Rocket launcher handed in during gun surrender

[Duke Wellington]

31 minutes ago, spartan max2 said:

What if I defend myself against the guy with the knife with a pistol?

If he comes at you then yes you can shoot him.

If he starts backing off and running away then you cannot. Even if he is carrying some of your property.

[hetrodoxly]

2 hours ago, RabidMongoose said:

Without a license you are allowed samurai swords, air pistols and air rifles below 12 foot pounds.

With a license you are allowed shotguns, more powerful air pistols and air rifles, and .22 semi-automatics.

Anything greater requires an additional license normally only given to the police, military, or security forces.

You can have larger calibre for deer hunting etc, most people think there was a ban on hand guns but that's not the case, the law is can you justify owning one, pest controllers can, terrier men controlling fox in the ground can, deer stalkers to finish off injured deer can, knacker men can, vets can, some police forces are allowing 410 shot pistols for pest control, you can still get a licence for black powder pistols.

[aztek]

he'll be fked either way, if he has illegal pistol

[hetrodoxly]

40 minutes ago, OverSword said:

In that case, in England, defending yourself with anything but your body or a club would be illegal. Guns are illegal and effectively knives are as well. And if you lived you would get in trouble for using the club I’d wager.

Guns and knives aren't illegal, the law is you can't use them in self defence, you can take a fixed blade knife hunting, fishing, camping etc, if you take one to the pub you'll be prosecuted.

[RoofGardener]

9 minutes ago, hetrodoxly said:

Guns and knives aren't illegal, the law is you can't use them in self defence, you can take a fixed blade knife hunting, fishing, camping etc, if you take one to the pub you'll be prosecuted.

Yeah ... I know.. I took my anti-tank rocket launcher to the pub, and people had the nerve to complain  

[spartan max2]

30 minutes ago, hetrodoxly said:

Guns and knives aren't illegal, the law is you can't use them in self defence, you can take a fixed blade knife hunting, fishing, camping etc, if you take one to the pub you'll be prosecuted.

That can't be real.

So I can't use a knife to defend myself from an attacker ?

So if the other person is stronger then me I am just *****?

[+Desertrat56]

3 hours ago, Setton said:

 

It's also a common misconception brought about by a paranoid failure to understand the term 'reasonable force'. 

You absolutely are allowed to defend yourself, in a manner commensurate to the threat you face. 

E. G. If someone tries to punch you, you're free to punch them back. If they pull a knife on you, you're can seriously injure or kill them (as that is the same threat you are facing). You can't however, kill someone who isn't threatening your life or use a weapon you shouldn't have possessed. So if someone pulls out a knife and you stab them with yours first, you're fine on the self defence side but will be prosecuted for having and using the knife. 

That makes more sense and I did understand that the person I responded to was grousing and exaggerating because of the language used.  Some people just like to make things seem worse than they really are.  My response to him was in similar kind. 

[spartan max2]

4 minutes ago, Desertrat56 said:

That makes more sense and I did understand that the person I responded to was grousing and exaggerating because of the language used.  Some people just like to make things seem worse than they really are.  My response to him was in similar kind. 

Setton can correct me if I'm wrong but it sounds like if someone attacks you with a knife you can't defend yourself with one.

Because it is illegal to have a knife for self defense. Because you "shouldn't have possessed it". 

That sounds like it inherently disadvantages innocent people. 

You're allowed to defend yourself without weapons against people who might have weapons.

That feels very wrong 

Edited August 7, 2019 by spartan max2

[+Desertrat56]

6 minutes ago, spartan max2 said:

Setton can correct me if I'm wrong but it sounds like if someone attacks you with a knife you can't defend yourself with one.

Because it is illegal to have a knife for self defense. 

That sounds like it inherently disadvantages innocent people. 

That isn't what is seemed like Setton said to me.  It seemed like you can use a knife against a person threatening you with a knife.  Different states in the U.S. have different rules and I believe what Setton described is very similar to the state of Colorado.  In Texas you are allowed to shoot someone who is trespassing once they get into your house, you cannot shoot them if they are on your porch trying to break the door, but once they step inside you can shoot them (even if it turns out they don't have a gun).  In New Mexico it is more complicated, every county has different laws and if you are related to a politician, a state police big wig or someone who owns a lot of ranches you can get away with almost anything.

