Whaley Bridge shooting

[hilts]

Where do you draw the line? Would you advocate shoplifters being shot in the face at point blank range?

How about fare dodgers on the tram?

No because neither are someone's remote home

 

[hilts]

Impossible to know without medical reports.

If I was in the jury

 

[Alan Harper's Tash]

No because neither are someone's remote home

So if someone nicked a Yodel parcel out of your bin, you’d be cool with killing them?

 

[Alan Harper's Tash]

If I was in the jury

Fair enough. 10/2 would be enough.

 

[fulabeer]

So if someone nicked a Yodel parcel out of your bin, you’d be cool with killing them?

I would shoot them in the face just for touching my bin!

 

[hilts]

The law can be a blunt instrument but where do you draw the line? Say in your case you are allowed to shoot someone breaking into your house, so you shoot me put I was only attempting to deliver a parcel but you thought I was breaking into your house so you have the right to kill me.

It's a problem that the hang em high brigade can never get their heads around, humans are prone to lynch mob mentality we have laws to stop that happening, does it always work? No, is it always fair? No but it's been developed over hundreds of years to ensure that society is relatively stable.

I will say this though we are living with the consequences of years of austerity in this country, police forces have been cut, as well as everything else and society is starting to break down in the most alarming way I have known

I would imagine the farmer has had plenty of parcels delivered, they tend to knock and holding a parcel is another giveaway.

I don't know all the details but I doubt this chap is a serial parcel delivery man killer.

 

[GortonBlue62]

So if someone nicked a Yodel parcel out of your bin, you’d be cool with killing them?

Keep it real mate.

In pursuit of the moral high ground your level of sanctimony has just gone off the scale.

 

[Alan Harper's Tash]

Keep it real mate.

In pursuit of the moral high ground your level of sanctimony has just gone off the scale.

It’s not sanctimony. I’m trying to figure out where peoples’ lines are for shooting someone in the face.

 

[hilts]

Fair enough. 10/2 would be enough.

It must have happened at some point, jury get together decide he is guilty of the offence but think fuck that due to the circumstances. At the end of the day as a juror you can give any verdict you want. I think sometimes it's why they go for the easier manslaughter charge.

Couple of years in an open prison seems about right. He can probably never live in his farm again.

* this is all based on the events put in the thread.

 

[Semper aggressus]

The laws are crazy.

Oh no go on Mr Burglar, you fill your boots ransacking my house. Do you want a brew? I'll go and start loading the stuff into my car for you. Not a problem.

You should be allowed to beat the living shit out of some skank breaking in AND not be found guilty.

This fuckin country.

Agreed. You should have the right to protect yourself, your family and within reason your property.

I completely understand not shooting someone leaving or in the back, but if you warn them, and they come at you, armed or not, what else can you do? Absolutely you have to defend yourself, and if you’re a farmer with a gun it must be easy to get so scared you pull the trigger.

Imagine being faced with two or three handy-ish lads in hoodies wanting to ransack your house. I for one am certainly not going to offer them a brew. You fight with whatever you have, how do you know they won’t stab you or rape your missus? Any fucker breaking in, after you warning them, should expect a baseball bat across the temple or kitchen knife in the stomach at the very least.