87% of people are retards. Official, undisputable, scientific fact.
Tory MP Patrick Mercer's proposal for a 'Tony Martin Law', allowing householders to blast the shit out of unarmed burglars with shotguns, has been rejected by the Home Secretary.
Good.
(For those who support Tony Martin, he is a mentally unstable man, not allowed to own firearms, with an illegal and unlicenced pump-action shotgun, who shot a pair of unarmed burglars, from ambush, as they tried to flee. For a sane person, that is not home defence, it is murder. He had defended his home, having made them run away, and then decided to go the extra mile and rip another human being to shreds with a spray of red hot lead. And let's not forget the array of booby traps set up across his property, that the police had to disarm before they could go near the place. The Daily Mail championed this guy as a hero of the people...)
From the BBC:
Mr Mercer said he was extremely disappointed by the news but said he would continue to try to get his bill passed, especially as several police officers had supported the move.
He pointed to a survey for Virgin Money Insurance which suggested that 87% of people think current law on the issue is weighted in favour of criminals.
"This is public opinion, this is democracy, I'm amazed the home secretary is choosing to ignore this," said Mr Mercer, claiming Labour was treating his bill as a political football.
Let me think, 87% of people think current law is weighted in favour of criminals...
What the fuck does that mean? It means nothing.
The important word is 'thinks'. This is the public we're talking about. Let's take a poll of judges, lawyers and other people who actually know what the current law is and who aren't just piping out of their arse.
For those of you who don't know, the law allows 'reasonable force' to be used. This is the same guideline that covers assaults or killings in self-defence, and so on. It's rare for anyone to kill a burglar, rarer still for them to be charged with murder (and if the decision's taken to charge, that's because, well, they're believed to have murdered the burglar - see, due process in action, and if the decision was wrong, you get a not guilty verdict). You can tell when something's reasonable or unreasonable, but you sure as fuck can't legislate it. That's why you can't give carte blanche to householders.
And 'several' police officers support the change in the law? So what? What the fuck does a bobby know? Remember that the police go to the Crown Prosecution Service when they're deciding if someone should be charged with something. The police weren't good enough, which is why the CPS were set up (plus, separating evidence-gathering and prosecution removed some of the bias from the system).
Tony Martin's murder conviction was quashed on psychiatric grounds. He was suffering from a paranoid schizophrenic disorder and was suffering 'diminished responsibility' at the time he killed Fred Barras.
Lord Woolf, one of the appeal judges: "Martin used a firearm which he knew he was not entitled to have in a manner which was wholly unjustified. There can be no excuse for this, though we treat his responsibility as being reduced." A law-abiding, upstanding citizen, treated unfairly by the state? No, a lunatic with a pump-action shotgun.
Fuck Tony Martin's supporters. They're advocating murder of human beings (or rather, burglars, because in their eyes they're two separate things), not the care and treatment of the mentally ill, nor even greater rights for home owners. They're scum. That's my carefully balanced and cautiously given opinion.
Odd, isn't it, that the ones who scream the most about being law-abiding citizens are the ones who scream about changing the law to make it easier for them to do stuff?
No one remembers that guy, a few years ago, who spoke at a press conference about how he felt his life would never be the same again, after he wrestled a burglar on his lawn, and ended up stabbing him through the heart. He was let off, because he'd done it reasonably, and the law recognised this. Of course, you can't launch a tabloid media frenzy on a 'non-event' like that, can you?