You are allowed to have kitchen knives, right?  Or a fire place poker, screw driver or hammer?  Those can be lethal and used in self defense.

Do you have to have a license for a hunting knife if you are a hunter?

Edited August 7, 2019 by Desertrat56

[+OverSword]

35 minutes ago, hetrodoxly said:

Guns and knives aren't illegal, the law is you can't use them in self defence, you can take a fixed blade knife hunting, fishing, camping etc, if you take one to the pub you'll be prosecuted.

Yeah.  I carry one everywhere I go and use it almost daily for one thing or another and has never been used as a weapon.  As a matter of fact this has been my practice since I was a boy.  It's perfectly safe and reasonable for me to carry it.  In your country I would be forbidden because some inner city thug may carry one and the fact is the ban on casually carrying one doesn't stop the thugs from doing so.  Were I there I would consider this unreasonable and it's difficult for me to understand how you can't.  

I'm not assigning the same value to my knife as to a gun as a gun has only one purpose and it's reasonable that you have effectively banned them in your nation if that's how the majority want it to be, but please don't pretend that guns and knives are legal there.  They are only legal under extremely narrow conditions.

[+OverSword]

14 minutes ago, spartan max2 said:

That can't be real.

So I can't use a knife to defend myself from an attacker ?

So if the other person is stronger then me I am just *****?

Yes.  And if you hit them much harder than they hit you, you are in as much trouble as the aggressor. 

[+OverSword]

4 minutes ago, Desertrat56 said:

That isn't what is seemed like Setton said to me.  It seemed like you can use a knife against a person threatening you with a knife.

No.  You can not.  It is illegal for you to have a knife and you will at a minimum receive the same charges as your attacker.

[+OverSword]

1 hour ago, hetrodoxly said:

if you take one to the pub you'll be prosecuted.

Why?

[Setton]

2 hours ago, OverSword said:

One punch can kill so if a person were punching you can you defend yourself with a cricket bat?

Yes. So long as you were carrying it because you were playing cricket not because you planned to fight with it. 

2 hours ago, spartan max2 said:

What if I defend myself against the guy with the knife with a pistol?

Again, yes, provided you were allowed to carry the pistol (you almost certainly wouldn't be). 

It's not about 'matching' the weapon, it's about the fear the victim feels. If you genuinely fear for your life, you can do pretty much whatever. What you can't do is go around armed just in case something happens. 

[Setton]

14 minutes ago, OverSword said:

No.  You can not.  It is illegal for you to have a knife and you will at a minimum receive the same charges as your attacker.

No it isn't. Knives are legal so long as you have a purpose for carrying it (self defence is not a valid purpose). 

You will also not get the same sentence as the attacker. They will be prosecuted for the assault/attempted murder, possession of a bladed article.l and going equipped (off the top of my head. You would only be prosecuted for the second offence. 

[Setton]

18 minutes ago, OverSword said:

Yes.  And if you hit them much harder than they hit you, you are in as much trouble as the aggressor. 

Again, not about matching its about the victim's perception. 

If you think they are going to try and hit oyu hard enough to kill you, you can do whatever you have to to make them stop. 

[Setton]

22 minutes ago, OverSword said:

Yeah.  I carry one everywhere I go and use it almost daily for one thing or another and has never been used as a weapon.  As a matter of fact this has been my practice since I was a boy.  It's perfectly safe and reasonable for me to carry it.  In your country I would be forbidden because some inner city thug may carry one and the fact is the ban on casually carrying one doesn't stop the thugs from doing so.  Were I there I would consider this unreasonable and it's difficult for me to understand how you can't.  

In short, because our police are vaguely competent. 

[Setton]

30 minutes ago, spartan max2 said:

Setton can correct me if I'm wrong but it sounds like if someone attacks you with a knife you can't defend yourself with one.

Because it is illegal to have a knife for self defense. Because you "shouldn't have possessed it". 

