Posted on 07/12/2006 4:05:09 AM PDT by IrishMike
At 2 a.m. on Sunday, 27-year-old Alan Senitt was murdered. Senitt, an aspiring British politician, Jewish activist and Democratic volunteer, was walking home a female companion in the Georgetown area of Washington, D.C. when he was accosted by Christopher Piper, 25, Jeffrey Rice, 22, and a 15-year-old. Piper, who had a gun, immediately grabbed Senitt's female companion and pulled her away to rape her. Rice, who had stated earlier in the night that he was desperate to "cut" someone, slit Senitt's throat. The three thugs then hopped into a getaway car driven by Olivia Miles, 26, and sped off into the night.
Only hours later, the police arrested the four suspects. Apparently, two of the suspects matched the descriptions of perpetrators of two recent robberies, and the police had already obtained an address for those two suspects. So why did Alan Senitt have to die in order for these animals to be arrested? "I can give you my 100 percent word everything was done within the confines of the law," Lt. Robert Glover of the police department's violent crimes branch told the Washington Post. "We cannot make an arrest without probable cause."
Now the police have their probable cause. Rice was found with Senitt's ID and the woman's cell phone on his person, and his shirt covered in Senitt's blood. The suspects are in custody. And Alan Senitt is dead.
Our Constitution mandates that citizens may not be deprived of life, liberty or property without due process of law. One of the requirements of due process of law is that arrests not be arbitrary. It is likely true that the D.C. police did everything within the confines of the law to pursue the suspects.
(Excerpt) Read more at townhall.com ...
Unless you are a Senator of course. Then it's easy.
Or if you are a criminal. In which case, you ignore the laws anyway by definition.
Gun control laws only work on those concerned with obeying the laws. I'm only concerned with obeying/enforcing laws that fit the plain meaning of the wording in the Constitution.
Can you name which parts of Manchester are no go areas for the police.
LOL For anyone one else who wants to respond to my email, I don't want to start a debate on gun control that will end with who saved whose ass in the Second World war.
Your friends sound very Middle Class, as a working class boy who grew up in one of the toughest ares in the East End, even in my late 40s I still have street smarts.
To be fair, in a culture where government is putting pressure in every sphere to disarm the population its possible this man did not know he could defend his life with a gun.
As the islamic war continues its even more important that citizens be armed. Terrorists might finally get me but it will be only after the magazine in my Glock is empty.
Why should these thugs not be put to sleep?
Good idea, but one question, if you know, would the bills apply to DC, a federal area? There are those who would say no because DC is not a state. My view is that people don't surrender their natural rights when they cross a border into DC.
Either a Glock mod 23C (.40) or a Smith mod 642 (.38spl).
Not that the same thing doesn't happen in US cities.
My friends are decidedly middle class. They live in Bristol.
'Can you name which parts of Manchester are no go areas for the police.'
Must admit, I'd like to know that. There are no 'no-go' areas in Britain I am aware of. I've walked round most inner city areas over the years and have never seen an area where the police won't go. Even Moss Side isn't that bad at 2am after a curry. . . . . ;-)
'My friends are decidedly middle class. They live in Bristol.'
Typical Bristolians - they think 'here be demons' north of Gloucester! :D
Seriously though, I've worked in the inner city areas of Manchester and Leeds and it's just not true. the police have no 'no-go' areas,it's just that the residents of same areas are less helpful than others!
Possibly, although when you get a few blocks away from the monuments &c, you find that DC is a very run-down city.
While not having a go at your English acquaintances, I would guess they are middle class and what they know about those ares they read about from the press.
LOL I have to travel a lot and so leave the family at home I pick cheap rooms to rent when contracting saves money, and I always get fellow workers saying you don't live there do you.
They are policed, maybe not policed as effectively as I would like, but its more a manning problem.
I am not saying we don't have high crime rates, but the Police do police do police.
Do you have no go areas.
LOL tonight on the way home I will be mugged and given a beating, because I am tempting fate with my reply.
Tell that to "Republicans" Bloomberg, Pataki, and Giuliani.
