# Theives!



## mailee (8 Nov 2007)

Well it has happened again, my workshop was broken into about an hour ago! Luckily all they got away with was my sliding mitre saw which was close to the rear window. It was the same window that they tried last weekend but this time they forced the window open. Police were great and on the scene in minutes but unfortunately never caught them. My neighbour alerted the police after seeing two youths at the rear of my shop. It didn't set the alarm off as the sensor won't reach that corner of the shop so I think a second one is in order to make sure it is covered. Pity I didn't catch them though they wouldn't have ever done it again. :twisted:


----------



## ByronBlack (8 Nov 2007)

sorry to hear that mailee, hopefully the police can do something, or the insurance people can be of help. Not sure an alarm would have done much good, they'd just run of with it regardless.


----------



## motownmartin (8 Nov 2007)

Bad luck Alan, I hope you get that alarm sorted out as soon as possible, I ought to get one fitted in my garage, one day someone will have a go.


----------



## mickster (9 Nov 2007)

Mailee,

that really sucks, prolly the same scrotes that tried last time.

Actually, although I agree with the punishment they would have got if you DID catch them, I'm glad you didn't for two reasons. 

1. They're obviously tooled up to get the window open, and you wouldn't want the tool used on your person. Better to be able to continue doing what you love doing, than to be stuck in a wheelchair...or worse.
2. You could have ended up in the dock whilst the scum roam free and end up with 'compensation'.


Mick.


----------



## devonwoody (9 Nov 2007)

Leave the nut loose on your circular saw and leave it near the window.


----------



## Newbie_Neil (9 Nov 2007)

Hi Alan

Sorry to hear about your bad luck.

IMHO, DAMHIKT, they will keep coming back until they are put off by bars etc. At least, that's what happened at my office.

Cheers,
Neil


----------



## mr (9 Nov 2007)

How about a cheap network camera to monitor and record the goings on in your workshop? By day we could watch you work and by night you can watch people run off with your tools, but at least you could identify who they were. In my experience whenever this sort of thing happens the perpetrators are usually quite well known at the local station. 

Cheers Mike


----------



## Adam (9 Nov 2007)

mailee":1opbkjrh said:


> which was close to the rear window.



I bet you are gutted. Can I just check this? You have a workshop with a rear window? and you hadn't boarded it over after the last attempt? I can gaurentee they will come back again. Bolt it over with 2 cheets of 18mm ply and coach bolts. *They will come back again.*

Better still, cover it in a metal sheet across the back where you can't see it so they cannot get in.



mailee":1opbkjrh said:


> It didn't set the alarm off as the sensor won't reach that corner of the shop so I think a second one is in order to make sure it is covered.



Why does that help? When did a burglar alarm ever interest a couple of punks on drugs? You need to physically stop them getting in. Sure, it might warn the neighbours and they might call the police? So what? Even if they get arrested they will probably be out and back in a couple of days? What happens if you catch them and they take a swing with a club hammer? Or your neighbour intevenes and is attacked? I'm not trying to be negative but rear windows and workshops don't mix. I'd be securing all windows with bars, beefing up locks, panelling internal rear walls on the inside where they might kick through.

Will they come back next time with a big crowbar? Could they jemmy the rear timber off? Could they cut through it with a battery circular saw? Could they come round the front and pull the doors open? Knock the hinges out?

I hope you get it all sorted. If they've had a sellable item out of you they are 100% certain to come back. 

Adam


----------



## devonwoody (9 Nov 2007)

quote

hope you get it all sorted. If they've had a sellable item out of you they are 100% certain to come back. 


Your statement above is most probably correct.

A burglar alarm went off opposite the other night at 11am again 2pm finally the system broke down after 3pm ring.

Nobody takes a blind bit of notice of burglar alarms these days, especially the one over the road, its always going off. 