You can use it, but only so long as you weren't carrying it for that purpose. 

Quote

That sounds like it inherently disadvantages innocent people. 

 

You're allowed to defend yourself without weapons against people who might have weapons.

 

That feels very wrong 

I suppose it will to you. Here, civilians are not expected to have to enforce the law. That's what the police are for. 

Yes, criminals might carry a weapon. Yes, our best bet is always to run. But I'd far rather be able to walk down. The street knowing there is only a teeny tiny chance of anyone trying to attack me and an even smaller chance they're armed than knowing every person I go past could be able to kill me if the mood takes them. 

[+OverSword]

8 minutes ago, Setton said:

No it isn't. Knives are legal so long as you have a purpose for carrying it

So effectively illegal, because you must have some other valid reason to carry it if you just so happen to need it for defense.  See, I can carry one for no reason at all, or more accurately because I want to. 

 

[+OverSword]

12 minutes ago, Setton said:

Again, not about matching its about the victim's perception. 

If you think they are going to try and hit oyu hard enough to kill you, you can do whatever you have to to make them stop. 

And face charges later, facing jail time if you can't prove you needed to do so.

[aztek]

in UK you need to prove you need to carry one, in USA they have to prove why you should not.  that is the difference between us and them. 

[+OverSword]

11 minutes ago, Setton said:

In short, because our police are vaguely competent. 

Really?  So there is not an epidemic of knife violence in Manchester then eh?  See the problem with police everywhere is that what they mainly do is write reports after the fact, even in England. When you are being assaulted the odds of the police intervening are generously thousands to one.

[aztek]

Hundreds of victims of grooming gangs were punished and even blamed by police for years in the North East, a Serious Case Review has found. 

 

The 150-page report found that grooming gangs were allowed to prey on 700 girls and vulnerable young women for years. The report was produced in a bid to investigate the authorities’ response to child sexual exploitation after a series of trials which saw 22 defendants sentenced for a range of offences including rape, drugs and prostitution.

 

Officers soon realised the problem was much worse than first thought and broadened the investigation, including paying £10,000 to an informant, who turned out to be a child rapist, for information. The abusers were mainly ‘not white but came from a diverse range of backgrounds including Pakistani, Bangladeshi, Indian, Iranian, Iraqi, Kurdish, Turkish, Albanian and Eastern European’.

 

 

Read more: https://metro.co.uk/2018/02/23/victims-of-grooming-gangs-were-punished-and-blamed-by-police-review-finds-7337392/?ito=cbshare

 

[aztek]

Five years in prison for acting in self-defence

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/1461346/Five-years-in-prison-for-acting-in-self-defence.html

Britain’s Failed Weapons-Control Laws Show Why the Second Amendment Matters

https://www.nationalreview.com/2018/08/britain-failed-weapons-control-laws-curb-self-defense-rights/

 

[Setton]

11 minutes ago, OverSword said:

So effectively illegal, because you must have some other valid reason to carry it if you just so happen to need it for defense.  See, I can carry one for no reason at all, or more accurately because I want to. 

And so can the person who wants to stab you. Hurray. 

11 minutes ago, OverSword said:

And face charges later, facing jail time if you can't prove you needed to do so.

Just not true. The presumption is innocence on the part of the victim. 

Again, even if it is questioned, you don't need to prove you needed to do anything. You only have to show why you thought it was reasonable. 

8 minutes ago, OverSword said:

Really?  So there is not an epidemic of knife violence in Manchester then eh? 

Not in the way a certain orange man likes to claim. Yes, there is a problem with knife crime. The overwhelming majority is between rival gangs. 

And your solution is to give more people weapons? 

Quote

See the problem with police everywhere is that what they mainly do is write reports after the fact, even in England. When you are being assaulted the odds of the police intervening are generously thousands to one.

If you think all the work the police do is after the fact, you really don't know anything about them. 

The idea isn't that they'll miraculously appear mid-assault. It's that they're doing all the work to prevent people feeling they are in a safe position to assault you. It's about prevention and deterence, not intervention.