Robert E. Shlafer wrote:
>What opened up this "avenue" was a homeowner shooting a guy trespassing in his
>home at o'darkthirty wherein the homeowner was convicted of using unreasonable
>force and some dumbass judge and jury decided the rights of the criminal came
>before the rights of the culprit. A case of dumb and dumber to be sure.....
English farmer Tony Martin is now a legend in his own time. After being
burglarized time and time again on his remote farm, in 1999 he caught
two burglars red-handed. He shot and killed one, wounded the other. He
was subsequently convicted of murder, and although it was later reduced
to manslaughter, he served four years in prison. And the burglar he
wounded? He served no time and sued Farmer Martin! And collected
unemployment benefits! And, as I recall, victim's benefits!
During a trip to England last May, I met a retiree in a cafe down in
Wilton who recounted hearing noises at 2 a.m. coming from the shed
where he made furniture. It was behind his second floor apartment, and
after calling the police, he went down to the shed to investigate.
There he found two young men stealing his power tools. When the police
arrived, they found the poor old boy unconscious from a smash on the
back of the head from a 2x4, with five screwdriver stab wounds in the
chest, and the screwdriver still sticking out of his thigh. The first
thing the police asked him? "Did you injure the two lads, because if
you did, we will have to arrest you." After, of course, advising HIM of
his rights to remain silent.
Since the Tony Martin fiasco, many attempts have been made in Parliament
to protect property owners from such abuse. So far, all attempts have
been killed by the Labour majority.
As Bob Dylan once sang, "The times they are achangin'...." (Oh, and
Bob, I think you meant the rights of the criminal came before the rights
of the victim!)