I very much doubt if the police will do anything about your problem because they most probably had so many more the same evening and probably logged it. (Today I saw a person dealing drugs in the high street twice within 15 minutes and there wasn't a copper in the high street, or surrounds because I went to look for one. )
And because the streets (and at night) are not patrolled they get away with it. Policing needs to go back to basics.
That applies to small time burglary. and all the other crimes.


----------



## Lord Nibbo (9 Nov 2007)

devonwoody":y5d3d2m1 said:


> I very much doubt if the police will do anything about your problem
> 
> And because the streets (and at night) are not patrolled they get away with it. Policing needs to go back to basics.
> That applies to small time burglary. and all the other crimes.



It dosen't surprise me one bit, it's all to easy for the police just to give out a crime number without doing any more work. :evil: 

If you drive a little to fast or murder someone then expect a knock on your door. They might even chase you in a Porsche, now how much did that cost and for what reasons do they need Porsches?

In my past working life I was forced to install an alarm system costing in excess of £16,000 because of storing explosives. One week it went off in error three times and because it involved explosives the police had to attend within minutes, I usually got there before them :x Anyway after the three false alarm call I received a letter from Thames valley police stating that they would not attend another alarm call for 90 days owing to the three false calls. :x 

So paying out more than £16,000 was a total waste of my money :evil: 

No wonder bombers have it so easy. :x :evil: :x :evil:


----------



## JackL (9 Nov 2007)

I hate to be negative BUT THEY WILL BE BACK!
It's a well known fact that burglars return after about three months from the first attack. They reckon that by then you will have made an insurance claim and replaced the stuff that they stole in the first place. So they come again and pinch the new stuff as well.


----------



## devonwoody (9 Nov 2007)

Referring to my earlier posting, perhaps the home secretary has told the Chief Constables the prisons are full, please slow the boys down.


----------



## Mike.C (9 Nov 2007)

> Jack,
> 
> I hate to be negative BUT THEY WILL BE BACK!



They have been back already, they just did not get anything the first time.

Sorry to hear about your problems Mailee  

Maybe a faulty tool sitting on the window, that has bare wires, and which you accidently left plugged in might be in order. The sort of thing which would fry anyone who touched it. 

Cheers

Mike


----------



## mailee (9 Nov 2007)

Thanks guys. Well Adam the original reason for the rear window was so that I could cut long lengths of timber on my Radial Arm Saw. As for not boarding the window over after the first time I had assumed (wrongly) that they had given up deciding that the Lexan was tougher than they were. I have now boarded up the window with ply just as you suggested. I have also moved the PIR just in case too. I have to admit I do like Mike's suggestion of the faulty power tool, that would certainly work. I am also going to fit an intruder light at the rear of the shop to alert me of anyone coming over the fence in future. Mel is also furnishing me with some barbed wire for the top of my fence. :wink:


----------



## llangatwgnedd (9 Nov 2007)

Grease with *used* engine oil. 

Might not stop them the first time, but second thoughts on a return visit.

Failing that, 240v and bare wires. :lol: :lol:


----------



## Adam (9 Nov 2007)

mailee":1iwq6x6c said:


> Thanks guys. Well Adam the original reason for the rear window was so that I could cut long lengths of timber on my Radial Arm Saw. As for not boarding the window over after the first time I had assumed (wrongly) that they had given up deciding that the Lexan was tougher than they were. I have now boarded up the window with ply just as you suggested. I have also moved the PIR just in case too. I have to admit I do like Mike's suggestion of the faulty power tool, that would certainly work. I am also going to fit an intruder light at the rear of the shop to alert me of anyone coming over the fence in future. Mel is also furnishing me with some barbed wire for the top of my fence. :wink:



I reread my post and it sounds dreadful, all I was meaning was they've tried one, successful on the second visit and may up the "quality" of their preparation by bringing items to assist. They will certainly be back. Could you have a "metal" flap to allow items to poke out the back?

