User Panel
User Panel
User Panel
|
Posted: 7/20/2010 9:01:47 AM EDT
[#1]
hotlinks...makes life easy
I know a couple families who heard about this and said its a bad idea for several reasons. it looks good on the face of it. |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/20/2010 9:09:29 AM EDT
[#2]
Wow, some intelligence out of GB. Who'd have thought.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 7/20/2010 9:11:39 AM EDT
[#3]
 Logical decisions in Europe; Satan must be skiing. |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/20/2010 9:11:39 AM EDT
[#4]
Quoted: Wow, some intelligence out of GB. Who'd have thought.  |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/20/2010 9:12:16 AM EDT
[#5]
Quoted:
hotlinks...makes life easy I know a couple families who heard about this and said its a bad idea for several reasons. it looks good on the face of it. why? |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/20/2010 9:12:58 AM EDT
[#6]
|
|
|
|
Posted: 7/20/2010 9:13:23 AM EDT
[#7]
Quoted:
Wow, some intelligence out of GB. Who'd have thought. Great Britain refers only to the island comprised of England, Scotland, and Wales. Ireland is part of the British Isles. 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 7/20/2010 9:14:03 AM EDT
[#8]
Quoted:
Wow, some intelligence out of GB. Who'd have thought. Ireland is not the UK. |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/20/2010 9:14:26 AM EDT
[#9]
Quoted: Wow, some intelligence out of GB. Who'd have thought. Talking about intelligence, Ireland is not part of GB  |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/20/2010 9:15:08 AM EDT
[#10]
Quoted: He said GB, not UKQuoted: Wow, some intelligence out of GB. Who'd have thought. Ireland is not the UK. |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/20/2010 9:15:09 AM EDT
[#11]
Quoted: Wow, some intelligence out of GB. Who'd have thought. I think that post would qualify as being ironic.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 7/20/2010 9:15:57 AM EDT
[#12]
Quoted:
Wow, some intelligence out of GB. Who'd have thought. GB? huh? |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/20/2010 9:16:04 AM EDT
[#13]
Quoted:
Wow, some intelligence out of GB. Who'd have thought. Out of GD, not so much... |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/20/2010 9:16:42 AM EDT
[#14]
poor tojan
|
|
|
|
Posted: 7/20/2010 9:17:24 AM EDT
[#15]
We're called the 'Fightin' Irish' for a reason!
Chris |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/20/2010 9:18:57 AM EDT
[#16]
Now, if only someone would reincarnate William Wallace or Robert the Bruce so they can save Scotland from liberal socialism.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 7/20/2010 9:19:21 AM EDT
[#17]
Quoted:
Wow, some intelligence out of GB. Who'd have thought. Your correct STILL NO SIGN OF INTELLIGENCE OUT OF GB THE IRISH REPUBLIC has NOT been a part of Great Britain since the uprising of 1920's when they were given independence |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/20/2010 9:20:40 AM EDT
[#18]
Quoted:
Wow, some intelligence out of GB. Who'd have thought. Of course this is Ireland, not Northern Ireland (UK). Looks pretty close to the US model of Castle Doctrine. |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/20/2010 9:21:05 AM EDT
[#19]
Quoted:
Quoted:
Wow, some intelligence out of GB. Who'd have thought. Great Britain refers only to the island comprised of England, Scotland, and Wales AND NORTHERN IRELAND... FIXED IT FOR YA |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/20/2010 9:22:22 AM EDT
[#20]
Quoted:
hotlinks...makes life easy I know a couple families who heard about this and said its a bad idea for several reasons. it looks good on the face of it. I'd like to hear those reasons, since it appears to be an obvious good move. Are these criminal families that don't like this? |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/20/2010 9:23:16 AM EDT
[#21]
Quoted:
Quoted:
hotlinks...makes life easy I know a couple families who heard about this and said its a bad idea for several reasons. it looks good on the face of it. why? 1) criminals are armed, the victims are not, this law doesnt allow you to arm yourself or stop charges that you had an illegal weapon. 2) there is still a lot of civil-impossed segregation for religious groups. if the wrong person is in the wrong area people will use this law to get away with assault. These were the two reason I can remember, one guy was from Belfest (sp) the other from North ireland. |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/20/2010 9:23:20 AM EDT
[#22]
Quoted: Quoted: Wow, some intelligence out of GB. Who'd have thought. Your correct STILL NO SIGN OF INTELLIGENCE OUT OF GB THE IRISH REPUBLIC has NOT been a part of Great Britain since the uprising of 1920's when they were given independence And you're is even more correct  |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/20/2010 9:24:16 AM EDT
[#23]
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Wow, some intelligence out of GB. Who'd have thought. Your correct STILL NO SIGN OF INTELLIGENCE OUT OF GB THE IRISH REPUBLIC has NOT been a part of Great Britain since the uprising of 1920's when they were given independence And you're is even more correct
Clearly, the English are the original grammar Nazis. 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 7/20/2010 9:25:31 AM EDT
[#24]
Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Wow, some intelligence out of GB. Who'd have thought. Great Britain refers only to the island comprised of England, Scotland, and Wales AND NORTHERN IRELAND... FIXED IT FOR YA No you didn't, GB only refers to the mainland countries. N. Ireland is not part of great Britain, but is part of the United Kingdom. The full title is the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland. Would everyone please stop failing |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/20/2010 9:26:01 AM EDT
[#25]
Quoted: I'm Irish Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Wow, some intelligence out of GB. Who'd have thought. Your correct STILL NO SIGN OF INTELLIGENCE OUT OF GB THE IRISH REPUBLIC has NOT been a part of Great Britain since the uprising of 1920's when they were given independence And you're is even more correct Clearly, the English are the original grammar Nazis. |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/20/2010 9:29:33 AM EDT
[#26]
Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Wow, some intelligence out of GB. Who'd have thought. Great Britain refers only to the island comprised of England, Scotland, and Wales AND NORTHERN IRELAND... FIXED IT FOR YA Northern Ireland is on the same island as England, Scotland, and Wales? |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/20/2010 9:30:19 AM EDT
[#27]
Quoted: Quoted: I'm Irish Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Wow, some intelligence out of GB. Who'd have thought. Your correct STILL NO SIGN OF INTELLIGENCE OUT OF GB THE IRISH REPUBLIC has NOT been a part of Great Britain since the uprising of 1920's when they were given independence And you're is even more correct Clearly, the English are the original grammar Nazis. Which means your English is even worse than that of the English. |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/20/2010 9:30:55 AM EDT
[#28]
Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Wow, some intelligence out of GB. Who'd have thought. Great Britain refers only to the island comprised of England, Scotland, and Wales AND NORTHERN IRELAND... FIXED IT FOR YA Northern Ireland is on the same island as England, Scotland, and Wales? Lots of geographical (and other) fail in this thread |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/20/2010 9:32:57 AM EDT
[#29]
Quoted: poor tojan Damn. I've never had so many quotes in a single thread. Bastards. |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/20/2010 9:34:27 AM EDT
[#30]
I love it when all the "Irish" who have never been to Ireland (or could even find it on a map) make their presence known. You have some Irish ancestry, congratulations.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 7/20/2010 9:35:52 AM EDT
[#31]
Quoted: Quoted: poor tojan Damn. I've never had so many quotes in a single thread. Bastards. That's because you failed Tojan. You're a failing failer, from Failville |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/20/2010 9:37:56 AM EDT
[#32]
QUICK - SOMEONE POST A BLOODY MAP BEFORE THE YANKS HAVE A BRAIN ACHE
|
|
|
|
Posted: 7/20/2010 9:39:29 AM EDT
[#33]
Ireland, Scotland, it's all the same.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 7/20/2010 9:41:53 AM EDT
[#34]
Quoted: Ireland, Scotland, it's all the same. Yeah, according to Saddler the geographically inept Brit above you |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/20/2010 9:42:28 AM EDT
[#35]
Quoted:
Ireland, Scotland, it's all the same. their whisky all tastes the same, too. |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/20/2010 9:44:47 AM EDT
[#36]
Quoted: Only to your uneducated quarter pounder munching palette Quoted: Ireland, Scotland, it's all the same. their whisky all tastes the same, too. |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/20/2010 9:45:08 AM EDT
[#37]
Nice to see a ray of light shine out of the third world every now and then. Good for them.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 7/20/2010 9:47:00 AM EDT
[#38]
Quoted:
Ireland, Scotland, it's all the same. Yep. Easy pickins' for the Northmen.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 7/20/2010 9:47:21 AM EDT
[#39]
Quoted:
Quoted:
Ireland, Scotland, it's all the same. their whisky all tastes the same, too. BLASPHEMER! |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/20/2010 9:51:33 AM EDT
[#40]
Quoted: Quoted: Only to your uneducated quarter pounder munching palette Quoted: Ireland, Scotland, it's all the same. their whisky all tastes the same, too. Everybody knows that bourbon is the best tasting whiskey. |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/20/2010 9:55:33 AM EDT
[#41]
Quoted:
Quoted:
Only to your uneducated quarter pounder munching palette Quoted:
Ireland, Scotland, it's all the same. their whisky all tastes the same, too.
I've always noticed that cheap whisky/whiskey/bourbon is usually more bitter and burns more than the more expensive stuff. Cheap alcohol also gives me a worse hangover. But other than these things, I can't really tell the cheap stuff from the expensive stuff. |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/20/2010 10:13:52 AM EDT
[#42]
Quoted: Quoted: Ireland, Scotland, it's all the same. their whisky all tastes the same, too. BLASPHEMY!  |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/20/2010 10:27:36 AM EDT
[#43]
Quoted:
Wow, some intelligence out of GB. Who'd have thought. Republic of Ireland. Not GB. British Isles yes, Great Britain or UK no. |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/20/2010 4:55:47 PM EDT
[#44]
The vast majority of that bill is already the law of the land in Ireland. The only new bit I can see is the bit about the intruder not being permitted to sue the homeowner, but that's only a fairly partial one as the homeowner would pretty much have to break the law to be liable as it is.
