New Law To Protect People Defending Their Homes

SEPT 23 1989 · 14-12-2009 06:17PM

All that will happen now is that the scumbags will carry handguns rather than screwdrivers when robbing your home,a lot of innocent people will lose their lives over this

aDeener · 14-12-2009 06:19PM

SEPT 23 1989 wrote: »

All that will happen now is that the scumbags will carry handguns rather than screwdrivers when robbing your home,a lot of innocent people will lose their lives over this

they carry guns as it stands! :rolleyes:

SEPT 23 1989 · 14-12-2009 06:25PM

aDeener wrote: »

they carry guns as it stands! :rolleyes:

no they dont they are scum but they are not complete fools

Capt'n Midnight · 14-12-2009 06:26PM

Reese Abundant Campus wrote: »

you can't shoot someone in the face if they stick their hand through your letterbox.

:rolleyes:

Until you open the door you can only shoot them in the hand.

ScumLord · 14-12-2009 06:31PM

dermo88 wrote: »

In Ireland, judging by the treatment of Patrick Nally, they will treat the likes of John Frog Ward like a victim, irrespective of the FACT that John Frog Ward had no less than 46 criminal convictions prior to his death.

I doubt that, I was quite surprised to be on a bus going down Gilmartin road after that happened full of people cheering. Travelers get no respect in this country and most people supported Nally, he even got off really lightly considering he went out and shot the guy in the back. The vast majority of Irish people applauded his actions.

I'm not picking any sides or saying whats right or wrong, I'm just saying your way off the mark if you think travelers are anything but despised in this country, that's just a fact of life.

Chucky the tree · 14-12-2009 06:37PM

dermo88 wrote: »

Back in my early days on boards.ie and also on p45.net, I had cause to comment, like many others on the controversial and divisive Patrick Nally case. Currently, I live overseas, in a developing country. If I have the "misfortune" of maiming or killing an intruder in my 'flat' (apartment) the police will shake my hand and play a game of pool with me over a beer or six.

And maybe smoke a joint or two and pop a couple of 'E's".

In Ireland, judging by the treatment of Patrick Nally, they will treat the likes of John Frog Ward like a victim, irrespective of the FACT that John Frog Ward had no less than 46 criminal convictions prior to his death.

Now.......I am not going to even risk a ban, on commenting on the community John Frog Ward came from, but ask some questions.

1. Do pubs close their doors because this particular community is known for their talent in pub quizzes?
2. Are we grateful for our own brand of 'traveller' having seen the kind that comes from Eastern Europe?
3. Other more horribly right wing questions may follow, which are poorly reflective of my character, but more so....of our society.
4. Those questions and their solutions are very final. This is because this grouping in society has failed to address their problems.

Read between the lines, and I hate it.

Says it all really.

Jesus Juice · 14-12-2009 06:48PM

Nice one.

Its good to know a burglar can now get a face full of a hurley if he tries to rob our house.

stovelid · 14-12-2009 06:54PM

dermo88 wrote: »

And maybe smoke a joint or two and pop a couple of 'E's".

I've often wondered how one would "pop" these Es of which you speak.

Jesus Juice · 14-12-2009 06:56PM

stovelid wrote: »

I've often wondered how one would "pop" these Es of which you speak.

Presumably,like popping a boner?

Overheal · 14-12-2009 06:58PM

SEPT 23 1989 wrote: »

no they dont they are scum but they are not complete fools

You'd think that.

The irony of course being this man shot at the Gardai through his own front door.

Oh and more to your point, there was this. And this. Just two, very recent cases of scumbags with guns.

A google search for Dublin Shooting is too easy, tbh.

stovelid · 14-12-2009 07:02PM

Jesus Juice wrote: »

Presumably,like popping a boner?

Excellent. So if you rub Es, they get bigger?

DonkeyStyle \o/ · 14-12-2009 07:07PM

RTE NEWS wrote:

The Commission is also recommending that gardaí and prison officers be allowed use lethal force when doing their job such as when making arrests, dealing with serious public disorders or preventing prison escapes.

