Tony Martin - what bullshit

[scott thesocialist]

yeah lets support the person that killed a 16 year boy, lets support the person that has shown no remorse for killing a 16 year boy.
he took a life and he should have to deal with the reactions, of his action.

[Moskitto]

get this, this guy has had his farmhouse broken into hundreds of times and had got to the point where he removed his staircase. The police, who only prosecute 10% of burglaries anyway, told him they didn't have sufficient resources to protect him from burglaries, so one time during a burglary, he shoots 2 burglers who have both been convicted 17 times, one of them dies and the other one becomes a cripple.

the farmer gets charged with murder, the surviving burgler has been given permission to claim damages on the basis of lost earnings (he can't burgle anymore.)

Why the hell is it that people have to go on "self defense courses" to learn how to defend themselves legally? how come when someone jumps infront of me in a dark alley with a knife I can't punch them so hard I break all their teeth, both cheek bones, their nose and make them loose their sight without being charged with GBH? why do people who are breaking the law expect the law to protect them while they are breaking the law?

[YKTMX]

I agree!

Defend rich landowners right to shoot 16 year boys in the back with a shotgun!

That oughta be a vote winner.

[Moskitto]

yep, also defend the rights of paedophiles with video cameras video recording 12 year old girls wearing hotpants and wet t-shirts to defend themselves against citizens arrest.

[Invader Zim]

Quote: from YouKnowTheyMurderedX on 5:59 pm on July 28, 2003
I agree!

Defend rich landowners right to shoot 16 year boys in the back with a shotgun!

That oughta be a vote winner.


Rich land owner... excuse me while I pull this to pieces as being plain old ignorance.

The majority of burgalrys are commited in the same area as the burgalars come from. This generally is in the poorer areas of socioty. So most people who get robbed are other members of the working class.

The guy tony martin was a farmer, if you knew anything about Britian you would know that currently the farmers are far from being rich, quite the oppersit. So I doubt that Tony Martin is Rich. Also was defending his human right to live free from intimidation? His right to not be forced to live in fear? Etc, etc.

Sorry I could not leave this ignorant statement unanswered.

[Invader Zim]

Quote: from scott thesocialist on 2:38 pm on July 28, 2003
yeah lets support the person that killed a 16 year boy, lets support the person that has shown no remorse for killing a 16 year boy.
he took a life and he should have to deal with the reactions, of his action.

You make it sound as if he knew how old the kid was. From what I have read of the story, it was about the 20th time he had been broken into in a month, and the previous time he had accosted those who had invaded his home and privicy the was beaten. So when the next time he realises his home is being broken into he grabs his shot gun and runs down stairs and into his barn. Its dark he cant see, he is afraid of being beaten again and he hears crashes from the intruderes he fires a shot into the barn, at what he persieves in his shocked and frightened state to be above head height. However what goes up must come down and some of the spray catches the two theives. One of them dies, sorry if I dont feal that sorry for the guy, him being a bullying theif who had been tormenting this poor guy for months.

In short the guy cracked and made a mistake, he has repeatedly appologised to the family of the victim. Personnaly I believe his actions to be above that of self defence, but I can definatly see why he would have done such a thing. As for the sixteen year old boy, what diffearance would it have made if he was a 40 year old? Apart from you would have been far less sympathetic towards the dead guy.

he took a life and he should have to deal with the reactions, of his action.

An eye for an eye... Sorry if I am a little sceptical for your view on the treatment of criminals. I believe that community service and counciling are far more affective ways of reforming criminals than wasting state funds in locking them in prisons. You go as a junkey, in waste thousands of £££ of state money and leave as a dealer. Except in the most sevear cases of rapists and murderers (who probably belong in a mental hospital) who are a danger to the public prison is never the answer. The levels of criminals who reoffend prove this.

If you would give people like Tony Martin a prison sentance even in the circumstances he was in, I shudder at what punishment you would give a proper murderer, and not a fear crazed farmer, death??? people like you sicken me.

[YKTMX]

Quote: from AK47 on 3:15 am on July 29, 2003

Quote: from YouKnowTheyMurderedX on 5:59 pm on July 28, 2003
I agree!

Defend rich landowners right to shoot 16 year boys in the back with a shotgun!

That oughta be a vote winner.


Rich land owner... excuse me while I pull this to pieces as being plain old ignorance.

The majority of burgalrys are commited in the same area as the burgalars come from. This generally is in the poorer areas of socioty. So most people who get robbed are other members of the working class.

The guy tony martin was a farmer, if you knew anything about Britian you would know that currently the farmers are far from being rich, quite the oppersit. So I doubt that Tony Martin is Rich. Also was defending his human right to live free from intimidation? His right to not be forced to live in fear? Etc, etc.

