Go Back   Computer Forums > Welcome To Computer Forums .org > Social Lounge | Off Topic
Join Computer forums Today

Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
Old 04-24-2006, 12:01 PM   #21
Site Team
root's Avatar
Join Date: Mar 2004
Posts: 7,872
Default Re: Court

with regards Tony Martin...
sadly two wrongs don't make a right...

A guy illegally buying firearms, and using them to shoot people in the back is a tragic thing. you ever wonder why people are disallowed from owning guns, there are reasons, such as they are deemed a danger to the community, or they may shoot a guy in the back etc...

In short, I don't think there is ever a real reason to go out, illegally buy guns, with the intent of killing people, store them illegally, and use them to murder people.

face it, tony martin, (far from being the common hero that the Sun billed him to be)

was in fact nothing more than a murderer.
no better than a terrorist who illegally buys fireams -funding whatever other illegal activities.
He was mentally unsound,-probably why he was disallowed guns in the first place.

Tony martin was not a great man.

As for the person suing about falling through the roof, (that's actually perfectly sound... -leagally speaking)
how many people played football when they were younger and kicked a ball into someones garden? you climbed over the wall to get it right?

well what if there were spikes on the wall?

because there is not a malicious intent everytime someone does something wrong,
therefore, you can't have an attack dog loose in your yard without having a sign to say so, (what if the mail man is attacked), you can't have spikes on your wall without a sign to say so, (what if someone cuts thenselves whilst trying to retrieve something that is theirs), you can't have a weak roof without signs to say so, (what if a firefighter was trying to rescue you and fell through your roof onto a knife.
and you can't keep guns with the specific intent of shooting people, (at all).

there are no laws in britain that allow leathal defense.

Yes, I agree that the ambulance chasers should be stopped, all this no-win-no-fee crap, and all the people that trip on paving slabs should just open their eyes. but when someone breaks the law, and another person suffers because of that, (even if they are attempting to break the law themselves), both law breaking parties have to be brought to justice, you can't hold back the law from one person whilst attempting to throw it full force at another.

I didn’t fight my way to the top of the food chain to be a vegetarian…
Im sick of people saying 'dont waste paper'. If trees wanted to live, they'd all carry guns.
"The inherent vice of capitalism is the unequal sharing of blessings; The inherent vice of socialism is the equal sharing of miseries."
root is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-24-2006, 12:13 PM   #22
Fully Optimized
Nik00117's Avatar
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 4,025
Send a message via AIM to Nik00117 Send a message via MSN to Nik00117 Send a message via Yahoo to Nik00117
Default Re: Court

"well your honor I was climbing o her roof because I was going go though it to break into her house, and her roof was unsound and I fell though and there was a sharp object below the point where I feel and I got stabed in the process of attempting to break in"

Yes I can fully understand how its her fault. Fact of the amtter it wasn'ta firefighter, it was a robber. WHO SHOULDN"T OF BEEN ONF THE ROOF IN THE FIRST FREAKING PLACE! IDK about the UK, but In Germany, Guam, United States, Japan and portgual climbing on top of other poeples roofs its not a commonly practiced acivity normally they tell the owner and the owner knowing his roof will know the best action to take.

And root you should be a lawyer. I'd love to lawyer aganist me. And frankly you better well damn believe if a man breaks into my home i'm not going wait for some cop with a night stick, and flashnight for 40 mins well he arrives at my house! In america if you called in a break in its classified as a Red Emeregecy implying all avaible units in the area Lights Blazing, speeding type deal. In Germany they don't have that. Reports of shootings are always followed up IN MINUTES NOT HOURS. In Germany my grandmas house was broken into this was quite a while ago about 15 years or so she called the cops, it took them 50 MINUTES TO GET THERE. Luckily only thing they took was a TV and some money.

She slapped the cops for being so SLOW. She was standing on the street because the robbers had left. Franky from what i've heard of the UK and German ploice force is that they are slow therefor leathal force in my mind is perfectly resonable if someone breaks into a house, you break into my house you will either get injured to the point where you can't run out of the house, or die or vice vesa either way there will be injuries involved and no judge will want have me in his court room if I get sued for some bullshit like that.

IDK What thats nation laws are i've been raised like this, your home is your sancoitry NO ONE ENTERS IT AND DOES DAMAGE TO IT, YOU YOUR FAIMLY OR LOVED ONES and gets out without a fight. Granted if the robber has a gun to my head or a knife to my thoart before I can fight back he may have a adv, but chances are i'd have the gun loaded and pointing at his head.

Frankly handguns are reviality pointless, and useless. Rifle is just as good if not better, I believe everyone should be allowed to own a rifle, WHY? Well most shootings involve a hangun. Most swedish poeple OWN A GUN there modern rate isn't that high because well their rifles not handguns.

And once again, I don't play if someone wehre to break into m house, its survival of the fittest/smartest/fastest ETC!

I'd hate a guy to break into my buddies house hes active in the Gym very buff, he is ex speacil forces, he has several black blets in marterial arts. I asked him once what if someone broke into his house (he is affair of the british law of leathal force) he'd say i'd be given a long prison term for what i'd do to them. This guy is like my online personnal trainer, i'd hate to fight him, not only is he buff, even if he wasn't he could still kick a lot of arse. Leathal force is perfectly alright in my reason if someoen breaks into your hosue its CALLED DEFENDING YOUR SELF AND PROPERTY, we've beend oing it for thousands of years.