I remember hearing some of the lisbon 'no' voters mentioning this exact lethal force issue, apparently it was in some lisbon treaty foot note. I can't find anything about it from searching the text of the actual treaty, and there was an awful lot of scaremongering, so maybe it's total arse. (maybe someone who actually knows the treaty well can shed some light)
Interesting timing though, why now?
If this is about Ireland getting in line with the lisbon treaty, then I don't think this proposal is going away.

If that's why they're doing this, it really makes the home/self-defence aspect look like sugar coating... "yes, yes, wonderful self defence for everyone, free padraig nally... and oh by the way police can lawfully kill you"
I think this is what the debate really needs to be about.

The_Minister · 14-12-2009 07:12PM

piby wrote: »

Good to see that they're doing something about this at long last! Too many people have been screwed over by the legal system the way it is!

http://www.rte.ie/news/2009/1214/justice.html

Who has been screwed over?

The_Minister · 14-12-2009 07:18PM

dermo88 wrote: »

In Ireland, judging by the treatment of Patrick Nally, they will treat the likes of John Frog Ward like a victim, irrespective of the FACT that John Frog Ward had no less than 46 criminal convictions prior to his death.

He was the victim.
Being guilty of many crimes, be they prostitution, drug-dealing or stealing, doesn't take away the right to life - we don't have the death penalty.

Look:
Man attacks you, you kill him - grand (within reason).
You shoot man, he is crawling away, doubtless crying in fear, you enter house, reload, come back outside and finish him in cold blood - not ok.

dermo88 wrote: »

Now.......I am not going to even risk a ban, on commenting on the community John Frog Ward came from, but ask some questions.

1. Do pubs close their doors because this particular community is known for their talent in pub quizzes?
2. Are we grateful for our own brand of 'traveller' having seen the kind that comes from Eastern Europe?
3. Other more horribly right wing questions may follow, which are poorly reflective of my character, but more so....of our society.
4. Those questions and their solutions are very final. This is because this grouping in society has failed to address their problems.

Read between the lines, and I hate it.

:eek: OMG, I just got that now.

stovelid · 14-12-2009 07:20PM

The_Minister wrote: »

Man attacks you, you kill him - grand (within reason).
You shoot man, he is crawling away, doubtless crying in fear, you enter house, reload, come back outside and finish him in cold blood - not ok.

Unfortunately to the baying mob that often comprises public opinion in this country, it is OK.

Liam Byrne · 14-12-2009 07:24PM

ScumLord wrote: »

Travelers get no respect in this country and most people supported Nally, he even got off really lightly considering he went out and shot the guy in the back. The vast majority of Irish people applauded his actions.

If "travellers get no respect", it's partially because groups like Pavee Point try to defend the indefensible.

If an individual traveller (or anyone) commits a crime, or intimidates someone, or gets drunk and violent, or even leaves a place in a complete mess, then groups like this should not defend them, because the resultant opinion because of their actions is that they all defend and condone it.

And this isn't just a traveller issue; reading through the papers about people who get off lightly for assault based on some half-assed excuse or on the basis that they can't control themselves after drinking too much is sickening.

Likewise, any "foreign" criminals and scumbags should be dealt with without accusations of racism, while those who behave and don't excuse/condone the thugs should be welcomed and supported.

ScumLord wrote: »

I'm not picking any sides or saying whats right or wrong, I'm just saying your way off the mark if you think travelers are anything but despised in this country, that's just a fact of life.

Decent, respectful, law-abiding travellers citizens are OK by me; others who impose on law-abiding people or start rows over nothing or drink too much or intimidate people are not.

And that is a just fact of life.

I couldn't give a bollox what religion, race, ethnicity someone is; if they're sound, they're sound. But if they excuse objectionable behaviour then they're obviously not sound.

Liam Byrne · 14-12-2009 07:27PM

The_Minister wrote: »

....doubtless crying in fear......

