But the words "accurate" and "true" could be used:D

Tony Martin had an illegal gun which if he hadn't have had he probably wouldn't have killed the burglar. He knew the risks when he picked up that gun. He paid the price [however excessive].

How many of you keep a gun on your bedside cabinet? The amount of force he used was excessive, whatever his justification.

I think the media coverage is out of control over this. He was guilty after a trial and whatever evidence was heard in court prompted those jurors to make that decision. Perhaps it was a fluke and all the jurors were burglars or perhaps the evidence was there that proved Tony Martin went beyond the remits of reasonable force.

the parole officer that I mentioned keeps one in his house

Quote:

I think the media coverage is out of control over this. He was guilty after a trial and whatever evidence was heard in court prompted those jurors to make that decision. Perhaps it was a fluke and all the jurors were burglars or perhaps the evidence was there that proved Tony Martin went beyond the remits of reasonable force.

The jury were not in possession of all the facts when they made their decision and they were not allowed to choose a verdict of manslaughter at the original trial.

legally?

what facts?

yes

Quote:

what facts?

That he was mentally ill at the time of the shooting.

Although, in my experience, being able to own a gun legally does not necessarily mean you should.

I know someone who had a gun pulled on her by her father, who was mentally ill and had a licenced gun.

Back on topic..

Do we know that the Media coverage of the Tony Martin case has been accurate and unbiased? I have seen coverage of this case in a few places, and would consider all the coverage to be biased either for or against Tony.

Does anyone here KNOW how they would react in a situation like this? It is easy to SAY that you would act this way, or that way, but not so easy to know... Believe me, I have experience of this.

good point i agree he should have been in a secure unit

i throughly agree owning a licensed gun doesn't guarantee u will use it correctly or for the reason it's licensed i own 2 licensed shotguns and 2 mod licensed weapons and know how hard it's to get the license but that doesn't mean u wont go out and buy an illegal weapon like tony martin did

Anyhoo.....thats beside the point, Martin was given 12 months extra for the unlicensed weapon.

According to a newspaper this morning, Tony Martin's dog has now been threatened.:rolleyes:

:rofl: , that is so stupid it's funny. It just shows what kind of people we are dealing with here, ****.

Having gone back and re-read the original comments and responses, it seems that there's been a confusion about what's actually being talked about here.

When I said you don't "prevent" someone from robbing you by shooting them I didn't mean actively stopping them by putting a bullet into them, but deter them from planning on robbing you in the first place.

I've also realised that I missed out an "or" in my post #100 which makes the meaning of my sentence unclear.

You can assume anything you want, I can't stop you doing that, but I never said that in the first place.

From post #117:

Quoting You: He was done for manslaughter wasn't he?

Me: Tony Martin was originally charged and convicted of murder and sentenced to life imprisonment. This was later reduced to manslaughter on appeal.

From post #118:

You: fact: the conviction was reduced to manslaughter, therefore he is not guilty of murder but manslaughter.

That's what's known as "moving the goalposts".

Sorry, are we still talking about the same mentally ill homeowner who was in possession of an illegal firearm?

Yes, for instance it could tell me that I'm quite capable of making my own mind up instead of following the flock blindly like the rest of the sheep.

It could also tell me that I'm not afraid to stand up and the tell the whole world that it can go to hell and that I'm not scared of being out of step with everyone else.

Can you say the same thing? Oh and...

Ramrod #79: As I have already said, it was a dark night and there were unknown numbers of burglars threatening him harm.

Ramrod #79: I'm glad you feel able to make split second decisions in the dark, in the middle of nowhere with multiple intruders on the premises. You have a cooler head than many of us.

Mark W #92: so why would someone be tip toeing around my livingroom in the dead of night with a balaklava and torch? yet i should still be polite and civil until his intent is proved? how about "oh, good morning old boy, could i help you?"

Ramrod #94: (Quoted) what if it was *you* on someone else's property who gets the kicking? "Oh well, it was my fault for looking suspicious"?

You: Thats right, I shouldn't have been trespassing/breaking and entering in the first place, at night, with an accomplice, making threats to the homeowner.

Scastle #98: I have been in a situation where a loved one was attacked (while I wasn't around) and when the attacker was pointed out to me, I chased him down the street, although I never caught him, and don't know what I would have done if I did.

