Adam Buckland wrote: > Peter, > > Brits have the right to self-defence, he would also not have been > charged unless he used excessive force... what they don't have is the > legal right to have guns.. otherwise you'd end up with the rioters with > guns, shop owners with guns and police with guns... It would achieve > nothing except leave many more people dead. People can do enough damage > with for example baseball bats... guns would only make the situation > worse... living in both countries I can see that the UK does not need > the gun problems of the US.
Hi Adam, What are the authorities going to do with the crook, now that they have his picture dead to rights? > What England needs is castle doctrine, concealed carry and > stand-your-ground laws. > > http://www.metro.co.uk/news/871848-london-riots-thugs-force-people-to-st > rip-naked-to-steal-clothes > > What will it take to make the Brits reclaim their God-given right to > self defense? > > As it is, if the guy had thrown a punch or two to save his pants *he* > would have been charged! If the looter were "black" it would be a "hate > crime" thrown into the bargain? > > Unless they were all drunk, of course. Then it would be just sleep it > off and let go the next day. -- Regards, Pete http://pete-theisen.com/ http://elect-pete-theisen.com/ _______________________________________________ Post Messages to: [email protected] Subscription Maintenance: http://leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profox OT-free version of this list: http://leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profoxtech Searchable Archive: http://leafe.com/archives/search/profox This message: http://leafe.com/archives/byMID/profox/[email protected] ** All postings, unless explicitly stated otherwise, are the opinions of the author, and do not constitute legal or medical advice. This statement is added to the messages for those lawyers who are too stupid to see the obvious.
