What would you do about Virginia Tech?

[[Phill]]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Brits,

From a historical perspective, I find the fact that citizens of the UK are telling us we should have gun control laws very LOL.

Part of the reason that the US has historically been very anti-gun control is because of the actions of your government during colonial times. I'm not laying blame, I just thought it was kind of funny.

[/ QUOTE ]

232 years almost to the day. Brits tried to take Americans guns. Didn't work then. Doubt it will work now.

How many Brits are behind bars for defending themselves with a gun (shotgun) in the face of an armed intruder into their house? Nice law. Punish the good guys.

[/ QUOTE ]

Urgh.

You are referencing the case of the farmer guy (whose name escapes me). He owned an illegal pump action shotgun. He confronted burglars who, as they were leaving, he shot in the back.

They were unarmed.

When they got outside his property he followed and gunned one down killing him, and seriously injuring another.

He should have had his murder conviction upheld. Newspaper coverage was biased in his favour and he got away with murder when his sentence was reduced to manslaughter (or something lesser like that).

It is pure ignorance to say that the law is stacked against the homeowner in the case of house defense. The same is true with a mugging. The only cases where someone has been convicted has been cases where gross excess of force was used (like gunning down a kid in the back as he runs away) or where one guy captured said burglar and tortured him.

If someone invades your home you are able to use force in your defense provided it is reasonable given the situation - if the burglar is holding a weapon then a fatal blow from a cricket bat or 7 iron is fine. If you are a woman and there is a burglar there is virtually no limit to what you can do (assuming you arent trained for such a situation, of which a self defense course does not count as training).

There was a few hyperthetical test cases ran through the system under as close to real circumstances as possible, including a guy alone killing a burglar who had a weapon and a case where he killed an unarmed burglar who took an aggressive stance when he made his presense known. In the case of a woman alone she killed the burglar whilst he had his back to her and made no aggressive motives known. All cases were examined by lawyers, barristers and judges and in all the cases but one the crown wouldnt have even taken steps to press charges, and in the one where it felt there was a case to be heard all the barristers and judges agreed that the case wouldnt result in a conviction.

The UK law is balanced and fair, and to suggest otherwise is gutter press led BS.