He was British. Since self-defense in crime situations, whether or not a gun is involved, is strictly illegal in Britain, he lacked that whole set of instincts we take for granted.
I don't know if I actually have any 'no-go' areas. There are areas in any large city that, at certain times of the day, you try to avoid if possible.
If you do need to go there you do so with situational awareness turned up on high.
Thats true for anywhere.
LOL if you pardon my French that is complete and utter bollox we are allowed to defend ourself.
Joint Public Statement from the Crown Prosecution Service and the Association of Chief Police Officers
What is the purpose of this statement?
It is a rare and frightening prospect to be confronted by an intruder in your own home. The Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) and Chief Constables are responding to public concern over the support offered by the law and confusion about householders defending themselves. We want a criminal justice system that reaches fair decisions, has the confidence of law-abiding citizens and encourages them actively to support the police and prosecutors in the fight against crime.
Wherever possible you should call the police. The following summarises the position when you are faced with an intruder in your home, and provides a brief overview of how the police and CPS will deal with any such events.
Does the law protect me? What is 'reasonable force'? Anyone can use reasonable force to protect themselves or others, or to carry out an arrest or to prevent crime. You are not expected to make fine judgements over the level of force you use in the heat of the moment. So long as you only do what you honestly and instinctively believe is necessary in the heat of the moment, that would be the strongest evidence of you acting lawfully and in selfdefence. This is still the case if you use something to hand as a weapon.
As a general rule, the more extreme the circumstances and the fear felt, the more force you can lawfully use in self-defence.
Do I have to wait to be attacked? No, not if you are in your own home and in fear for yourself or others. In those circumstances the law does not require you to wait to be attacked before using defensive force yourself.
What if the intruder dies? If you have acted in reasonable self-defence, as described above, and the intruder dies you will still have acted lawfully. Indeed, there are several such cases where the householder has not been prosecuted. However, if, for example:
having knocked someone unconscious, you then decided to further hurt or kill them to punish them; or you knew of an intended intruder and set a trap to hurt or to kill them rather than involve the police, you would be acting with very excessive and gratuitous force and could be prosecuted.
What if I chase them as they run off? This situation is different as you are no longer acting in self-defence and so the same degree of force may not be reasonable. However, you are still allowed to use reasonable force to recover your property and make a citizen's arrest. You should consider your own safety and, for example, whether the police have been called. A rugby tackle or a single blow would probably be reasonable. Acting out of malice and revenge with the intent of inflicting punishment through injury or death would not.
Will you believe the intruder rather than me? The police weigh all the facts when investigating an incident. This includes the fact that the intruder caused the situation to arise in the first place. We hope that everyone understands that the police have a duty to investigate incidents involving a death or injury. Things are not always as they seem. On occasions people pretend a burglary has taken place to cover up other crimes such as a fight between drug dealers.
How would the police and CPS handle the investigation and treat me? In considering these cases Chief Constables and the Director of Public Prosecutions (Head of the CPS) are determined that they must be investigated and reviewed as swiftly and as sympathetically as possible. In some cases, for instance where the facts are very clear, or where less serious injuries are involved, the investigation will be concluded very quickly, without any need for arrest. In more complicated cases, such as where a death or serious injury occurs, more detailed enquiries will be necessary. The police may need to conduct a forensic examination and/or obtain your account of events.
To ensure such cases are dealt with as swiftly and sympathetically as possible, the police and CPS will take special measures namely:
An experienced investigator will oversee the case; and If it goes as far as CPS considering the evidence, the case will be prioritised to ensure a senior lawyer makes a quick decision.
It is a fact that very few householders have ever been prosecuted for actions resulting from the use of force against intruders.
I don't know but I agree with you that it certainly should. I think the 2nd Amendment would trump all state and local laws and we shouldn't need a permit to carry anywhere. But this bill is a start.
With a gun?
I'm sure that's a great comfort to Tony Martin.
When Tony Martin shot the two intruders, they were running away from him.
One was by his window the other further away in his garden.
He shot both of them in the back.
It was not self defence, it was punishment.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.