Posted on 06/03/2015 4:03:28 AM PDT by HomerBohn
British citizens seeking advice on what’s legal to use for self-defense found some answers at www.askthe.police.uk, a website sponsored and operated by the government’s Police National Legal Database.
Question 589: Are there any legal self-defence products that I can buy?
Answer: The only fully legal self-defence product … is a rape alarm.
There may be other products, according to the website, but they haven’t been fully tested and “if you purchase one you must be aware … there is always the possibility that you will arrested and detained until the product, its contents and legality, can be verified.”
In an effort to reduce any anxiety, the website goes on to point out that any product a British citizen purchases, other than a rape alarm, “must not be a product which is made to cause a person injury. Possession of such a product in public (and in private in specific circumstances) is against the law.”
It offers some suggestions, along with a disclaimer. A British citizen may use a squirt bottle filled with a safe but brightly colored dye that may help police find and apprehend a criminal after the attack has been successfully completed. But, says the website, a citizen “should be aware that even a seemingly safe product … would become an offensive weapon [if] it would be used in a way that is intended to cause injury.”
And, the disclaimer: “The above advice is given in good faith. You must make your own decision and this website cannot be held responsible for the consequences of the possession, use or misuse of any self defence product," with the exception, of course, of a rape alarm.
This is not someone’s idea of a bad joke, or a parody. Readers may verify the veracity on their own by going here: https://www.askthe.police.uk/content/Q589.htm
The National Rifle Association (NRA), when it learned of the presence of the website and its response to the question about self-defense products that are legal to own in Great Britain, confirmed “that British subjects continue to live at the mercy of their potential attackers.” It reads, says the NRA, like an appeal for victims to graciously suffer criminal violence while removing “any remaining vestiges of the traditional right to self-defense.”
Real people have experienced the absurdity of such rules being enforced with diligence across the country. Three knife-wielding burglars [guns are illegal in England] invaded a home in England, tied up the family members and threatened to kill the father. One of the members managed to escape and get help. The family member and the helper returned and inflicted permanent brain damage on one of burglars — a criminal, by the way, with more than 50 previous convictions — using a cricket bat. Authorities arrested the defendants — the victims — and sent them to prison for more than two years. The attacker? He escaped punishment.
A well-known television personality was sitting at her kitchen table with her daughter one evening when she caught several young men peering through the kitchen window. Looking around for something to defend herself and her daughter from imminent attack, she found — oh, no! — a kitchen knife and waved it in front of them, chasing them away. Hertfordshire police arrived at the scene and informed her that the knife was an “offensive weapon” and therefore was illegal. She avoided being arrested, but the Sunday Telegraph explained: “She was not looking to be a vigilante … but ... police explained to her that even if you’re at home alone and you have an intruder, you are not allowed to protect yourself.”
There are precious few Hollywood actors who see the absurdity of such laws, but one of them, Vince Vaughn (The Internship, The Watch, Couples Retreat) was interviewed by the British version of GQ Magazine:
I support people having a gun in public … not just in your home. We don’t have the right to bear arms because of burglars; we have the right to bear arms to resist the supreme power of a corrupt and abusive government. It’s not about duck hunting: it’s about the ability of the individual. It’s the same reason we have the freedom of speech.
It’s well known that the greatest defense against an intruder is the sound of a gun [being cocked].
Since 1979, International Living magazine has offered people advice on where to live if they are looking for alternatives to where they are. “Retiring abroad has never been more attractive,” says its website, and among the 25 countries on its list are places with great climate, excellent and inexpensive healthcare, modest living costs “and more.” American citizens observing the changes that appear to be making the United States more and more like England may be tempted to subscribe to International Living for advice.
Economist Gary North, on his members-only website, is often asked the same question, with variations: Where would you go if you were looking to get out of the country, Gary? North outlined his list of requirements:
A country that collects no more than 20 percent of its GDP in taxes.
A country where foreigners are trying to get in.
A country with English as the common language.
A country with a common law tradition.
A country where an entrepreneur can start a business in one day.
A country with a highly developed system of roads.
A country where cartoons lampooning politicians and their policies are not only legal but welcomed.
A country where home schooling is legal.
