Hehe. Poe much?Archon said:This is shocking.
I, for one, think we need to begin to look at sword control. If this college student didn't have access to a dangerous bladed weapon, a man would not have died yesterday. And what if the intruder had a sword? Then there conflict would have escalated into a swordfight! Who knows who might have gotten hurt - including innocents.
And let's not the forget the children. Sword violence is a childhood pandemic: Just yesterday I saw two kids in my neighborhood training for the sort of gruesome violence that occurred on this college campus. Entire industries are devoted to creating swords and sword simulators for children. Meanwhile, violent "fighting" games teach our children that these sorts of tools, which were designed for WARRIORS, are for fun.
Meanwhile, in the United Kingdom, street gangs are already using swords to engage in acts of terror, assault, and robbery. We don't want that to happen in America.
It's important that we act now, before another child dies to a sword. That's why I hope you'll support HR-42.666.69, the Sword And Blade Elimination/Reduction (SABER) Act. It begins by comprehensively banning all "assault swords" with blades that are obviously based on military designs, and institutes instant background checks on any citizen who attempts to purchase a sword or blade.
Actually police now say your not allowed to defend yourself at all. Several lawsuits have been filed and won against the person who defended themselves.Booze Zombie said:There's a thing called appropriate force, here in Britain.
I could use, say, a shovel on someone, but they'd have to be wielding a melee weapon themself or posing a direct threat to my life otherwise it'd be a bit... well, the police would get a bit angry about me using too much force.
On that note, why didn't this kid have a baseball bat, tire iron or taser?
I totally agree that this is probably one of the coolest stories ive ever heard. This kid shouldnt get charged for anythingIrridium said:That is awsome.
Its actually a lot more complicated than that. Under Common law there are certain conditions that need to be met, one of them is that the mortal strike was made before he was in a position of no danger, the kid wounded the guy during the assault so hes good there. If lets say he broke his knee caps then went to finish him that wouldn't be self defense. The guy initiated the attack, etc... The whole actual definition is fairly complicated and those other cases your talking about probably had other situations that made it fall out of self defense.Lucifus said:Actually police now say your not allowed to defend yourself at all. Several lawsuits have been filed and won against the person who defended themselves.Booze Zombie said:There's a thing called appropriate force, here in Britain.
I could use, say, a shovel on someone, but they'd have to be wielding a melee weapon themself or posing a direct threat to my life otherwise it'd be a bit... well, the police would get a bit angry about me using too much force.
On that note, why didn't this kid have a baseball bat, tire iron or taser?
People break into the house and your not allowed to lay a finger on them.
Wow. I mean damn what is the point of that?shial said:Its actually a lot more complicated than that. Under Common law there are certain conditions that need to be met, one of them is that the mortal strike was made before he was in a position of no danger, the kid wounded the guy during the assault so hes good there. If lets say he broke his knee caps then went to finish him that wouldn't be self defense. The guy initiated the attack, etc... The whole actual definition is fairly complicated and those other cases your talking about probably had other situations that made it fall out of self defense.Lucifus said:Actually police now say your not allowed to defend yourself at all. Several lawsuits have been filed and won against the person who defended themselves.Booze Zombie said:There's a thing called appropriate force, here in Britain.
I could use, say, a shovel on someone, but they'd have to be wielding a melee weapon themself or posing a direct threat to my life otherwise it'd be a bit... well, the police would get a bit angry about me using too much force.
On that note, why didn't this kid have a baseball bat, tire iron or taser?
People break into the house and your not allowed to lay a finger on them.
I've also heard a police officer say that if something happens its better to kill them. They can't contradict your story then.
Clearly untrue. We've got the media shovelling enough sensationalist stories down our throats already, we don't need anymore.Lucifus said:Actually police now say your not allowed to defend yourself at all. Several lawsuits have been filed and won against the person who defended themselves.
People break into the house and your not allowed to lay a finger on them.
Why would you feel like a large cat for being rational and efficient?Sh0ckFyre said:I myself would rather use a hand gun, or compact SMG. I now feel like a massive pussy.