Mark W #106: you are gonna creep up behind him and sock him one before he sees you then call the police

The "Prosecution" rests its case!!

Yes you can deter them from robbing you. The USA has half the number of burglaries that we have because homeowners have guns and are backed up by the law when they use them. Burglars know this.

Quote:

From post #117: Quoting You: He was done for manslaughter wasn't he? Me: Tony Martin was originally charged and convicted of murder and sentenced to life imprisonment. This was later reduced to manslaughter on appeal. From post #118: You: fact: the conviction was reduced to manslaughter, therefore he is not guilty of murder but manslaughter. That's what's known as "moving the goalposts".

No, the origional conviction was found to be wrong. I ask again: Do you feel that all those who have been found guilty of murder (through a miscarriage of justice) and then later aquitted, are still guilty of murder?!

Quote:

Sorry, are we still talking about the same mentally ill homeowner who was in possession of an illegal firearm?

Yes, and your point is?

Quote:

Ramrod #79: As I have already said, it was a dark night and there were unknown numbers of burglars threatening him harm. Ramrod #79: I'm glad you feel able to make split second decisions in the dark, in the middle of nowhere with multiple intruders on the premises. You have a cooler head than many of us. Mark W #92: so why would someone be tip toeing around my livingroom in the dead of night with a balaklava and torch? yet i should still be polite and civil until his intent is proved? how about "oh, good morning old boy, could i help you?" Ramrod #94: (Quoted) what if it was *you* on someone else's property who gets the kicking? "Oh well, it was my fault for looking suspicious"? You: Thats right, I shouldn't have been trespassing/breaking and entering in the first place, at night, with an accomplice, making threats to the homeowner. Scastle #98: I have been in a situation where a loved one was attacked (while I wasn't around) and when the attacker was pointed out to me, I chased him down the street, although I never caught him, and don't know what I would have done if I did. Mark W #106: you are gonna creep up behind him and sock him one before he sees you then call the police The "Prosecution" rests its case!!

How, why?:confused: The above seem reasonable to me, what are you, a burglar?:confused:

Reading that just made my jaw drop.

He's Mentally Ill, As you put it, Because 2 men came into his House in the middle of the night intent on damage/stealing stuff. As far as he knew, they could of been carrying guns/knives any sort of weapon. He had to protect himself, or he would of been the dead one now, and the thugs would of got away scot free. They got what they deserved.. if it was me it wouldnt of just been one shot, and there wouldnt be a guy sueing for a shot leg either, He'd of joined his mate.

true, the reason that he was paranoid was because of the many times he'd been burgled.:( ...and not got much help from the police.
Both of them were career criminals, the elder with many convictions for assault. As I see it, Martin did the public a favour.
Feardon soon re-offended (selling heroin outside a police station!), Bark, the driver was done for burglary, actual bodily harm and making threats to kill and Barras senior has since been done for robbery!

from yesterdays Guardian newspaper:


But what about the burglars? Why do they burgle? Why don't they steal cars, or commit credit-card fraud instead? Probably because they enjoy burgling. My friend Steve spent some time working with criminals, and was fascinated most by the repeat burglars. One used to stack up the household goods by the front door, prior to making his escape. Then, at the last moment, he would pause and decide whether or not to take it all. He said that he enjoyed the thought of a couple coming home to discover that their home had been entered, but that their valuables had not been stolen - and then wondering what kind of man had shown them this strange mercy. It was about power.

Another young burglar would only steal from houses where he knew women with young children lived. Once he broke into a house just before Christmas and sat under the tree opening the family presents. In other words, just as the nervous homeowner imagines the burglar, the burglar imagines the homeowner. It may be unconscious, but the burglar enjoys the power of violation.



From The Spectator:


The law, in other words, leaves a citizen wanting to defend his life and property on a knife-edge. Pull the trigger while your dagger-wielding assailant is facing you at five yards and the law congratulates you; pull it at ten yards when your assailant has turned slightly away and you face a lifetime behind bars.



From The Eastern Daily Press:


Fearons father Joseph says he loves his son. But the 65-year-old retired nurse still sympathises with the man who pulled the trigger. I feel sorry for the farmer, he said. He was protecting his own property. It was his house, his home and they should never have been there. People have to be able to protect their own homes from burglary. People work hard for what they have got and it must be soul destroying to have it snatched away.


....you will note that the last extract quotes Feardons own father!