everything (and then presumably lose my FAC for daring to be a victim of crime) is utterly stupid. Oh wait, better hope they picked the lock because they can sue me if they hurt themselves breaking my window.

F****ing mad :realmad: :realmad: :realmad:

 

sad to say but your proberly not far wrong pal!

 

Thanks both of you!

[cyclonebri1 8]

SS, normally I agree with you, but not here.

 

Just because the police are hampered in their use of weapons by daft rules, doesn't mean we should be too.

 

In a situation where I have to confront someone like that, if I have a rifle with me it is more likely to mean that they don't attack me, for their own safety. That means that if I expect confrontation the weapon is a good thing to have - better to have and not need, than need and not have.

 

The law should permit this. I love the American attitude. In the sporting goods store, alongside sporting rifles and AR15s, there are f*** off great big tactical shotguns, specifically sold for home defense.

 

That's the right attitude IMHO, if someone gets to my property, they should be in for a shock. This pathetic situation where I have to let the burglars steal everything (and then presumably lose my FAC for daring to be a victim of crime) is utterly stupid. Oh wait, better hope they picked the lock because they can sue me if they hurt themselves breaking my window.

 

F****ing mad :realmad: :realmad: :realmad:

 

I can understand your frustration Mr Logic but I'm afraid thats the way it is. And in general it's the best safest way for all.

 

The British system for firearms authorisation is designed purely for sport/control. Self protection or protection of property cannot ever be an option.

 

If you or anyone else wants an example of how things can go wrong when you (me) stand up and defend yourself in such circumstances, PM me and I will explain.

 

But yes it does make you F***ing mad

[SportingShooter 0]

I don't agree with a gun being used just because its there, whether the persons has a weapon or not, that where the American attitude falls short I feel.

 

But I think we'll have to agree to disagree on this one.

 

JMHO,

 

SS

[hotel2zero 0]

I don't agree with a gun being used just because its there, whether the persons has a weapon or not, that where the American attitude falls short I feel.

 

But I think we'll have to agree to disagree on this one.

JMHO,

 

SS

 

 

I think so too, if the event was to ever happen and for what ever reason, however it was dressed up, and what they were armed with - leave it to the LAW.

otherwise i'll always run the risk of getting in more trouble than the offenders.

 

i'm sure my feelings are shared accros the site however we live in the uk and like it or not the law is the law.

 

mad as it makes me and what i'd do if i was in the 'power' to change things but....

 

 

Thanks for you views, advice and help regarding the law people

[Deker 3,450]

I think the "law" bit has been "done" here...

 

But a few years back on a Christmas Tree Farm I shoot at the owner put up signs along the lines of..DANGER - Keep Out ..Armed Hunters control this area!!

 

I think it took about 2 weeks before they had all been pulled down by the local ******!!!

 

But his "shrinkage" problems are still much reduced as they all know it's true!!!

Edited January 2, 2009 by Deker

[fastrac10 0]

I agree the law bit has been done here, but just to add a bit extra. I have a very good friend who is a policeman and he said he would never want to carry a firearm - because he said if he ever used it he would be hung out to dry! What chance have we got against these people when even the police will not even stand behind there own men?

I totally agree with you Mr L on you view. The law is there to protect the criminal not US! Things are starting to change a bit now - but we are a long way off protecting our property with what ever we want too. Another friend of mine has had his farm done twice now and the last time he found a length of 4by2 which the police said would have been for him if he came across them!

These guys came to this farm with a 4x4 with false plates on and with a baseball bat. Their intension was to steel and harm - no Question! With things the way they are at the moment there might be alot more of this to come. How are we supposed to protect ourselves and property? and how on earth are we supposed to make a citizens arrest? Snapshot had the right idea in taking a few mates to "sort" the job out! BUT we have all to keep the gun cabinet locked however tempted we are!

Fastrac10

[cyclonebri1 8]

I think the vast majority of us realise that to raise any weapon in retaliation/defence will do no good at all..

 

The 4 x 2 comment made me chuckle.

 

Many years ago my bro in law had one of the early golf GTI's. Highly sought after by the underclass. His mate across the road came home very late one night and saw a couple of guys in the drive.

He parked up then belted across the street armed with a length of 4x2. Inspite of many blows to the back and shoulders of the kid who leapt out of the car, he kept on going with the radio cradled in his arms. What are they on???

[The Sporting Agent 0]

Guys this is clearly a hot topic, but lets not beat about the bush; there are laws that exist to cover incidents such as this, they are not clear but they exist and any infringement (particularly where a firearm is concerned) will have huge reprocusions for the person concerned but also potentially for all firearms owners.

 

Suggestions such as, use an alarm mine, show them yau have a gun etc etc do not help.

 

I would suggest anyone who seriously feels they need cover because of situations such as this happening, read the P.A.C.E Act of 1984, this covers an individuals right to detain/arrest someone commiting a crime and oulines the use of force in such a situation (section 24A). This power is only applicable to indictable offences, i.e those which are tried in a Crown Court. Theft as in this case would be one; but so is a firearms offence!

 

But; just because this law exists, if your actions are not conducted within the guidelines of the Act, you can be liable (be prepared to be sued) for a private prosecution against you for unlawfull detention, or worse!

 

If this takes place lets say on a farm or shoot where you work, in such a case your employer may also be liable under the act of Vicarious Liability.

 

Other Acts such as the Occupiers Liability Act of 1957 and the amended 1984 Act can leave you wide open should you use methods such as the alarm mines mentioned above or even paintball munitions (broken glass on walls, barbed fences etc also). This Act makes it your responsability to have a duty of care to anyone on your land or property including burglars, it also includes tresspasers and unlawfull visitors!!!

 

We don't even need to get onto firearms laws!!

 

Basically its a minefield; but if you step out of line (even if you think you are in the right) you could be in more trouble than the "criminal"; even without bringing a firearm into play!!

 

As long as you can prove that your actions are Reasonable, Justifiable, Necessary and Proportionate, you should be ok. But with such incidents on the up, its worth being carefull.