Sorry, but that's an attempt at emotive bull****! :mad:

What about the householder who was crying in fear ?

The bottom line is that if a scumbag doesn't break in or threaten you, they've nothing to "cry in fear" about.

And if they do, any resulting occurrences are 100% based on their decision to be a thug.

epgc3fyqirnbsx · 14-12-2009 07:37PM

dermo88 wrote: »

Back in my early days on boards.ie and also on p45.net, I had cause to comment, like many others on the controversial and divisive Patrick Nally case. Currently, I live overseas, in a developing country. If I have the "misfortune" of maiming or killing an intruder in my 'flat' (apartment) the police will shake my hand and play a game of pool with me over a beer or six.

And maybe smoke a joint or two and pop a couple of 'E's".

In Ireland, judging by the treatment of Patrick Nally, they will treat the likes of John Frog Ward like a victim, irrespective of the FACT that John Frog Ward had no less than 46 criminal convictions prior to his death.

Now.......I am not going to even risk a ban, on commenting on the community John Frog Ward came from, but ask some questions.

1. Do pubs close their doors because this particular community is known for their talent in pub quizzes?
2. Are we grateful for our own brand of 'traveller' having seen the kind that comes from Eastern Europe?
3. Other more horribly right wing questions may follow, which are poorly reflective of my character, but more so....of our society.
4. Those questions and their solutions are very final. This is because this grouping in society has failed to address their problems.

Read between the lines, and I hate it.

Jeebus! Are you proposing a final solution!?
Might make 'em sweat under the collar anyway...

The_Minister · 14-12-2009 07:48PM

Liam Byrne wrote: »

Sorry, but that's an attempt at emotive bull****! :mad:

What about the householder who was crying in fear ?

The bottom line is that if a scumbag doesn't break in or threaten you, they've nothing to "cry in fear" about.

And if they do, any resulting occurrences are 100% based on their decision to be a thug.

In that case the man had been shot. With a shotgun. And beaten IIRC.
He was trying to crawl away, when the man came back out, with a loaded shotgun, and blew him away there and then.

Had the first shot killed him, I wouldn't have cared, but only a coward kills a man whose shot and bleeding on the ground, trying to retreat, and no honourable man would defend one who did so.

SEPT 23 1989 · 14-12-2009 07:55PM

Overheal wrote: »

You'd think that.

The irony of course being this man shot at the Gardai through his own front door.

Oh and more to your point, there was this. And this. Just two, very recent cases of scumbags with guns.

A google search for Dublin Shooting is too easy, tbh.

All those examples you give are of organised crime
im talking about the average small time burgler who breaks into houses they do not carry guns

jumpguy · 14-12-2009 07:57PM

This should be made so that you are not allowed to kill someone fleeing, otherwise it'll be ****e. No man should be shot in the back...

Overheal · 14-12-2009 08:07PM

SEPT 23 1989 wrote: »

All those examples you give are of organised crime
im talking about the average small time burgler who breaks into houses they do not carry guns

Oh.

Right.

Because Organised Crime never tries to break into homes.

If I could post a bigger one of :rolleyes: these in AH, believe me I would.

Do you have any evidence beside your own opinion that the examples I provided were actually organised crime anyway? Do you have anyway to prove that they took their marching orders from a Don or a Kingpin?

Im calling them scumbags. Prove me wrong.

Liam Byrne · 14-12-2009 08:12PM

The_Minister wrote: »

In that case the man had been shot. With a shotgun. And beaten IIRC.
He was trying to crawl away, when the man came back out, with a loaded shotgun, and blew him away there and then.

You're conveniently leaving out the fact that Nally was repeatedly broken in to; i.e. every time the scumbag had previously "left", he had come back with buddies, and the law had failed him.

I'd prefer the existing outcome - where the scum died as a direct result of his own actions - to reading the following weekend's headlines that yet another defenseless old man was beaten and murdered in his bed.

Of course, I'd much prefer the scenario where no crime or intimidation took place whatsover, but Ward ensured that that wasn't to be.

