Re: Man shoots at noisy teenagers, killing one

"Brent P" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, P. Tierney wrote:
> >
> > "Brent P" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >> In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, P. Tierney wrote:
> >> >
> >> > "Brent P" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> >> > news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >> >> In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, The Rifleman wrote:
> >> >> > The effects of idiot do gooders getting guns banned is shown
> > perfectly
> >> > well
> >> >> > over here in the UK,  Since gun  ownership was basically
introduced
> > in
> >> > 1996
> >> >> > gun crime from gangsters, robbers, rapists, drug dealers etc has
> > risen
> >> > over
> >> >> > 100% in 5 years.
> >> >>
> >> >> I've read some news stories of people in the UK who have defended
> >> >> themselves from criminals, using firearms to do so, and thusly have
had
> >> >> incured rather extreme penalties. Much more than the criminal who
> >> >> attacked them.
> >> >
> >> >     Got any links?
> >>
> >> A google search fails to turn up the articles I remember reading a
> >> couple years ago. I failed to save the urls so finding the articles
> >> at this point would be difficult.
> >
> >     It's worth a look.  Something that seems unjust on the
> > surface of things isn't always so when the details are explored.
>
> The news stories I recall reading were more detailed than what as
> given in the article I gave the URL too. However I don't know how
> criminally charging people who scare off and detain criminal intruders
> with toy guns can be anything but unjust.

    I don't know.  But a paragraph blurb likely doesn't do a
full court case justice.

    It was also mentioned that the sentences were "much more
than the criminal who attacked them", which wasn't in the URL,
though there were some other points of interest in it.


                                                        P. Tierney