The Law Is An Ass.

[Eric]

Originally Posted by jaysay

You'll just have to teach your Rottie how to shoot Eric, after all, according to an adds campaign running in GB at the moment Arthur Bell, after perfecting his whisky, taught his dog to play the bagpipes

According to the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, the bagpipes constitute "cruel and unusual punishment."

[jaysay]

Originally Posted by Eric

Buddy of mine, a couple of years ago, heard noises outside his house ... the motion sensor lights were on ... and he could hear someone trying the door. He phoned 911, and told the dispatcher what was going on. He told them to hurry, because he was loading; and if they weren't there quick there would be a body to pick up. The cruiser was there before he could finish loading and get downstairs. The cops took the perp away .... they checked that he had an FAC (Firearms Acquisition Certificate); checked that his firearms and ammunition storage conformed to the law; and went on their merry way.

If that had been this country Eric the police would have let the perp go then arrested the home owner for making a threat to the life

[cashman]

Originally Posted by jaysay

If that had been this country Eric the police would have let the perp go then arrested the home owner for making a threat to the life

agree but do ya honestly think "ANY" of the main parties will do owt about it.?

[jaysay]

Originally Posted by cashman

agree but do ya honestly think "ANY" of the main parties will do owt about it.?

No

[cashman]

Originally Posted by jaysay

No

Good man, that n many other things none will correct is the sole reason i washed me hands of em.

[DaveinGermany]

Originally Posted by Eric

According to the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, the bagpipes constitute "cruel and unusual punishment."

Well let him try anyway & if he can't manage to play them he could always H**p em' !! Don't think Jake will find them cruel & unusual punishment ! !

[katex]

Originally Posted by Balbus

The police got this wrong. The law on offensive weapons (Prevention of Crime Act 1953) only applies to "public places". Munir Hussain was convicted by a jury of inflicting grievous bodily harm on the basis that he had wreaked revenge on those who had attacked his family - the law of the vigilante.

You have all chosen to ignore this information by Balbus, who is well qualified to point this out.

This is also informative too :

Householders and the use of force against intruders

[cashman]

Originally Posted by katex

You have all chosen to ignore this information by Balbus, who is well qualified to point this out.

This is also informative too :

Householders and the use of force against intruders

not a question of ignoring balbus, the thread is about the treatment of a woman alone at home wi her kids n therefore in my eyes the law is n ass.

[accyman]

Originally Posted by katex

You have all chosen to ignore this information by Balbus, who is well qualified to point this out.

This is also informative too :

Householders and the use of force against intruders

its a pitty the police dont read this because it does seem that ringing the police usually ends up with teh victim been arrested or cautioned, if teh police want to install trust into teh public they need to start earning it and arrsting teh correct people

a woman alone in the house with kids facing an intruder is way up on my list of feeling threatened situations and to put it frankly the intruder should think hiself lucky the knife didnt end up inside him rather than cry to the police about been threatened by a woman with a knife behind a glass window alone with her kids

[mattylad]

Yes, not ignoring the article, unlike the police.

They arrest you all first and then decide afterwards if they are going to let you go.

They have little choice.

[katex]

Originally Posted by cashman

not a question of ignoring balbus, the thread is about the treatment of a woman alone at home wi her kids n therefore in my eyes the law is n ass.

But that was the point Cashman, the police were wrong; not the law.

[DaveinGermany]

Originally Posted by katex

But that was the point Cashman, the police were wrong; not the law.

But the Police enforce the Law, or so we were led to believe !!

[cashman]

Originally Posted by katex

But that was the point Cashman, the police were wrong; not the law.

as far as i'm aware the job of a policeman is to uphold the law, therefore making the policeman the laws representive, ya can skirt around that fact all ya want, i will stick with my statement.

[katex]

Originally Posted by DaveinGermany

But the Police enforce the Law, or so we were led to believe !!

Of course they do Dave .... but they are just the 'soldiers' behind the law (you will understand this no doubt) .. when it gets to the law courts 'tis a different matter.

Not all police officers can expect to be graduates in this difficult area, and can make mistakes in their interpretion of such, which is addressed when a case gets to court ... the next step in protecting and educating our back up services (the police) in what I consider, the best justice system in the world.

[cashman]

Originally Posted by katex

Of course they do Dave .... but they are just the 'soldiers' behind the law (you will understand this no doubt) .. when it gets to the law courts 'tis a different matter.

Not all police officers can expect to be graduates in this difficult area, and can make mistakes in their interpretion of such, which is addressed when a case gets to court ... the next step in protecting our back up services (the police) in what I consider, the best justice system in the world.

if they can train monkeys to brew up, why can they not train the police to follow the law?