The_Minister wrote: »

Had the first shot killed him, I wouldn't have cared

At least we agree on that much

The_Minister wrote: »

.....but only a coward kills a man whose shot and bleeding on the ground, trying to retreat

While I'm not 100% "defending" him, I can completely understand how the fear imposed by Ward could overtake any other natural instinct. To say that Nally was "a coward" is simplistic in the extreme.

The_Minister wrote: »

....and no honourable man would defend one who did so.

Thanks for the attempted insult :rolleyes: I'm 100% honourable, and I would defend Nally as outlined above.

Manic Moran · 14-12-2009 08:36PM

jumpguy wrote: »

This should be made so that you are not allowed to kill someone fleeing, otherwise it'll be ****e. No man should be shot in the back...

Unfortunately, it often happens with cause. There were some 'reaction time' experiments conducted in the US. It looked at the number of times forensics showed that a suspect was shot in the back vs the amount of times the police said 'self defence'.

The reaction times were such that even if police had their sidearms out and drawn, it was still easy enough to turn, shoot, and turn before the police had the time to react. Usual response time was between a third and a half a second.

There's also the argument that no man should be fleeing the scene of a crime to begin with, especially if it's an assault on the person such as a burglary. My solution for 'If you don't want me to shoot you' is 'don't break into my home to begin with.' A simple, but very effective way to lengthen your life.

NTM

Liam Byrne · 14-12-2009 08:40PM

Manic Moran wrote: »

There's also the argument that no man should be fleeing the scene of a crime to begin with, especially if it's an assault on the person such as a burglary. My solution for 'If you don't want me to shoot you' is 'don't break into my home to begin with.' A simple, but very effective way to lengthen your life.

NTM

+ 1,000,000

FatherTed · 14-12-2009 08:50PM

If someone comes into my house and I catch him stealing my TV and he refuses to stop and takes off with my TV.

If I choose not to shoot him, I am out a TV. That's a loss for me. Who's going to cover my loss (if insurance doesn't cover it)?

Pedro K · 14-12-2009 08:50PM

The_Minister wrote: »

In that case the man had been shot. With a shotgun. And beaten IIRC.
He was trying to crawl away, when the man came back out, with a loaded shotgun, and blew him away there and then.

You can be damn sure that had he not have died that night, Frog Ward would've come back with a few of his buddies and probably even have killed Nally.

As previously said, Nally was repeatedly broken into and terrorised, and the law had failed him countless times.

RMD · 14-12-2009 08:50PM

All we need now is legalized handguns for defense and we can turn Ireland into America, yay.

weldoninhio · 14-12-2009 08:52PM

The_Minister wrote: »

In that case the man had been shot. With a shotgun. And beaten IIRC.
He was trying to crawl away, when the man came back out, with a loaded shotgun, and blew him away there and then.

Had the first shot killed him, I wouldn't have cared, but only a coward kills a man whose shot and bleeding on the ground, trying to retreat, and no honourable man would defend one who did so.

I love the way your timeline starts with him being shot, and not with him terrorising an old man. Its bleeding hearts like you that lets us end up in a situation like we have now, where criminals are getting off with a slap on the wrist for serious crimes because their "rights" might have been abused.

Once they commit a crime, they should forfeit any civil rights they have, because acting like a scumbag is far from civil.

sock puppet · 14-12-2009 09:05PM

weldoninhio wrote: »

I love the way your timeline starts with him being shot, and not with him terrorising an old man. Its bleeding hearts like you that lets us end up in a situation like we have now, where criminals are getting off with a slap on the wrist for serious crimes because their "rights" might have been abused.

Once they commit a crime, they should forfeit any civil rights they have, because acting like a scumbag is far from civil.

This thread has absolutely nothing to do with sentencing so why bring it up? Was it to reach the "at least one reference to bleeding hearts/PC liberals" quota?

You're right to an extent but shooting a man as he flees is unjustifiable no matter what the circumstances.

New Law To Protect People Defending Their Homes

Comments