And the only reason it has not happened here yet is because they may or may not get away with it in some Blue states. In Red States the crime scene cleaner’s bill would require a GoFundMe, but it is doable.

Keep your powder dry because some dumb assholes will try and do this.

Spread the love

By Miguel.GFZ

Semi-retired like Vito Corleone before the heart attack. Consiglieri to J.Kb and AWA. I lived in a Gun Control Paradise: It sucked and got people killed. I do believe that Freedom scares the political elites.

15 thoughts on “England: Why we need Castle Doctrine, Stand Your Ground and rifles with lots of big magazines.”
  1. All of them, lined up to go up the stairs – becomes what’s referred to as a “fatal funnel.” And fatal it would be. It’s even an ammo saver, in an era where ammo is hard to find and expensive. A single bullet could take out several.

    Or not. I don’t mind pulling the trigger a second time. And they’ve even been helpful enough to provide the evidence for their own trials – if they lived.

    In my jurisdiction, if any one of them lived, they’d hold the surviving intruders responsible for the cost of cleaning bloodstains out of the walls and carpet.
    As it should be.

    Of course, this sort of crap ideological crap isn’t tolerated in my jurisdiction. I’ll not have to worry about this. Just the occasional run-of-the-mill burglar, robber, etc.

    Same result.

  2. This is also why we need solid protections for Freedom of Speech. In England, speech deemed “hateful” or “intolerant” (using broad, SJW-approved definitions) is outlawed, just like self-defense.

    And the Palestine-supporting, Israel-hating Muslims and Leftists are taking full advantage of it. Someone mentions the documented, factual shortcomings of Hamas and/or Palestine, and they’ll denounce it as “hate speech” and attack, both rhetorically and physically*.

    Thus, if you say something “wrongthink” and are physically assaulted, you are criminally liable for inciting your attacker. If you then defend yourself and injure your attacker (how else will you get them to stop, especially if there are more than one?), you are doubly criminally liable.

    And they WILL throw the book at you, as they let your attackers off. Because punishing SJWs for their violent actions is hateful, or something.

    This is how cultures die. First they outlaw defending their way of life with force, then they outlaw defending their way of life with words, and then there’s no way to defend the culture and it’s openly attacked and torn down from all sides — including and most especially from the inside.

    * – For some reason, England seems to have an unwritten “fighting words” exception to their assault laws, even without freedom of speech … but only Leftists and Muslims can use it.

    1. As an aside: Another blogger reminds us that during WWII, England experienced a shortage of rifles and small arms, and so American civilians were asked, “Would you send a rifle to defend a British home?” Millions of privately-owned guns were donated and sent over … and the vast majority were never returned; instead, after the war was over they were collected by the British government and unceremoniously dumped into the Atlantic.

      Thus, if the question were asked again today, the overwhelming response would be a resounding, “No.”

      In the name of safety, they voted to outlaw guns and self-defense (both armed and unarmed). In the name of tolerance, they voted to outlaw free speech. In the name of diversity, they voted to allow immigrants with diametrically-opposed values free rein to do whatever they want — including violence — and outlawed their own citizens from doing anything about it.

      They created this monster, which is now out of their control, and they have no way to stop it.

      F#@k ’em. They made that bed, they can sleep in it.

    2. Just remember, in spite of frequent claims saying otherwise, that England does NOT have a Constitution. The legislature can do, and does, whatever it feels like. There’s a reason people in England are called “subjects”. In particular, just like there is no right of self defense, there is no right of free speech.
      The same is true in other countries. While some might have actual written documents labeled “Constitution” that tag doesn’t label something designed to protect the rights of the people. I’ve looked at the “constitution” of Holland at some length — that’s my country of origin — it is a good example of what I just described.

  3. And, the attack happened because he “allegedly” disrespected palastine.

    The mob breaking into his home likely had no direct evidence of this offense, and let’s be honest here, disrespecting someone/something is not exactly a reason to attack them.

    Yet. Here we are.

  4. Import Palestine get Palestine. They do this to Israeli’s too, except usually that ends in murder.

    1. Yes, it’s real. SCOTUS ruled (in a rare unanimous decision) that police cannot remove firearms from a home without a warrant. The case is Caniglia v. Strom. The state sought to treat a home like an abandoned car with a firearm visible, but the court rejected that view; a private, occupied home is not in any way like an abandoned car parked on a public street, regardless of whether or not firearms are present.

      But it gets better: Justice Alito wrote in his concurrent opinion that while they’re not ruling on so-called “red flag” laws, this decision has serious implications for them. That’s actually in his written opinion! If police cannot remove firearms without a warrant specifically to seize them, then “red flag” warrant-less seizures are Constitutionally questionable at best, and probably will not hold up to scrutiny.

Login or register to comment.