Sorry I could not leave this ignorant statement unanswered.


Really? That's very noble of you. Let me tell you this. I am SICK to the back teeth of farmers being classed as some kind of victimised minority. Farming is one of the most subsidised industries in Britain and the world. I know that al ot of burgalries happen in working class areas (unlike many of the people here I actually LIVE in a working class area) and I know that burgalry is a terrible thing. However, the last time I checked it DOESN'T carry the death penatly. A person has a right to use reasonable force against intruders. Note the word reasonable, not LETHAL or EXCESSIVE. Shooting someone in the back with a shotgun IS excessive, so Martin paid the price.

Now fuck off and read the Daily Mail.

[Invader Zim]

Quote: from YouKnowTheyMurderedX on 5:54 pm on July 29, 2003

Quote: from AK47 on 3:15 am on July 29, 2003

Quote: from YouKnowTheyMurderedX on 5:59 pm on July 28, 2003
I agree!

Defend rich landowners right to shoot 16 year boys in the back with a shotgun!

That oughta be a vote winner.


Rich land owner... excuse me while I pull this to pieces as being plain old ignorance.

The majority of burgalrys are commited in the same area as the burgalars come from. This generally is in the poorer areas of socioty. So most people who get robbed are other members of the working class.

The guy tony martin was a farmer, if you knew anything about Britian you would know that currently the farmers are far from being rich, quite the oppersit. So I doubt that Tony Martin is Rich. Also was defending his human right to live free from intimidation? His right to not be forced to live in fear? Etc, etc.

Sorry I could not leave this ignorant statement unanswered.


Really? That's very noble of you. Let me tell you this. I am SICK to the back teeth of farmers being classed as some kind of victimised minority. Farming is one of the most subsidised industries in Britain and the world. I know that al ot of burgalries happen in working class areas (unlike many of the people here I actually LIVE in a working class area) and I know that burgalry is a terrible thing. However, the last time I checked it DOESN'T carry the death penatly. A person has a right to use reasonable force against intruders. Note the word reasonable, not LETHAL or EXCESSIVE. Shooting someone in the back with a shotgun IS excessive, so Martin paid the price.

Now fuck off and read the Daily Mail.

Really? That's very noble of you. Let me tell you this. I am SICK to the back teeth of farmers being classed as some kind of victimised minority. Farming is one of the most subsidised industries in Britain and the world.

Most likley true. However lets look at it shall we on why they should be.

1. Cheep labour and produse from abroad brings down price of British produse. Farmers lose out massivly. the reason is because of the capitalist free trade pushing down prices below that of the standard of wages in this country. The farmers suffer.

2. Farming disasters, such as BSE and foot and mouth have increased the amount of forign import of produse. Increasing the damage of point 1.

3. farming in this country is currently in the middle of a slump. Where as the rest of the country's industrys have been in a period of economic stability. This is partially caused by years of under investment and points 1 and 2.

4. The economic stability has caused confidence in markets leading to an increase in wages etc and there for an increase in spending. Due to the increase in spending more demand on products has inflated prices, British farming due to points 1, 2, and 3 cannot keep up, so forign produse is again bought.

Its is the reoccuring cycle of all British primary and secondary industrys, farming like all the rest is going to collapse... and you want that, increased unemployment poverty, forign ownership of British farms making them just another outpost of multinational control, like Mc Donalds or Microsoft. I will elaborate below.

This has caused many farms to lose money and go bust. these farms are bought up by corporations at a lower cost than they are worth. This means that eventually the majority of farms will be owned by corporations. You are a socialist and you want that??? Yes you really are the most convinced socialist I have ever met, perhaps you should call your self a corporate crusader like Ghost Writter.

Listen mate just because I know my stuff does not mean that I read the daily mail, but when we are on the subject of reading you hould get out your economics or geography book before making ignorant statements.

I know that al ot of burgalries happen in working class areas (unlike many of the people here I actually LIVE in a working class area) and I know that burgalry is a terrible thing.

Well then you know why I was forced to attack your ignorant statement. Also just because you happen to live in a working class area does not make you a better socialist, if you had not noticed a vast majority of socialist thinkers such as Marx, Owen, St Simon, Orwell all came from the upper or middle classes.

However, the last time I checked it DOESN'T carry the death penatly. A person has a right to use reasonable force against intruders. Note the word reasonable, not LETHAL or EXCESSIVE. Shooting someone in the back with a shotgun IS excessive, so Martin paid the price.


You talk as if the guy deliberatly shot the kid in the back, which further highlights your ignorance of the case. If he did that he would have been on a murder charge, as it happens it was man slaughter because he fired above there heads, but graverty has a nasty habit of bringing down material fired from a gun over long range. It was not on purpose so not murder.

Martin paid the price.

Yes the savage capitalist price which has bringing down Britain for years. Jail does not work, we should not punish criminals we should rehabilitate them. Community service and coinciling have been shown to be far more efficent in redusing rates of reoffending. So mate as you are the one with the excessive right wing view on criminal justice you may wont to re-evaluate the one who should be off reading the Mail, the Sun or what ever the right wing reads these days.

(Edited by AK47 at 7:28 pm on July 29, 2003)

[YKTMX]

Yes, I know he supposedly didn't shoot him on purpose HOWEVER, he had warned burglars he had caught previously that they would be shot if they did come back, so I have my doubts about whether it was a mistake. Also, he shot the other burglar aswell, so, are we saying that TWO diffirent shots went array and hit someone by mistake?

I never claimed to be a better socialist, I'm just slightly peeved at people telling me what it's like for working class people and how they think, when most of them have never been near a working class area in their short privileged lifes.

[Just Joe]

If a man breaks into your home, It is your individual right, in fact as go as far as to say duty, to defend yourself. Tony Martin should actually be praised for this but instead, he is imprisoned by an authoritarian government convinced that it knows best.

This isn't an issue on who he is. Who gives a fuck? if he is rich, poor, black or white, who cares? Its a issue about civil rights.

Good luck Tony Martin. Do not let the orwellian state of Britain grind you down.

[Invader Zim]

Quote: from Just Joe on 9:18 pm on July 29, 2003
If a man breaks into your home, It is your individual right, in fact as go as far as to say duty, to defend yourself. Tony Martin should actually be praised for this but instead, he is imprisoned by an authoritarian government convinced that it knows best.

This isn't an issue on who he is. Who gives a fuck? if he is rich, poor, black or white, who cares? Its a issue about civil rights.

Good luck Tony Martin. Do not let the orwellian state of Britain grind you down.

For once we are in agreement, well more or less... I dont agree with shooting people who invade your home, but the guy was in fear etc... In my personnal opinion you should not kill or seriously injur a person, however i would be linient to people like Martin, considering he had been beaten.

Do not let the orwellian state of Britain grind you down.

What do you mean by that btw, Orwell was a democratic socialist Britain is not remotly socialist.

[MikeyBoy]

What do you mean by that btw, Orwell was a democratic socialist Britain is not remotly socialist.

You realize that Orwell wrote about Totalitarian governments? He was a socialist but that's not what the term "Orwellian" means.

It is my opinion that if someone enters your home illegally, with the intention of theft or harm, you have a right to defend yourself. I'd like to hear more details about this story. I wouldn't have shot at them unless they tried to attack me.

[Invader Zim]

Originally posted by [email protected] 30 2003, 09:19 PM

What do you mean by that btw, Orwell was a democratic socialist Britain is not remotly socialist.

You realize that Orwell wrote about Totalitarian governments? He was a socialist but that's not what the term "Orwellian" means.

It is my opinion that if someone enters your home illegally, with the intention of theft or harm, you have a right to defend yourself. I'd like to hear more details about this story. I wouldn't have shot at them unless they tried to attack me.
I was aware that he hated and wrote about totalitarian governments, books such as 1984 and animal farm both attack different types of totalitarian government. However I was unaware of that specific term, so thans for telling me.

:)

So many smilies... so little time :D .

[chamo]

I don't think it is advisable to let things get out of hand, as in America where this kind of thing is legal, many children and family members are mistakenly shot. I think people have a right to defend themselves, but at the same time that they give the intruder the chance to surrender himself and give them a warning before anyone goes trigger happy. You would find that most burgulars are cowards and would either run away or surrender.

Yeah, Orwellian basically means what is described in 1984.

[Invader Zim]

Originally posted by [email protected] 30 2003, 10:58 PM
I don't think it is advisable to let things get out of hand, as in America where this kind of thing is legal, many children and family members are mistakenly shot. I think people have a right to defend themselves, but at the same time that they give the intruder the chance to surrender himself and give them a warning before anyone goes trigger happy. You would find that most burgulars are cowards and would either run away or surrender.

Yeah, Orwellian basically means what is described in 1984.
Yes I agree with you HappyGuy, however I dont think that use of a gun was warrented. However I definatly see where the guy was coming from and feal very sorry for him. I think that puting him in prison was very unjust.

Yeah, Orwellian basically means what is described in 1984.

cool, I never until Joe mentioned it actually though of looking at it like that, It just would never have occured to me.

