• Dad Cuts Ear Off Intruder With Katana, Doesn't face Jail Time
    141 replies, posted
[QUOTE=TheOnlyHunter;20222624]Have you seen how police officers are trained to behave? If a guy is shouting, running around, they approach him calmly. If he brings out a knife, they take out their gun, and warn him that they will shoot him if he does not stay where he is. [b]If he charges them, they shoot him in a non-fatal area (arm, leg, etc.) and call for assistance.[/b][/QUOTE] Wrong. They make use of a taser; a firearm is for when [i]lethal[/i] force is necessary. This being a life or death situation such as when the assailant is very close with a bladed weapon or using a firearm himself.
What a fucking BAMF
[QUOTE=Mr_Sun;20229037]god damn the UK use really weird words for these court sentences and things. all i know is nobody is in jail and the father is a hero good for him id do the same thing but cut off their dick instead[/QUOTE] Your avatar makes this post seem hilarious. [editline]06:04PM[/editline] [QUOTE=Loen;20232486]Wrong. They make use of a taser; a firearm is for when [i]lethal[/i] force is necessary. This being a life or death situation such as when the assailant is very close with a bladed weapon or using a firearm himself.[/QUOTE] Only the Staff Sergeants carry tasers. [editline]06:04PM[/editline] BTW, I'[m reffering to the CANADIAN police.
[QUOTE=TheOnlyHunter;20232751]Your avatar makes this post seem hilarious. [editline]06:04PM[/editline] Only the Staff Sergeants carry tasers. [editline]06:04PM[/editline] BTW, I'[m reffering to the CANADIAN police.[/QUOTE] I'm referring to the U.S. police; every officer is issued a taser. I find it abit odd that it's otherwise there.
[QUOTE=IronPhoenix;20229007]I've been in a few, and only when it's needed. If you mean to say have i ever been hit, then no, you are right there. I know a few useful moves to take someone down quickly, and can incapacitate them if needs be. You may have done more, but this man didn't. He followed the law, like anyone should. If you go overboard, you should face the consequences. Muggers can become murderers through mistakes after all.[/QUOTE] You're a moron to be giving advice about fighting when you've never had to fight for your life. I've had a knife pulled on me in a fight before, I've been slashed before, I've had a black gangbanger threaten to pull his gun on me. I've been in fights to the "death"(No one died, but when they pull a knife out, that's what they call it), there isn't just an easy way to "incapacitate" someone. You do what it takes to survive. You can knock em down, you can hurt them, but if they criminals, gang members, anything that isn't a law abiding citizen, they aren't going to stop at that. You better know that if you're in a fight with them, you've got to go as far as they will. The sheer fact that this man defended himself, and faced 8 fucking years is not right. He defended himself. If someone is attacked, they have every right to defend themselves. The muggers got slaps on their wrists despite the fact they deserved much, much more. The law doesn't account for the nature of people to defend themselves anymore, everyone has the right to defend themselves. Go get in a real fight with a real person who has the intent to kill you or really fuck you up, and you'll see how useless your fighting philosophy is.
In my honest opinion, the dad should have been sent to jail; he caused bodily harm!
So wait wait wait. He was going to get 8 years but he successfully pleaded self defence. FYI for everyone who’s kicking up a shit storm about this, this is how the courts system in England works. The CPS would have had clear evidence that the father had attacked this guy and so therefore would be under an obligation to seek a prosecution, knowing that he is likely to plead self-defence and win. This seems to me to be a show case that our legal system works, abate slightly inefficiently.
Haha, that's great.
[QUOTE=Trotsky;20218944]oh no, that guy is stealing my stereo he must want to kill me, obviously.[/QUOTE] Yeah, except that didn't happen. Good job providing an irrelevant example. Did you even read the article? These two men threatened him and his family. They had weapons as well. He had every right to defend himself and his family. [editline]05:43PM[/editline] [QUOTE=HumanAbyss;20234741]You're a moron to be giving advice about fighting when you've never had to fight for your life. I've had a knife pulled on me in a fight before, I've been slashed before, I've had a black gangbanger threaten to pull his gun on me. I've been in fights to the "death"(No one died, but when they pull a knife out, that's what they call it), there isn't just an easy way to "incapacitate" someone. You do what it takes to survive. You can knock em down, you can hurt them, but if they criminals, gang members, anything that isn't a law abiding citizen, they aren't going to stop at that. You better know that if you're in a fight with them, you've got to go as far as they will. [/QUOTE] Tough guy alert.