Controlling caselaw is DPP vs Barnes Selected quotes. It may be important to note that this constituted him not merely a trespasser but a trespasser in a dwellinghouse which he had entered forcibly with intent to steal from it.
In acting in this way, Barnes was not merely committing a crime but was invading Mr. Forrestal’s constitutional rights. Article 40.5 of the Constitution, under the heading “Inviobility of the dwelling” provides as follows: “The dwelling of every citizen is invioble and shall not be forcibly entered save in accordance with law”. An occupier in the presence of a burglar (whether the burglar knows that he is there or not), is in a position of very acute difficulty. Firstly, his dwellinghouse has been violated and this is not merely a crime at law but an invasion of his personal rights. Such a thing, especially if repeated, may in itself gravely undermine the wellbeing even of a strong and healthy occupant, and still more that of an older or feeble one. The offence of burglary committed in a dwellinghouse is in every instance an act of aggression, an attack on the personal rights of the citizen as well as a public crime and is a violation of him or her.
But it is also necessary to say, in the words of an English academic authority:
“When the householder finds himself in the presences of a burglar in the still of the night, his position is exactly the same as it was for his nineteenth eighteenth or even sixteenth century ancestors. The police force is of no service. If he has a telephone, the noise made in operating it will probably alert the burglar, who may well be of a violent disposition. The householder knows that he must make the choice between attempting to arrest or scare off the burglar in which case he may find himself in serious danger, if the burglar turns out to be violent, and attacking the burglar first without a warning and possibly by inflicting death thus ensuring the safety of himself and his family”. (See Lanham Defence of Property in the Criminal Law [1966] Crim. L.R. 368 Every burglary in a dwellinghouse is an act of aggression. The circumstances may make this element of aggression more or less patent but the violation of a citizen’s dwellinghouse is just that, a violation and an act of aggression no matter what the other circumstances.
A person who commits such a violation exposes himself to various legal penalties, if he is detected and convicted. But that is not the limit of his exposure. Although he is not liable to be killed by the householder simply for being a burglar, he is an aggressor and may expect to be lawfully met with retaliatory force to drive him off or to immobilise or detain him and end the threat which he offers to the personal rights of the householder and his or her family or guests As noted above, the special protection afforded to the dwellinghouse dates back to time immemorial. It has been expressed in various ways, none perhaps so well known, even outside legal circles as that in Semaynes case (1604) 5 Co. Rep. 91a:
“That the house of everyone is to him as his castle and fortress, as well for his defence against injury and violence as for his repose…”. This is the origin of the “castle doctrine” prominent especially in U.S. law. It is of course common experience that there will be occasions when a person might well be advised to flee, but that is a matter for his own discretion and he can never be under a legal obligation to do so. Equally, there will be other occasions when a person might be ill advised to flee, perhaps because of exterior conditions or perhaps because of the fear of meeting an accomplice of the known aggressor, or being pursued by the latter, and attacked when he is outside his dwellinghouse and to that extent in a worse or more dubious position.
It is, in our view, quite inconsistent with the constitutional doctrine of the inviolability of a dwellinghouse that a householder or other lawful occupant could be ever be under a legal obligation to flee the dwellinghouse or, as it might be put in more contemporary language, to retreat from it. It follows from this, in turn, that such a person can never be in a worse position in point of law because he has decided to stand his ground in his house. But even apart from that it would be observed that the statutory formula itself partakes of both a subjective element - force “such as is reasonable in the circumstances as her or she perceives them to be…” and an objective element - the provisions of s.1(2) of the 1997 Act which require a court or jury to have regard to the presence or absence of reasonable grounds for the belief that the level of force used was no more than was reasonably necessary in the circumstances. But it must always be borne in mind that the burglar must take the occupant as he finds him and that in many cases it will in practice take the deployment of grossly disproportionate force, or evidence of actual malice (as in the well known Martin case in Great Britain) to fix the householder with liability. He or she has, after all, been deliberately subjected to an experience which will shock even the most robust and might make many irrational with terror.
NTM |
|
|
Win a FREE Membership!
Sign up for the ARFCOM weekly newsletter and be entered to win a free ARFCOM membership. One new winner* is announced every week!
You will receive an email every Friday morning featuring the latest chatter from the hottest topics, breaking news surrounding legislation, as well as exclusive deals only available to ARFCOM email subscribers.
AR15.COM is the world's largest firearm community and is a gathering place for firearm enthusiasts of all types.
From hunters and military members, to competition shooters and general firearm enthusiasts, we welcome anyone who values and respects the way of the firearm.
Subscribe to our monthly Newsletter to receive firearm news, product discounts from your favorite Industry Partners, and more.
Copyright © 1996-2024 AR15.COM LLC. All Rights Reserved.
Any use of this content without express written consent is prohibited.
AR15.Com reserves the right to overwrite or replace any affiliate, commercial, or monetizable links, posted by users, with our own.