Burglary really gets my goat. Its the sheer gaul of someone to take something you've invested your effort through working to acquire. really bugs me. Perhaps some razor wire as well? Or a heavy oak beam that isn't well "supported" that could "detach & drop" under extreme loading (someone kicking or pulling a window below? I'm sure you'd always screw things with the best length of screws. :wink: 

Security lighting (perhaps mounted on a high post) or one of these PIRs that rings you mobile? *it has to be connected to a phone line so you can't ring "yourself" as such but could ring your landline and several others e.g. neighbours etc...

Adam


----------



## pobo (9 Nov 2007)

to stop any other thefts maybe somethink along these lines may help :twisted:
( press the Quicktime link in the box)

really sorry to hear about the theft. makes me think about beefing up my security.

after a break in a couple of years ago my brother bought back his car radio form local scrap yard for £10 two days after it was nicked


----------



## Escudo (10 Nov 2007)

pob your right this is a warning to us all.

My security is poor on reflection. I am going to do something about it. Even if I am in a sleepy back water, where we still leave our doors and windows open.

sorry for your troubles mailee. I realise now how Tony Martin felt. (I think that was his name)

Esc.


----------



## Losos (10 Nov 2007)

Newbie_Neil":13yq3dpm said:


> IMHO, DAMHIKT, they will keep coming back until they are put off by bars etc. At least, that's what happened at my office.
> Neil



Sorry to be a pesimist but I think Neil is right. The statistics clearly show that these scumbags will come back if they think they can get away with it.

Bars on the inside of the window are a good idea, it worked for me when I lived in Manchester


----------



## Woodmagnet (10 Nov 2007)

Sorry to hear about your break-in mailee, i got done on wednesday
night and lost most of my tools, i have good locks and alarms, i have insomnia so i'm awake most of the night and they still managed to beat me. None of my tools were expensive types but it took me a long time to get them as i can't work now. No insurance either as i could'nt afford it.  
I ended up in hospital as i collapsed luckily it was'nt my heart this time, it was exhaustion and anxiety. Then last night we got a phone call to say my favourite B.I.L. had died, what a week i've had.


----------



## Mike.C (10 Nov 2007)

Blo-dy hell Kevin, I am sorry mate, you really have had a terrible week.

It really makes me mad the way these ars-holes can just take you hard earned equipment, and then get away with it.

Cheers

Mike


----------



## ByronBlack (10 Nov 2007)

I'm really sorry to hear about your bad week Kevin, it's a real bummer to lose your tools. I'll have a look in the workshop and see if there's anything that I can send you to get you by.


----------



## mailee (10 Nov 2007)

I am sorry to hear about your bad news Kevin. Makes mine seem insignificant by comparison. I agree with Mike it really makes me mad too.


----------



## ianmelb (10 Nov 2007)

Kevin, can you list what the barstewards took?

When I've finished my workshed, rather than freecycling anything I'm replacing I'll see if you could use it (unfortunately no timescales as such).

Ian


----------



## mickster (10 Nov 2007)

Kevin,

I'll second the above. I'm a bit of a hoarder, so please list what the scumbags lifted and if I have anything going spare that fits the bill, you can have it.


----------



## devonwoody (11 Nov 2007)

It would appear my earlier comment on the thread that the police will most probably only log the crime has been confirmed on the BBC news this morning.
"Two million burglaries and thefts are not attended to by the police forces of the UK."
So the burglars know as long as they dont physically bump into the arms of the law with the swag on display they have nothing to worry about.

And the householder dare not get involved otherwise the law will prosecute the victim etc. etc. and even send him to prison if he takes the extreme measure of shooting the scum.


----------



## duncanh (11 Nov 2007)

A couple of years ago my shed was a target and was visited several times. The scariest was the time when I was inside it working late one night and someone climbed onto the roof to try to point the security light away from the door :shock: 
They returned several days later, ripped the window off it's hinges and made off with the easily portable hand power tools. Luckily for me they were just all Black and Decker cheapies in various states of dis-repair. The amusing part was that the idiots used one of my hollowing tools to pry the padlock off my wood store door and then left the tool lying on the floor as they didn't know what it was and it wasn't easily saleable. That one tool was worth more than all that they did take!

