Skip to comments.
One more step down the slippery slope for UK
BBC Online ^
| 4/15/02
| Unkknown
Posted on 04/15/2002 12:37:40 PM PDT by scouse
click here to read article
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-35 next last
Whoever did this should have his gene pool mopped dry.
1
posted on
04/15/2002 12:37:40 PM PDT
by
scouse
To: scouse
: "This was an appalling unprovoked attack upon an elderly defenceless woman." and it was you and your loony liberal government who made her defenseless, by taking away her right to defend herself.
2
posted on
04/15/2002 12:40:27 PM PDT
by
camle
To: scouse
UK's crime rate is soaring out of control.
To: camle
and it was you and your loony liberal government who made her defenseless, by taking away her right to defend herself. I'm sure she has the right to defend herself; you're probably saying that she doesn't have the means to do it. But don't you think that at her age he might have just taken her gun away from her and shot her with it? I mean, there's no guarantee that she could have defended herself even if she had a weapon.
4
posted on
04/15/2002 12:51:16 PM PDT
by
in_troth
Comment #5 Removed by Moderator
To: camle
I happen to be an American who lives in Florida.
6
posted on
04/15/2002 12:53:29 PM PDT
by
scouse
To: camle
Don't blame the police for Princess Tony's stupidity. For those who wonder about this guy, he banned handguns straight after coming into office, then began a process of releasing burglars, drug dealers and rapists early from prison. He also signed away to Europe the right of the British people to vote to restore capital punishment.
7
posted on
04/15/2002 12:57:26 PM PDT
by
Tomalak
To: in_troth
there's no guarantee that she could have defended herself even if she had a weaponThat's correct.
So, better to leave her utterly defenseless than to give her a fighting chance, eh?
8
posted on
04/15/2002 12:58:29 PM PDT
by
Gritty
To: Tomalak
I'm not blaming the police, the brits bought this on themselves by electing tony-boy.
9
posted on
04/15/2002 12:59:57 PM PDT
by
camle
To: in_troth
I'm sure she has the right to defend herself; you're probably saying that she doesn't have the means to do it. But don't you think that at her age he might have just taken her gun away from her and shot her with it? I mean, there's no guarantee that she could have defended herself even if she had a weapon. There is never any guarantees, but she didn't even was given a chance by the government. Besides, in having arms out in the public, the hoodlum is made guessing if the victim is armed or not. Plus, there could be an armed witness that could help out as well. In passing the gun control alws, both of these classes of people were disarmed.
To: in_troth; *bang_list
I mean, there's no guarantee that she could have defended herself even if she had a weapon.But we all know that her chances were zero since she was now defenseless
Imagine being awakened to the sound of your front door being broken down. With the sound of feet pounding up the stairs, you leap from your bed to retrieve your .357 Magnum revolver from your nightstand. Running to the window, you toss the weapon outside and turn to face your attacker completely unarmed and infinitely safer!
If that sounds correct to you, you must be a liberal. If it sounds preposterous, congratulations! Your brain is starting to engage and you are on the road to conservatism!
Next lesson: Two to the chest and one to the head.
To: scouse
Where does the slope get slippery?
12
posted on
04/15/2002 1:08:33 PM PDT
by
onedoug
To: FormerLib
Tony-Boy -- Slick Willie's best bud.
In the UK, if you DO happen to blow someone away who is burglarizing your house, YOU will go to prison.
Over there, they are subjects -- have been for millenia.
We've got the right idea here, although we are fast becoming subjects of our own oppressive government as well.
13
posted on
04/15/2002 1:23:19 PM PDT
by
Jerrybob
To: in_troth
Almost never happens. When a prospective victim produces a gun most (almost all) scum run for it. They want an easy target and even an old lady with a cheap pistol does not qualify. I have some experience with this as a couple of decades ago, my 80 year old grandma ran off a house breaker with a .22 single action revolver.
14
posted on
04/15/2002 1:50:19 PM PDT
by
Rifleman
To: onedoug
Where does the slope get slippery? Well before the majority of the people notice.
To: scouse
Hey Tommy! Your shit is lookin' mighty weak!
To: in_troth
no guarantee that she could have defended herself Quite true, but one of the perp's victims of the week before could, if armed, easily have performed a little social prophylaxis.
To: areafiftyone
UK's crime rate is soaring out of control.That'll happen when only the lawbreakers own firearms.
To: scouse
Keywords CHIPS and FISH?!?!?
To: Lazamataz
Yes removing Guns may have made her defenseless but I would recon that she would not have had one even if she could.
Neither of my folks have or carry a gun even though they could if they wanted. I carry always but have never needed it.
Another factor would be the removal of morality as a standard of living. We seem to be doing that here in the US as well.
20
posted on
04/15/2002 2:07:36 PM PDT
by
Khepera
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-35 next last
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.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson