“Why would someone attack this lovely elderly couple?” asks the front page headline in the Daily Telegraph. James and Joan Briton, both in their 80s were stabbed to death attempting to defend their home from a man believed to be Mark Hobson. Hobson, aged 34, is on the run, suspected of sexually assaulting and murdering twin sisters (one of whom was his girlfriend).
The question may be rhetorical but the answer is not.
Mr and Mrs Briton, of Strensall near York, were murdered because their attacker knew he could get away with it. Armed with a knife there was no possibility that the intruder could face anything more threatening than a lawyer offering him compensation for injury if his victims used household implements to defend themselves with.
Police advice is to “not approach Hobson”. I am puzzled as to quite how this advice is relevant to an intruder who bursts into one’s home.
Meanwhile two carjackers who killed a man are sentenced to seven and a half years each. With ‘good behaviour’ they will no doubt be released in three years, minus any time spent on remand.
I note that Hobson and the carjackers are all whites, in case anyone is imagining that ‘criminal underclass scum’ has any ethnic minority connotations.
A terrible story. Further proof, were it needed, that the right to self defence ought to be re-recognised in our law. Fat chance with Blair and co in charge. Is it too much to hope that the Tories would make it a manifesto pledge to reinstate the right to self defence? Probably.
The “advice” given by the police in this case shows just how useless they are.
Why is there only a miniscule amount of this type of incident in rural France? Because there is about an 80% chance that the occupant of the house will have a selection of legally held firearms
Cancergiggles
You’re right. Until not that long ago this was also true in England, which is why this kind of thing did not happen in England, but now does.
As I never tire of telling people, my grandmother lived in a huge house which (a) contained lots and lots of treasures which were never stolen, and (b) had an entire ground floor room set aside for the storage and cleaning and arming and general seeing to of … guns. The gun room, it was called.
Not coincidence.
A few months ago there was an equally terrible story about an elderly Dutch man in a wheelchair, who also had cancer — yes, you read right, he was elderly, had cancer, and was confined to a wheelchair! — who was attacked on his business premises by a group of no less than 5, healthy, young thugs. He managed to shoot one of them and scare off the other four.
Now on trial for “murder”.
The worst human rights violation possible: the state taking away one’s sacred right to self-defense.
All in the name of “human rights”, of course — the human rights of the criminal and the violent. The victims and the potential victims have none.
How long before black market law inforcement – vigilante style – becomes common in British society? It’s bound to happen. The state is not providing a desired service while preventing individuals from either providing it for themselves or purchasing it openly.
James: Happened in the US in the late 1970s. Organization called The Guardian Angels. It wasn’t for profit though. It was founded in New York to provide volunteer escorts for the elderly and weak so they could go out and do their shopping, etc., in bad neighborhoods. Now they have branches in several US cities.
Despised, discredited and attacked by the statists/tranzis/”progressives” ever since. But it was hard to make the tranzi slime stick — because most of the “Angels” are Puerto Rican, black and Hispanic. But they were probably the first step toward nudging the statists to actually do something about crime — which has come down considerably in the US in the past 20 years due to stricter enforcement.
We also have Victim’s Rights groups (not sure you have the same type of thing in the UK?) that have pushed vociferously for stricter law enforcement.
Of course, the statists never give up. As I write this there are a whole raft of “progressive” efforts to destroy the “three strikes and you’re out law” that my state passed (by a popular referendum in which 70 percent voted for the law) in response to our version of the Ian Huntley murders.
Our homicide rate declined by 40 percent since three-strikes was passed 10 years ago, but the “progressives” are more interested in isolated sob stories about some guy who was sentenced to prison for life for stealing a pizza for his “third strike.” These sob stories appear all over our media — but you have to search very hard to find the statistics which show that 7,000 people are alive today, thanks to the 40 percent decline in the homicide rate since three-strikes was passed.
Susan
The UK has one victim’s rights body. The name escapes me now but it has charitable status and I donate a few quid to it each month by direct debit.
You can set this against the 104 or 111 or 120 recognised bodies representing and promoting the welfare of criminals. I cannot remember the exact number (jeez, the memory’s fading fast in my old age!) but I do know the number exceeds 100.
Happy days.
I always assumed the US’ various laws on self defense stemmed from English law. I.E.: “A man’s home is his castle”, and all that.
Questions:
1. When did the right to self defense get removed in the UK? (Or am I mistaken and there never was any such law?)
2. If someone broke into your house and was *IN THE PROCESS OF* trying to murder one of your children, what would the UK courts do if you bashed the murderer with something (assuming you could)?