To solve the problem I boarded up all the windows with thick ply on the inside and outside. One pair is hinged at the top to open like gull-wings and all pairs are held tight with 4 long steel bolts.

I've also installed a dusk-til-dawn light on the front of the shed so the garden is illuminated at all times. I haven't had any problems since.

Duncan


----------



## Losos (11 Nov 2007)

Escudo":2l5m6xn5 said:


> _I realise now how Tony Martin felt. (I think that was his name)_



Yes, that was his name, he was a small scale farmer nearing retirement and living in an isolated farmhouse in Norfolk. He had been done several times before and when the two thieves *returned to do him yet again *he fired his shotgun at one of them in the dark as he came downstairs, one of the thieves latter died. 

Farmer Martin subsequently appeared in court, charged with manslaughter, and was given a prison sentance (I think it was 5 years)

Tony Martins *big mistake was telling the truth*, had he said he was *not* aiming at the thief and only wanted to fire over his head to frighten him he would have likely got off with a much more lenient sentance. People should know that Martin was not an eloquent man, he didn't have a high IQ and he also *thought that he should say what was in his mind as came down those stairs in the dark.*

What really got my goat was that the second thief, (a well known criminal with a list of convictions as long as your arm) was injured and *was allowed and encouraged by the slimy legal fraternity to bring a case for 'loss of earnings' and something else.* 'Tho thakfully it never got to a full trial, IIRC it was dismissed at a pre-trial hearing.

On another forum someone had the affrontry to say I was not being very 'moral' in saying Martin should have lied in court, but what the heck, we all know the criminals (And their slimy lawyer friends) lie and lie and lie in court, anything that cannot be proved with forensics is just lied about, *so why shouldn't farmer Martin lie *:?: :?: :?: :?: :?:


----------



## devonwoody (11 Nov 2007)

Agreed Losos.

And if the police are not going to pursue the criminals who break in, the householder should be allowed to be armed greater than the thief who enters.

~Therefore householder should have weapons such as Tony Martins and be encourage to use them. 
After all its no good taking on a burglar with a frying pan. 

Should get some bloods going


----------



## Woody Alan (11 Nov 2007)

> After all its no good taking on a burglar with a frying pan.



I dunno I wouldn't like to get smacked round the head with my missus' cast iron frying pan...and it's been close at times 

I don't see a problem in telling a "version" of the truth that balances the moral high ground to it's rightful place. After all in the cold light of day I don't expect he really wanted to kill anyone, when he said he did, it's much the same as anyone who gets angry might say "I'll kill the little ****," same stupid mistake as dipsticks at airports mentioning "bomb" . 

Alan


----------



## Woodmagnet (11 Nov 2007)

Thanks for the replies,but i dont want to hijack Mailees thread
so i'll start a new one.
Sorry Mailee. :wink:


----------



## ByronBlack (11 Nov 2007)

DW, if all home owners were armed and were legally allowed to use them, this could open up a real can of worms, for example:

You want to get 'rid' of someone, so you envite them into your home, shoot them, phone the police and 'tell' them that they were trying to rob you.

Or, your tired and half asleep, someone who is not a burgler comes into your home, maybe it's a carer or a family member, it's dark you think your getting burgled, you shoot and kill an innocent person..

You son/daughter young family member gets into trouble, they gain access to your shotgun and all kinds of trouble ensues.

Your young family member has a party, gets drunk, starts mucking about with the gun, it goes off, a friend gets killed.

In short, I agree that we should have more powers to defend ourselves against burglers, I just don't think this is it.


----------



## RogerS (12 Nov 2007)

ByronBlack":s0mqim6n said:


> DW, if all home owners were armed and were legally allowed to use them, this could open up a real can of worms, for example:
> 
> You want to get 'rid' of someone, so you envite them into your home, shoot them, phone the police and 'tell' them that they were trying to rob you.
> 
> ...