Main Rig: I7 920 CPU, 6 Gigs ram 5870 GPU
M17X Laptop 2.8 Ghz Dual Core, 4870 Radeon
Nik00117 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-24-2006, 04:49 PM   #23
Site Team
root's Avatar
Join Date: Mar 2004
Posts: 7,872
Default Re: Court

in deed, "An English mans home is his castle"...

I agree with all of that (in principal), but even so there are plenty of reasons that people may be on someones property, or even in their house with a fairly good reason...

As I said, yes, it was a robber, but what if it was a firefighter, what if was a child trying to retrieve a ball, (e.g. tennis ball etc that wouldn't roll off a roof).

what if the people Tony ,Martin shot wern't burgallars, what if they were people who were stranded, Maybe they knocked on his door and got no answer, (because he was busy arming himself ready to shoot them... what if, they were people who'd broken in simply to 'borrow' his phone and he shot them in the back without so much as a word or investigation into what they were doing...

OK, in both the questions there, when they are mentioned here it's been in the what if it's a burgallar, but what if it's not?
There are examples (just as I said above) when a desperate person breaks into a house simply to use the phone because they are stranded or in trouble, who have indeed been shot.
there have been cases where people have fallen through a roof when they are there either semi legitimatly, (e.g. retrieving a ball), or completly legitimatly, such as installing a service like sky, or even (as I said) trying to rescue the home owner!!

I mean if there was a sign saying that the roof was weak then the burgellar probably wouldn't have been there, let alone in the kitchen impalled on a knife!!

So far as self defense goes, if you are trained in a martial art, and kill someone with that skill, then it's beyond reasonable force, if you are trained to beat the crap out of people, then it's alike shooting an unarmed person

Oh... and just so you know.. the only reason that the coffee cups from Mcdonalds say hot, is simply because of a courtcase where someone spilled coffee on themselves and sued because they wern't warned it was hot!!

There are also more case that are just as stupid as that...
In the Co-op (a supermarket) where my parents live, a woman was not controlling her children, tripped over them and sucessfully sued the shop.

Same store, someone was tasting a grape, (which is actually stealing anyway), dropped one slipped on it, and again sucesfully sued the store.

The first question is are the courts crazy,
Yes, I reckon they are, certainly far too weighted in favour of the criminals, and that goes (IMO) all through the system, including the sentances given...

but if the second question is should anyone be able to do anything on their property... then no I don't think so...
shoul people be allowed to arm themselves indescriminantly?
No i don't think so either.
In britain, if you have a firearm it has to be kept under lock and key, not under your pillow!!!
I didn’t fight my way to the top of the food chain to be a vegetarian…
Im sick of people saying 'dont waste paper'. If trees wanted to live, they'd all carry guns.
"The inherent vice of capitalism is the unequal sharing of blessings; The inherent vice of socialism is the equal sharing of miseries."
root is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-24-2006, 05:21 PM   #24
Fully Optimized
-Paul-'s Avatar
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 2,242
Send a message via AIM to -Paul- Send a message via MSN to -Paul-
Default Re: Court

Originally Posted by Nik00117
I was talking to a person comparing American Courts to German Court and we came to this

America goes by the book far too much. In a german court if you would sue idk starbucks for making coffe without a warning that its hot and spiled it on yourself guess what the Judge will look at you and go, GET OUT, and if you agrue back he'll have you arrested. In america the judge will hear your stupidty out because hes required to by law.

If Honda were to be sued by a faimly because a member of that faimly died due to her not being able to undo her seatbelt well shes drowning because she was to drunk to keep her car on the road the Judge again would say. Thats her fault not hondas, get out!

I've told people that neve rbeen to the states about some lawsuits and stuff and they look at me like i'm crazy. They'll like WTF? Wait hang on, and they won? Then they say that'd never happen here, because the judge would never even hear it.

I think the American court system needs to use a system of thinking called logical and toss out crazy lawsuits at the start of the trail and ban that suit from being filed. Because in America, getting your case to court is easy, you don't need proof or anything. Even if you loose the winner still has to pay legal fees and everythign else which still hurts the winner and the looser has to do it as well, but the looser was PREPARED FOR IT. I think lawsuits that where the person injured or hurt or w/e due to his own stupidty should simply be ignored. If a German sued burger king because he ate their food, it wouldn't even touch court, he'd be told "we don't care, we don't wan tot hear it, say one more word and you will be breaking the law" or somthing along those lines basically telling him, your an idiot, you don't deserve this trail.

What do you think about some the frilous law suits?

One more i'd like to bring up, a man died trying to break into a bar because he was playing with the sercuirty systema nd got elerticaled well he on a trip and drunk. The faimly won 75,000 because of his stupidy. The bar owner was forced to pay up because his anti-burglar alarm killed a man well the man was high and trying to break in. Frankly I don't feel sorry for the man that died nor his faimly, his stupidy caused it if he would of thought twice about it he would still be living today getting high and being a burden on society.
i think america sues too much in the first place...for stupid stuff

-Paul- is offline   Reply With Quote

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are Off

All times are GMT -5. The time now is 08:00 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 4
Copyright ©2000 - 2016, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Search Engine Friendly URLs by vBSEO 3.6.0