[QUOTE=HumanAbyss;20234741]You're a moron to be giving advice about fighting when you've never had to fight for your life. I've had a knife pulled on me in a fight before, I've been slashed before, I've had a black gangbanger threaten to pull his gun on me. I've been in fights to the "death"(No one died, but when they pull a knife out, that's what they call it), there isn't just an easy way to "incapacitate" someone. You do what it takes to survive. You can knock em down, you can hurt them, but if they criminals, gang members, anything that isn't a law abiding citizen, they aren't going to stop at that. You better know that if you're in a fight with them, you've got to go as far as they will. The sheer fact that this man defended himself, and faced 8 fucking years is not right. He defended himself. If someone is attacked, they have every right to defend themselves. The muggers got slaps on their wrists despite the fact they deserved much, much more. The law doesn't account for the nature of people to defend themselves anymore, everyone has the right to defend themselves. Go get in a real fight with a real person who has the intent to kill you or really fuck you up, and you'll see how useless your fighting philosophy is.[/QUOTE] I live in London. And in London you are more likely to be injured from falling down stairs than being knifed. I'm also guessing you live in America (you mentioned guns), in which our laws differ from yours because they need to be. The law is there to protect everyone, otherwise devious people can bump people off then say they acted in self defense. Self defense laws mean that while you can walk from killing someone, you must prove that you did not go equipped. This means that in a struggle, you could stab someone with glass you found on the floor, but not a knife from your pocket. Now i don't live in a hard area, but as i said, i have been in violent situations. Thing is though, i am in support of incidents like this, yet the amount of abuse i am getting from saying that i support reasonable force is immense. I believe that everyone has a right to defend their home, but not to kill anyone. Incapacitation, not decapitation. Oh and reasonable force does mean that if the person you are facing is trying to kill you, then you can take him down as hard as in needed. If you need to severely hinder his ability to breathe without a machine doing it then fine, but you better have a damn good reason.
[QUOTE=JDK721;20238449] [editline]05:43PM[/editline] Tough guy alert.[/QUOTE] You can believe what you want, I can't honestly say I give a shit. I lived in Lower East Side vancouver for 3 years, if you've ever been there you'd know it's all drug addicts, gangs, homeless people, and other unsavory shit. You can get off your high horse. [editline]06:04PM[/editline] [QUOTE=IronPhoenix;20240050]I live in London. And in London you are more likely to be injured from falling down stairs than being knifed. I'm also guessing you live in America (you mentioned guns), in which our laws differ from yours because they need to be. The law is there to protect everyone, otherwise devious people can bump people off then say they acted in self defense. Self defense laws mean that while you can walk from killing someone, you must prove that you did not go equipped. This means that in a struggle, you could stab someone with glass you found on the floor, but not a knife from your pocket. Now i don't live in a hard area, but as i said, i have been in violent situations. Thing is though, i am in support of incidents like this, yet the amount of abuse i am getting from saying that i support reasonable force is immense. I believe that everyone has a right to defend their home, but not to kill anyone. Incapacitation, not decapitation. Oh and reasonable force does mean that if the person you are facing is trying to kill you, then you can take him down as hard as in needed. If you need to severely hinder his ability to breathe without a machine doing it then fine, but you better have a damn good reason.[/QUOTE] ...See, the point you're not getting is that it's not just "Oh, I think i'll stop him for just a little while, I'll just injure his breathing enough to stop this attack. It doesn't work like that. And it never could. If someone threatens your life, you do what it takes to survive, that's the rule. I'm all in favor of reasonable response, but if you think a reasonable response to deadly force is to say "Oh, i'm just going to kinda hurt this guy cause that'll be good enough" then you've never been in a real fight. My point isn't that people should kill those that threaten them, but that saying it's as easy as limiting yourself when you're in the heat of moment is an idiotic ideal. It isn't that easy. JDK can call me a "tough guy" or whatever, I don't care. I'm not, but the point is, if you've been in those situations, if you plan to survive, you fight your hardest, this doesn't give a lot of room for stopping yourself, thus were the law falls short. If you're defending yourself from deadly force, injury on either side is expected, and the defendant should NOT be persecuted for such action.
Michael Smith is my name....