(Also assume you just slightly injured the murderer while trying to protect your family.)
I understand the UK has very strict gun laws, but does that mean a person is expected to just leave the house and let someone kill his/her family? You can’t use *anything* (fists, even) to protect yourself?
The memory’s returned!
http://www.victimsofcrime.org.uk
Well, if they want to be strict on gun laws, the best way to do it would be to institute the death penalty on anybody who owns a gun illegally. Works wonders on cutting down gun crime rates, though criminals can certainly resort to more… normal means of assault, like knives and such.
In the case cited, there was nothing the elderly couple could have done without a firearm, the greatest equaliser in the history of man. But in any case, a much stricter punishment should be levied. The murderer should be caned, if not outright executed, as an example to other would be murders, not just given 3 years in prison as in the second example cited. Works wonders too.
TWG
Organization called The Guardian Angels. It wasn’t for profit though. It was founded in New York to provide volunteer escorts for the elderly and weak so they could go out and do their shopping, etc., in bad neighborhoods. Now they have branches in several US cities.
Many cities and several countries. A certain organized crime trial has the founder laying low lest they finish the murder they attempted on him years ago.
Chris Josephson,
In have written in some length on this subject.
See ‘The Way We Were’
Pete: It’s the same way in the US. The Pro-Criminal lobbying groups vastly outnumber the victim’s rights groups. But at least we have more than one — and several prominent semi-celebrity spokespeople who stir up noise, such as former Hollywood insider-turned-novelist Dominick Dunne (father of a murdered daughter) and John Walsh (bombastic host of a TV show called “America’s Most Wanted) whose 6-year-old son was raped and murdered in a famous case many years ago.
Anghelone: I saw that they finally indicted “Junior Don” for the attempted hit on Curtis Sliwa, but surely Silwa still does his NY radio show?
Pete, thanks for providing that link to the Victims of Crime charity. I’m going to donate to it.
Susan’s point about how the state violates our most fundamental of human rights got me thinking about the need for an organisation, along the lines of Amnesty, which targets such abuses. Does anyone know of any such group, i.e. one which publishes annual facts and figures about governments which violently suppress the right to self-defence?
Chris: “I understand the UK has very strict gun laws, but does that mean a person is expected to just leave the house and let someone kill his/her family? You can’t use *anything* (fists, even) to protect yourself?”
Not only do they have “very strict gun laws” in the UK, but I understand they also outlaw pepper spray and mace. Can someone confirm?
And is it true the UK authorities advise American tourists that they are not supposed to fight back if attacked by a crimin–oops, I mean — societally oppressed victim of the system?
David:
Thanks for the link. Very Informative.
What caused the change in 1967? I’m assuming it was the same as in the US .. due to the climate of the times and viewing criminals as victims of society?
Susan – thanks for the info on the Guardian Angels. They proved that private citizens can do a better job than tax sucking social parasite… er, I mean government police agencies. But the Guardian Angels are not a black market service. Their actions are legal in the USA.
My question still stands: how long before black market *ILLEGAL* police services become commonplace in British society? Is this likely to occur, and if so, when?
Cancergiggles – Yes, there is a strong chance that the householder in rural France is a hunter, has a gun and is comfortable enough with it to seize it and use it if his home is challenged.
But also – although for how much longer now that France is tripping down the primrose path of political correctness – the Gendarmes are on the side of law and order.
And yes, those old people were murdered defending their home because the criminals were aware that they could do it and even if the police bothered to catch them, the punishment would be derisory. The British police should be disbanded as they exist for no purpose other than to follow up cases reported to them by Herr Trevor Phillips of the Race Relations Gestapo. Crime has not been within their remit for at least 20 years.
If they catch this human scum, hopefully, some fellow prisoner or prisoners will have some lingering sense of justice and will disable them with extreme prejudice (and pain and fear).
Not only do they have “very strict gun laws” in the UK, but I understand they also outlaw pepper spray and mace. Can someone confirm?
Yes. Implements such as pepper spray or mace are classifed as per se offensive weapons and it is illegal to sell or supply them to anyone in the UK.
Technically speaking it is not actually illegal to possess them provided you have “reasonable excuse”. However, UK law does not recognise self-defence as a reasonable excuse so, in effect, they are prohibited.
Susan,
Curtis Sliwa still does a morning radio show with Ron Kuby. Either would be intolerable on their own but together they have a good show.
Story here.