Or a very large bloke breaks into your house and threatens you with a knife

Or a gang of drug crazed kids break in while you and your family are asleep

Or you wake up and hear some evil sod trying to rape your daughter?

Mmmm...gun or no gun....now let me see now.


----------



## devonwoody (12 Nov 2007)

I know an american who has a winchester rifle under the bed, never had any trouble with burglars  

I agree with the American way, quickest on the draw wins, you stay alive that way.

Remember I posted a news report that the police took no action on 2 million burglaries and theft, so how do you defend yourself against the criminal, they appear to be shooting quite frequently these days.
Shows prohibition doesn't work.


----------



## mr (12 Nov 2007)

devonwoody":2lsb2lcr said:


> I agree with the American way, quickest on the draw wins, you stay alive that way.



Suvival of the fittest? God help the old and infirm then.


----------



## devonwoody (12 Nov 2007)

Thats what Darwin said or something similar. :wink:


----------



## mr (12 Nov 2007)

devonwoody":jikere7y said:


> Thats what Darwin said or something similar. :wink:


What? "God help the old and infirm?"


----------



## woodbloke (12 Nov 2007)

DW wrote -


> And if the police are not going to pursue the criminals who break in, the householder should be allowed to be armed greater than the thief who enters.



Just had a trawl thru' this thread and I simply *can't* believe that some people here are actually advocating the widespread ownership and use of handguns and rifles (if that's how I'm reading it :? ) Whilst I greatly sympathize with those forum members who have had break-ins, the use of a lethal firearm cannot be condoned under any circumstances in my view and keeping them at home under your bed is probably one of the daftest things I've ever heard of.
The problems lie with the society that we live in and keeping firearms at home isn't going to solve that one, we should be striving to find ways to remove weaponry rather than encourage it's proliferation.
Interestingly, Switzerland has more guns per head of population _at home_ than any other country in the world (tho' may be wrong there) but don't seem to suffer from the sort of gun related crime that we see at the present time in the UK...







- Rob


----------



## Gary (12 Nov 2007)

Roger Sinden":2qidoem1 said:


> Or a very large bloke breaks into your house and threatens you with a knife
> 
> Or a gang of drug crazed kids break in while you and your family are asleep
> 
> Mmmm...gun or no gun....now let me see now.



and this happens to you on a regular basis?


----------



## devonwoody (12 Nov 2007)

Well those thieves better watch out if my wife is about.






She is a good shot.


----------



## RogerS (12 Nov 2007)

woodbloke":g47ms619 said:


> DW wrote -
> 
> 
> > Interestingly, Switzerland has more guns per head of population _at home_ than any other country in the world (tho' may be wrong there) but don't seem to suffer from the sort of gun related crime that we see at the present time in the UK...
> ...



Doesn't that sort of act as a counter argument to what you said earlier in the post?

I agree with you...if we lived in a different society where everyone went around in a purple haze of happy nirvana then we'd not be having the comments made in this thread. 

But we don't and so I would argue that it is my right to protect my nearest and dearest and all my property by whatever means I have at my disposal since our society does not.


----------



## devonwoody (12 Nov 2007)

Also ought to be mentioned that insurance is refused (for home cover against theft ) if many claims are received from a client also some residential areas the company will duck you.

So no police cover,
no insurance cover
no right to protect yourself against theives even with weapons.


----------



## RogerS (12 Nov 2007)

Gary":1amnf22g said:


> Roger Sinden":1amnf22g said:
> 
> 
> > Or a very large bloke breaks into your house and threatens you with a knife
> ...



Fortunately not ....about as likely to happen as ByronBlack's examples though.


----------



## woodbloke (12 Nov 2007)

Roger S wrote -


> Doesn't that sort of act as a counter argument to what you said earlier in the post?