[guerrillaradio]

Deary me. There's nothing positive to come outta this situation. They're both in the wrong, the shaggy inbred redneck farmer and the angry gangsta criminal. It's not a question of sides children. :rolleyes:

Alan

[Moskitto]

Most technically, if you come home and someone's raping your wife (yes, raping, not having an affair) you can't shoot him because it isn't self defense. Of course i'd just bash them with my 5ft barbell because i don't want to have to clean lots of blood up.

[scott thesocialist]

so its ok for this guy to shoot and kill another person with an illegal weapon, its ok for him to show no remorse. but if the boy had shot him it would be a outrage, ok the guy shouldn't have been on his property, but thats no reason to let him away with murder.I don't can what anybody says he killed a person and should've been sent down longer.

[Invader Zim]

Originally posted by scott [email protected] 31 2003, 03:37 PM
so its ok for this guy to shoot and kill another person with an illegal weapon, its ok for him to show no remorse. but if the boy had shot him it would be a outrage, ok the guy shouldn't have been on his property, but thats no reason to let him away with murder.I don't can what anybody says he killed a person and should've been sent down longer.
Listen mate, try reading up on the case instead of making blatantly false remarks.

For a start farmers in this country are aloud to own shot guns, for pest control etc, as long as they have a licence. So I doubt it is an illegal weapon.

its ok for him to show no remorse.

And how would you know if he has shown no remorse? Are you a personnal friend of his who is privy to such information? Or more likley are you just bullshitting to make a point?

but thats no reason to let him away with murder.

It was never murder in the first place, try reading about the case and you will see the charge was of man slaughter. And he never got away with it he served time in prison for it.

I don't can what anybody says he killed a person and should've been sent down longer.

People who show such ignorance to the facts of the case they are arguing about should be sent down as well. Until you actually bother to read up on the case, I am not going to argue this with you. Arguing with well meaning ignorance is a futile as it is stupid.

[scott thesocialist]

i think you'll find it was murder the pcs, reduced it on appeal, he had no licence , he has said he has no remorse and he would do it again,
so you read up on the case!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[Invader Zim]

Originally posted by scott [email protected] 31 2003, 04:01 PM
i think you'll find it was murder the pcs, reduced it on appeal, he had no licence , he has said he has no remorse and he would do it again,
so you read up on the case!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Yes but he was found guilty of Man slaughter not murder. So stop saying it was murder, because it was not. He used his full legal right to appeal a poor sentance and the appeal court rightfully altered the sentance to man slaughter. He is about as much guilty of Murder now as you or I am.

he has said he has no remorse and he would do it again,

now you are just making stuff up lets look at what he has said: -

"Look, I don't agree with shooting people. It's not something I take lightly. On the night of the burglary I was a terrified man alone in the house...
"I heard this murmuring and had this light shone in my eyes. All these things happened in a flash. I couldn't stand it any longer and then I just let the gun off.

"When you resort to using a gun you are desperate. I've never used that shotgun before. I'm not really interested in shooting rabbits round the house. I didn't even know if it worked. I discharged the gun and then ran upstairs. Nobody followed me."



A quotation from an interview with the man: -

Martin has said he will not own another gun and would not take the law into his own hands again if faced with burglars. He breaks down when pressed to speak about Barras, apparently unable to accept that he is responsible for the boy's death.

All these interviews etc come from this page: -

http://www.guardian.co.uk/martin/0,2759,214318,00.html

so you read up on the case

As you can see... I have.

[Danton]

I dont want to sound flippant or trite as I know this case well and you seem to have covered the technicalities etc.. At the end of the day if someone has broken into my house regardless of right or wrong or political ideology or the law, I'm gonna take the mother down by any possible means and if I've got a shotgun to hand all the better to blow a hole in their fucking skull...

At least Blunkett is taking steps to ensure injured burglars cannot sue their assailants/victims ?? That is the positive thing to come out of this shoddy mess.....









"The skeptic, the analytical sniper, the eclectic dissector of doctrines and psychoanalyst of dogmas" - El Commandante

[Moskitto]

i believe after this case they legalised using traps in houses as long as there's a visible sign warning of them, and using the excuse "I couldn't see the sign" is inadmisible. That means the tv program a while ago showing people how to turn their back gardens into fortresses is now legal.

[guerrillaradio]

I can't believe you're still debating this personally.

Alan

[Funky Monk]

I think Mr Martin was well within his rights to defend his propoerty. IF someone is prepared to break the law by robbing a house then they should not expect the full protection of the law.

I know this is going to be thrown back in my face with claims that the strong can abuse this and its a corrupt law but by any law you cannot break into someone's house to steal their things to aid yourself.