Pete_London and others, actually as the British police are so apathetic about Britain’s exploding crime rate, now is the time to think courageously outside the circle. We accept that Tony Blair wants a lawless society because frightened people are easier to control than self-confident people. We accept that the Gramscians who surround him, plus the BBC, want a society in which law and order are used against the citizenry. The police are complicit because staying inside in the warmth filling in forms is pleasanter than responding to dangerous situations and facing unknown consequences.
So I think we should put crime apprehension and punishment in the hands of the criminals.
I realise that informers, if the police can still whip up enough interest in a crime to use them, sometimes help by making informal contributions of knowledge for penny ante amounts or forgiveness of small transgressions. But that is not enough. We should put it on a more formal basis.
For example, for the two subhumans who murdered the old couple, society (informally, through channels yet to be devised) puts out a contract on them. Whoever offs them gets his money deposited for sakekeeping in an offshore account until his release. How he deals with paying off the people who could nark on him is up to him. Or, if the execution takes place outside, he gets assistance in moving out of British jurisdiction. But we, society, would always honour the reward.
A group called, say, Revenge could accept contributions and it would be administered just like a normal charity, although, obviously, it would operate a little bit more in the shadows. (Contributions wouldn’t be tax deductible, so need to trouble the government.)
Fees should be realistically generous. Perhaps one hundred thousand pounds for the actual killing of the convicted murderer. (I feel that fundraising would be a snap and the coffers would be able to withstand four or five hits a year. Maybe more.)
Once Revenge got a name for paying out, and for discretion, I think there would be no lack of volunteers. In this manner, the terror of the death penalty – albeit refreshingly informal – would be reactivated in the minds of criminals long grown accustomed to being indulged.
Revenge should also be prepared to pay off warders for turning a blind eye, of course. Revenge would simply privatise apprehension and punishment of criminals. I would be interested in hearing any thoughts of fellow Samizdatas …
I wonder if running a futures market or a lottery here participants try to guess when someone will die would have any legal problems.
Hmmm.
I’ve never understood the principles behind gun control.
I’ve worked, off and on, with any number of metal working tools both low tech and high tech. Guns aren’t all that difficult to manufacture. Nor are their blueprints and specifications secret either.
With a decent 3 axis CAD/CAM milling machine, as little as $50k USD, and a decent supply of the proper steel and aluminum you could manufacture your own guns and ammunition.
The guns, a semi-automatic pistol design, could be mostly milled out from steel stock. The only parts that couldn’t be milled would be springs, screws and bushings. But those are available, in quantity, from any decent industrial supply catalog.
Bullets can be formed using molds milled from steel stock with lead as the bullet material. The powder could be purchased in quantity and then, if illegal to own or buy, smuggled in. It doesn’t take all that much powder for a pistol round. The casings are a little tougher if they have to be made as centerfire casings require relatively thin walls and a thick base with a countersunk primer well. Or you could go very low tech with a rim-fire casing which is very easy to make. Either way you could make the casings easily enough using an industrial hydraulic press. They’re common enough since they were invented in 1912 or so.
But this really isn’t anything new. From what I’ve read Britain has been finding illicit gun manufacturing armories all over the place run by criminals. I guess the adage about criminals having guns is rather true.
Thanks everyone for the comments, seems like a nerve was struck.
However… three pick-ups from earlier comments:
drscroogemcduck, we have legal bookies in the UK and they do not take bets that involve predicting someone’s life expectancy. I believe this is self-regulation and not because of state regulation, so there is at least one area of life where the UK is freer than most countries!
Chris the 1967 laws were a response to an irrelevant problem: shotgun licences introduced in response to an increase in robberies using pistols. The real agenda was the abolition of the death penalty, which the government was determined not to reconsider.
Verity, I cannot support your call for what could be considered incitement of murder. My main objection to vigilante law is that the wrong man can be killed, and the legitimate anger of bystanders does not excuse lashing out at persons who may turn out not to be the actual criminals.
Having said that I am genuinely encouraged by the response from this posting.
1) Certain useful facts have been circulated, including the different experiences of different countries. This can help defeat the spread of victim disarmament, and could help swing juries into acquitting self-defenders.
2) The knowledge that there are actually a lot of people, many of whom have never fired a gun, or even wish to own one themselves, but who are on the side of the angels.
3) I think the discussions of ‘what to do’ have raised some useful tips, including a lobby group for victims rights.
Antoine
I think Verity’s idea applied to convicted criminals whose punishment was an insult to society. In theory I loved the idea, but it would be extremely difficult to administer. The entire resources of all the police forces in the UK would be used to destroy it, as the State will never accept such a blatant challenge to its monopoly.