Not really. A lethal weapon like a gun or rifle is simply a lump of innate metal until an individual picks it up and does something with it. The society that we live in largely determines (IMO) whether that individual does in fact do something with the weapon. In Switzerland as I said, there are a huge number of weapons kept at home, but such is the nature of their society, the sort of gun related activity that's been on the increase in the UK doesn't appear to happen over there.
Agree with you also Rog that you ought to be able to protect your loved ones with _any means at your disposal_.....just *not* a lethal firearm, that's all :wink: - Rob


----------



## RogerS (12 Nov 2007)

devonwoody":2izugupl said:


> no right to protect yourself against theives even with weapons.



Not strictly true, dw. Uncle Jack says that we can and he should know wot with being a lawyer and ex-Home Secretary and such :wink: 

Any road....there's those that think we should be able to protect ourselves and there are those with rose-tinted spectacles who don't. Neither camp will convince the other.


----------



## ByronBlack (12 Nov 2007)

Roger Sinden":2incgztp said:


> Gary":2incgztp said:
> 
> 
> > Roger Sinden":2incgztp said:
> ...



I disagree, there was a story only last week about a little boy who killed his sister with a gun that his mother was 'storing' for her criminal boyfriend.

Kids are stupid, and when drunk even more stupid, so if you start putting hand guns in the home, you'll see a massive increase in accidental killings.

DW, the law doesn't say you can't protect yourself, thats a nonesense. You have to use reasonable force, so if someone comes at you with a knife, then it would be reasonable for you to them with a large hammer or baseball bat, however, guns are illegal so theres nothing in the remit of reasonable to use them.

Most burgleries are carried out by drug addicts, these are not hardcore criminals armed to the teeth with firearms, so I think keeping a bludgeoning instrument close by quite reasonable.

If we go down the route of guns/rifles for every home, killings will go through the roof, look at the amount of killings we have now when guns are not freely available to all and sundry, besides whatever the home-owner will do, the hardcore criminal will go one better and far more ruthless than the average homeowner, you all might be quite gung-ho now, but in the middle of a situation it takes a certain kind of person to willingly kill someone for breaking into your home.


----------



## Mike.C (12 Nov 2007)

> Roger,
> 
> Any road....there's those that think we should be able to protect ourselves and there are those with rose-tinted spectacles who don't. Neither camp will convince the other.



Until god forbid, their 90 year granny gets raped by these animals, and then all of a sudden they see the light.

Cheers

Mike


----------



## RogerS (12 Nov 2007)

ByronBlack":3hhionym said:


> Roger Sinden":3hhionym said:
> 
> 
> > Gary":3hhionym said:
> ...



I don't quite follow your reasoning.

For a start, legitmate guns are kept under lock and key in a secure gun cabinet. Just because a criminal doesn't is no argument against using guns in defence of your property/attack etc. 

You then say 'killings will go through the roof'....where is your evidence to support this statement? 

You say in one sentence that most burglaries are carried out by drug addicts. A bludgeoning instrument close by is quite reasonable. But what if you are infirm/not very strong etc. Do you really think that an 80 year old grannie with a broomstick is a match for your drug crazed addict armed with a knife?

If most crimes are committed by drug addicts then the hard-core criminal issue fades away a bit, doesn't it?


What do you mean by 'a certain type of person'?


----------



## devonwoody (12 Nov 2007)

who started this hijack.  :wink:  

Roger is correct there are those that say yeh and those that say nah, its a case of waiting until their spouse dies because they were not able to defend them.
Lets call it a day.


----------



## Losos (12 Nov 2007)

Woody Alan":3fhpe40z said:


> After all in the cold light of day I don't expect he really wanted to kill anyone, when he said he did, it's much the same as anyone who gets angry might say "I'll kill the little ****," same stupid mistake as dipsticks at airports mentioning "bomb" .
> Alan



Yes, Alan I know exactly what you mean. In the situation he found himself at that moment he was _undoubtedly angry_. We all sometimes say things _when we're angry, we certainly think them_.

