Whaley Bridge shooting

paulchapo said:
I doubt he took the decision lightly. Aside from any possible mental torment he may suffer for taking someone's life, there are the legal repercussions to face, not to mention possible revenge attacks from the scrotes mates and family.
Click to expand...
Absolutely and we’ve seen in this thread that there are differing viewpoints.

If he’s told the police that he’ll shoot them if they come back and he’s done so, then that’s different to fearing for your life at 4am etc.

Each case is different and proportional force will always be at the centre of it.

What it can never be is if you find someone in your house, you’re free to kill them without consequence. Nuance and context are important.
 
Alan Harper's Tash said:
Surely, in this scenario, the shooter fuckwit needs to be behind bars before he commits more fuckwittery…

Dead fuckwit won’t bother society again, barring we miss out on some sick drops in their DJ sets.
Click to expand...

How many non fuckwits has this guy shot in his life to make you believe he shoots non fuckwits?
 
Alan Harper's Tash said:
Dunno, but he was described as a fuckwit in the scenario that was painted, so he must have done something to have become a fuckwit, no?
Click to expand...

Let's take the legal scenario out of it because it will sort itself out and we have no control over it plus its boring because there is not really any need to even discuss it.

You're the sole decision maker in what happens to this chap. What do you do?
 
hilts said:
Let's take the legal scenario out of it because it will sort itself out and we have no control over it plus its boring because there is not really any need to even discuss it.

You're the sole decision maker in what happens to this chap. What do you do?
Click to expand...
The farmer? Listen to the evidence and make a decision based on that, which is all I’ve done since reading the anecdotal account.

If he’s told the police he’s going to shoot them if the return, then that shows premeditation.

If they’ve burgled him 17 times, then that has to be factored into the verdict and diminished responsibility will need to be considered.

The fact they’ve visited 16 previous times and he hasn’t been killed suggests that the burglars’ MO doesn’t include violence.

Based on this evidence and this alone, it seems to be manslaughter on grounds of diminished responsibility or murder.



For our mutual Mexican acquaintance, this doesn’t mean that you can‘t defend your property, it just means it has to be a proportionate response to what is happening, just like the law states.
 
Alan Harper's Tash said:
The farmer? Listen to the evidence and make a decision based on that, which is all I’ve done since reading the anecdotal account.

If he’s told the police he’s going to shoot them if the return, then that shows premeditation.

If they’ve burgled him 17 times, then that has to be factored into the verdict and diminished responsibility will need to be considered.

The fact they’ve visited 16 previous times and he hasn’t been killed suggests that the burglars’ MO doesn’t include violence.

Based on this evidence and this alone, it seems to be manslaughter on grounds of diminished responsibility or murder.



For our mutual Mexican acquaintance, this doesn’t mean that you can‘t defend your property, it just means it has to be a proportionate response to what is happening, just like the law states.
Click to expand...

Go on don't be shy:-) based on the little we know what are you doing ?
 
3 lads coming through the front door of your house at night isn't limited information is it? The mental gymnastics performed by these contrary delusionists is phenomenal.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Unread Posts

Don't have an account? Register now and see fewer ads!

SIGN UP
Back
Top
✖
  AdBlock Detected
Bluemoon relies on advertising to pay our hosting fees. Please support the site by disabling your ad blocking software to help keep the forum sustainable. Thanks.