A country where police on the streets do not carry machine guns.
A country with no history of military coups.
Despite its problems and threats to liberty that appear to be mounting on a daily basis, America is still a pretty nice place to live, especially compared to Great Britain.
Remember, they do not want to offend the Muzzies over there. Given that, I bet that the rape alarms are really controversial in their own rite.
A disarmed populace is always the easiest for the totalitarian left to take over (Fascists; Communists; Socialists; Mohammadans). Every Englishman (and woman) should rise up and demand their rights to self-defense.
It’s just so hard to imagine, this once very proud great nation, having such a vast empire, great leaders, a great navy, great army and all it’s colonies - -
Now reduced to an island of defenseless whimps by the left.
Anyone remember the Tony Marshall case? Talk about a travesty of justice.
What about pointy sticks?
I was in England last week and on TV I watched an interview with a couple who had been victims of a home invasion back in February. It was really sickening to hear about their ordeal and to know if they had used a gun or anything in their defence, they would have been most likely prosecuted. Even here in Canada, people who use guns in self defence in a justifiable manner are now no longer charged by the authorities (and Harper took a good deal of condemnation in the chattering classes over that one recently).
There’s an apologist on this site that continues to claim that self-defense is legal in England. LOL!
Does he speak with a Scottish accent?
;^)
Q509: Are stun guns illegal?
Stun guns are prohibited weapons and it is an offence to possess them. A stun gun is a weapon that discharges a large voltage of electricity into its target, rendering them incapable of movement for a short time. In the wrong hands they are very dangerous. Recently there have been cases where people have bought them abroad and imported/mailed them into this country. This is still illegal and the penalties will apply.
If you are found in possession of a stun gun, you could face up to ten years imprisonment. In order to possess, import or sell such weapons you must have authority from the Secretary of State.
And the Brits still consider themselves a free society.
This is the face of the feminization of a culture. Our culture has at least the beginnings of this among the feminized left.
Quite. He usually finds these threads.
Um, those things listed apply to England and Wales as well (Scotland’s legal system is based on Roman law, so they’re excluded). In fact, except at sensitive locations, and specific incidents dealing with criminals known to be armed, Britain’s police do not carry guns.
As for self defence, using violence in self-defence is perfectly legal, as long as it is proportionate, and you do not continue to use violence as a means of revenge or once the danger is passed (unlike in texas, where you are allowed to gun down a burglar in the back as he tries to flee). And although a retarded liberal legal establishment has often tried to prosecute people who have used legitimate self-defence, the Conservative Prime Minister has taken steps to ensure that the rules on self-defence are clarified so that the judges cannot jail people who have used justified violence to defend themselves.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-2198379/I-use-shotgun-burglar-I—law-side.html
Even bananas are weapons. Dropping a ten ton weight may be okay in some circumstances.
Interesting that Gary North’s list of ten desirable criteria for a decent country to live in is quoted in an article attacking the UK, since of those ten there is only one (the first) which does not apply to Britain. Indeed there are several (political lampoons for instance) which apply rather more to the UK than the US.
So?
Lie, cheat and steal.
When the ‘law’ is no longer your friend—why give a sh#t about the law?
Have some crude, DENIABLE weapon (dagger, club, etc.), Use it, chuck it, say you took it from your assailant.
There is no future in being the “honest citizen” anymore—so why be one? Say you were “stunned”, that you “don’t remember” and then STFU!!
Britain like America, needs a revolution.
“Does he speak with a Scottish accent?”
Aye, Laddie, he does!
I met a former Brit at a gun show in Texas. As he clutched an “assault rifle”, he grinned widely and said, “God bless America!”
People are creative. When told they cannot defend themselves, their obvious solution is to subcontract their defense to “experts”. That is, in this case, whatever protectors that are willing to violently defend them.
Protectors who do not care what the police and government think.
To start with, the people form a discreet group, and take up a collection of funds to regularly pay their protectors. It begins with a large, up front payment to rid their neighborhood of its problems. Then a smaller, continued payment, to keep problems out.
Importantly, most criminals are smart enough to take the hint and leave, once they are convinced that the threat to them is real.
So the hardest part is recruiting a group that are professional enough to not abuse the situation.
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.