IIRC it was dark (He hadn't sitched on the light) and he could well have hit the ceiling or the floor, it just happened he hit the thief.

In the cold light of day _and definately in court _you need to say the 'right' thing.


----------



## Losos (12 Nov 2007)

devonwoody":3dljpqfk said:


> *So no police cover,
> no insurance cover
> no right to protect yourself against theives even with weapons*.



Yep, this is what it has come down to in the current day.

As it happens I *don't *advocate the universal use of guns, as has been pointed out there are risks. But, in farner Martins case he, like many farmers, have a gun for their work, (it's like a tool of their trade) just like all the pros on this board have a circular saw. So why shouldn't he use it :?: 

I honestly don't know what the answer is, but the guy who mentioned Switzerland failed to mention that there is a _strong 'family' tradition in that country_, and also it's very hard to gain entry on a permanent basis so all the laws in Switzerland are understood and supported by the population.

In America, and in many European countries their is such a high percentage of people who do not _agree with the laws_, who do not _hold the traditions of the country in high regard_, and who feel that they can do whatever they like _to achieve a lifestyle that is paraded in front of them everyday in the media._

OMG I've moved on to my pet hate.............The media.............better stop now before all your eyes glaze over :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:


----------



## Jake (12 Nov 2007)

Losos":ab1v1w32 said:


> But, in farner Martins case he, like many farmers, have a gun for their work, (it's like a tool of their trade) just like all the pros on this board have a circular saw. So why shouldn't he use it :?:



Unlike most farmers, he had no fire arms certificate and a pump action shotgun. And he wasn't using it to shoot pheasants or foxes, he used it to kill someone and shoot another person in the crotch. 

The circular saw analogy doesn't work. Try a chainsaw. If I own one to cut wood, can you see any reason why I shouldn't also be allowed to chop people up into little bits with one?


----------



## Gary (12 Nov 2007)

There is a lot of hot air being talked here about who would do whatever to whoever.

How many of you would really have the balls to do it if you were put in the position?

I suspect not very many if you were honest with yourselves.


----------



## Mike.C (12 Nov 2007)

> Jake,
> 
> he used it to kill someone and shoot another person in the crotch.



Good, and hopefully now he will not be able to bring another thief into the world, who would terrorizes old people in their homes. Remember we are not talking about an innocent man here, he had robbed Tony Martin on a number of occasions before. And when he tried to sue Martin and lost, he was doing so from a jail cell, in there for another crime.

If a person commits a crime they deserve what they get. The misery these people cause is unbelievable, just ask Kevin, who now not only has no tools to carry on his hobby, but also ended up in hospital because of these scum.

Cheers

Mike


----------



## Jake (12 Nov 2007)

Do you really think that the punishment for breaking and entering should be death? 

Where would you stop that? Stealing a loaf of bread?


----------



## Karl (12 Nov 2007)

Mike

I don't know if you have children. I do, so imagine this scenario.

Your child gets caught up with the wrong crowd. Gets a drug habit. Takes to breaking into peoples houses to fund this habit. Is shot dead by the houseowner under these "new rules".

Would you think your son got his just deserts?

Cheers

Karl


----------



## Jake (12 Nov 2007)

Mike.C":1sa9c1eb said:


> Remember we are not talking about an innocent man here, he had robbed Tony Martin on a number of occasions before.



I don't think there was any evidence that Fearon or Barras had robbed him before, and there was at least some doubt cast over whether he had been robbed before at all - Martin was, after all, later diagnosed as paranoid (in the proper mentally ill sense).

Let's not forget that he was given a jury trial, and the jury was given the option of a manslaughter conviction but rejected it in favour of a murder verdict. They'll have had a whole lot better sense of the evidence than any of us can have.


----------



## motownmartin (12 Nov 2007)

Jake":hza6tald said:


> Do you really think that the punishment for breaking and entering should be death?
> 
> Where would you stop that? Stealing a loaf of bread?