[QUOTE=HumanAbyss;20241740]You can believe what you want, I can't honestly say I give a shit. I lived in Lower East Side vancouver for 3 years, if you've ever been there you'd know it's all drug addicts, gangs, homeless people, and other unsavory shit. You can get off your high horse. [editline]06:04PM[/editline] ...See, the point you're not getting is that it's not just "Oh, I think i'll stop him for just a little while, I'll just injure his breathing enough to stop this attack. It doesn't work like that. And it never could. If someone threatens your life, you do what it takes to survive, that's the rule. I'm all in favor of reasonable response, but if you think a reasonable response to deadly force is to say "Oh, i'm just going to kinda hurt this guy cause that'll be good enough" then you've never been in a real fight. My point isn't that people should kill those that threaten them, but that saying it's as easy as limiting yourself when you're in the heat of moment is an idiotic ideal. It isn't that easy. JDK can call me a "tough guy" or whatever, I don't care. I'm not, but the point is, if you've been in those situations, if you plan to survive, you fight your hardest, this doesn't give a lot of room for stopping yourself, thus were the law falls short. If you're defending yourself from deadly force, injury on either side is expected, and the defendant should NOT be persecuted for such action.[/QUOTE] The law doesn't fall short. It protects both parties by saying that the action taken should be reasonable. It's to stop cowardly muggers ending up breathing through a tube because they ran away from a guy who, when he caught up with them, beat them repeatedly over the head with a cricket bat. Would you not say that in that situation, that is over the top?
[QUOTE=IronPhoenix;20247406]The law doesn't fall short. It protects both parties by saying that the action taken should be reasonable. It's to stop cowardly muggers ending up breathing through a tube because they ran away from a guy who, when he caught up with them, beat them repeatedly over the head with a cricket bat. Would you not say that in that situation, that is over the top?[/QUOTE] Sure, it's over the top when you put it that way. How do you know they didn't pull a knife, or a gun on him? And if they did, and instead of running away had tried to kill him, but he managed to do the same thing, would you still say he acted overly? Sure, I agree beating a fleeing mugger half to death is wrong, but there's a clear distinction between beating a man who's running from you to death, to defending yourself from deadly force with appropriate force.
But thats all irrelevent cause he did act with appropriate force and it was ruled to be self defence. :bravo:
[QUOTE=HumanAbyss;20247609]Sure, it's over the top when you put it that way. How do you know they didn't pull a knife, or a gun on him? And if they did, and instead of running away had tried to kill him, but he managed to do the same thing, would you still say he acted overly? Sure, I agree beating a fleeing mugger half to death is wrong, but there's a clear distinction between beating a man who's running from you to death, to defending yourself from deadly force with appropriate force.[/QUOTE] Exactly what i've been trying to say. If you need to put someone down for good to stop them from killing you or your family, that is allowed in the whole reasonable force thing. You would have to prove that you killed him to stop him killing you though. There was an incident recently where a man beat an unconscious intruder over the head with a cricket bat and gave him brain damage, would that count as reasonable?
[QUOTE=IronPhoenix;20247637]Exactly what i've been trying to say. If you need to put someone down for good to stop them from killing you or your family, that is allowed in the whole reasonable force thing. You would have to prove that you killed him to stop him killing you though. There was an incident recently where a man beat an unconscious intruder over the head with a cricket bat and gave him brain damage, would that count as reasonable?[/QUOTE] You didn't outline how, or why he beat that man, so I can't tell you. Was the man holding him at gun point? Was the man wielding a weapon considered to be a weapon of deadly, or lethal force? What was his intent? It should be noted, that whether you pull a weapon for a robbery, or for something else, like straight up assault, the weapon is still treated as a weapon for the sake of physical harm, IE, you brought out a gun, or a knife with the intention to kill or cause serious injury. At that point, any force is correct, if that is why the force is being applied.
[QUOTE=HumanAbyss;20247865]You didn't outline how, or why he beat that man, so I can't tell you. Was the man holding him at gun point? Was the man wielding a weapon considered to be a weapon of deadly, or lethal force? What was his intent? It should be noted, that whether you pull a weapon for a robbery, or for something else, like straight up assault, the weapon is still treated as a weapon for the sake of physical harm, IE, you brought out a gun, or a knife with the intention to kill or cause serious injury. At that point, any force is correct, if that is why the force is being applied.[/QUOTE] It’s ultimately up to the jury to decide based upon the evidence if the guy used reasonable force or not. It’s not the judiciary’s or the executive’s place to decide that, therefore it is better for it not to be properly defined.
[QUOTE=A.C.I.D;20247925]It’s ultimately up to the jury to decide based upon the evidence if the guy used reasonable force or not. It’s not the judiciary’s or the executive’s place to decide that, therefore it is better for it not to be properly defined.[/QUOTE] My very point is that it has to be defined on a case by case basis. But, defense lawyers are slippery bastards and make that impossible sometimes.(I would know, my dad was one for many years before I was born. He would agree they're slippery and don't do everything by the book or any moral code).
Hear, hear!
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.