No, thats a bit harsh, just chop their arms and legs off :lol: :lol: :lol:


----------



## Mike.C (12 Nov 2007)

> Karl,
> 
> Mike
> 
> ...



My kid's would not get into drugs, so it would never happen, but I can see your point, and so no I would not think they got their just deserts, but if that was the law I would not want to see the innocent houiseholder jailed either.

On the other hand when you have had your house broken into a few times, you do not give a s--t what happens to the criminals of this world.

To try and make you understand why I feel like I do, if a burglar broke in here now, because of my condition I could not do anything to stop them, so i would welcome a law that gave me back the edge.



> Jake,
> 
> I don't think there was any evidence that Fearon or Barras had robbed him before, and there was at least some doubt cast over whether he had been robbed before at all - Martin was, after all, later diagnosed as paranoid (in the proper mentally ill sense).
> 
> Let's not forget that he was given a jury trial, and the jury was given the option of a manslaughter conviction but rejected it in favour of a murder verdict. They'll have had a whole lot better sense of the evidence than any of us can have.



I think it all depends on what newspaper you read and whos side they were on.

Cheers

Mike


----------



## Mike.C (12 Nov 2007)

> Martin,
> 
> Jake wrote:
> Do you really think that the punishment for breaking and entering should be death?
> ...



I like your style Martin :lol: :lol: 

Cheers

Mike


----------



## Losos (12 Nov 2007)

Jake":127qp8zm said:


> Losos":127qp8zm said:
> 
> 
> > Unlike most farmers, *he had no fire arms certificate* and a pump action shotgun.



Are you certain of that :?: I followed the story over a few weeks in a paper (not a tabloid) which usually gets it's facts right ('tho being written by humans they do sometimes get it wrong)

Also, what's the differance between a 'pump action' shotgun and the type of shotgun most farmers use :?: What's the significance of it being 'pump action'

Reading accounts of his IQ and his living conditions he didn't sound like someone who could get his hands on an illigal weapon :?


----------



## Losos (12 Nov 2007)

Mike.C":1njpsxf0 said:


> The misery these people cause is unbelievable, just ask Kevin, who now not only has no tools to carry on his hobby, but also ended up in hospital because of these scum.
> Cheers
> Mike



Thank you MIke for returning the thread to the subject matter, that of Mailee and Kevins loss (In the latters case not just his tools either)

I believe it's entirely reasonable to discuss on this (or any other forum) ways to improve the terrible crime rate that exists in many countries now. It's all very well to compare statistics, to say the Uk or France or whereever has a lower crime rate than somewhere else etc. but for people like Mailee and Kevin it's all to real, *and all the people who should be doing something about the problem just seem to throw their hands in the air and say it's someone elses responsibility *


----------



## Gary (13 Nov 2007)

Mike.C":1brc0yoq said:


> My kid's would not get into drugs, so it would never happen, but I can see your point, and so no I would not think they got their just deserts, but if that was the law I would not want to see the innocent houiseholder jailed either.
> 
> 
> Mike



Well let's hope not, but one never knows.


----------



## Jake (13 Nov 2007)

Losos":20s4apnb said:


> Jake":20s4apnb said:
> 
> 
> > Unlike most farmers, *he had no fire arms certificate* and a pump action shotgun.
> ...



He was convicted of it. His shotgun/firearms certificate had been revoked some years before, because he shot at someone's car in a dispute. 



> Also, what's the differance between a 'pump action' shotgun and the type of shotgun most farmers use :?: What's the significance of it being 'pump action'



'One' doesn't go 'shooting' with a pump action gun - they aren't 'sporting' guns. You need a full firearms certificate, rather than a shotgun certificate. 



> Reading accounts of his IQ and his living conditions he didn't sound like someone who could get his hands on an illigal weapon :?



I guess that goes to show that assumptions can be wrong.


----------

