MarkAW
Established Member
Wow, this thread digressed fast.
Sadly yes, I feel sorry for AndrewG who simply wanted to get advice from the community on improving security.Wow, this thread digressed fast.
Read the post above,How is it like that though?
The thing about violence is we are all wired differently , had I of caught the xxxxxxxxxers that robbed my flat while I was away from home I guess I would of easily done them some damage -especially as I lived on the 17th floor . However I had several hours travelling home on the day the police contacted me so I went the legal route as far as I could .
A lot to unpack in that sentence. My understanding was that the UK did not permit the term, 'crime of passion' to be a defence, unlike the French 'Crime Passionel'. Where a murder in the UK was associated with adultery, the husband may cite 'provocation' as a defence to murder of a wife's lover. In fact, I think they now have to cite 'loss of control' because the term provocation is not used any more. Action taken in the heat of the moment may be provoked by many different motives.There is a world of difference between a crime of passion, action taken in the heat if the moment, and premeditated revenge/retribution.
No there has been that, as well as some light hearted and humerous commentary.Sadly yes, I feel sorry for AndrewG who simply wanted to get advice from the community on improving security.
I have to say that I for one don't find Spectric's views disappointing. What IS disappointing however is the namby-pamby way we in the West have become injured to the idea that it's okay for scumbags to victimise us, whether it be because they have rights that somehow trump our own or because responding with measures which would adequately dissuade them would start some kind of arms race. As citizens we devolve our individual rights to protect ourselves and our property to society; if those charged with ensuring this happens aren't up to the job then the deal is clearly being breached. Telling people to just suck it up is one of the reasons that crime is so prevalent and the authorities so complacent.Cameras really aren't much of a deterrent - they just cover their face. I know this because we had a couple of cars stolen in our neighbourhood recently and most people have cameras / doorbell cameras and had footage of them. In fact, recently it was said cameras actually attract thieves because it highlights that people who have them must have stuff of value inside.
Anyway, to the OP I am sorry you lost your tools.
And as for Spectric, well, disappointing attitude from a mod. No reflection on his views either after being challenged. If you escalate things with violence with anyone, it is only likely to escalate even further. I guess the safest option with Spectric is that anyone thinking of stealing from him should just take the Domino XL700 - given how he always goes on here on any joint thread about how inaccurate he thinks it is, I am sure he won't miss it
I wasn't using the term as a defence, or indeed, as a legal term.A lot to unpack in that sentence. My understanding was that the UK did not permit the term, 'crime of passion' to be a defence, unlike the French 'Crime Passionel'. Where a murder in the UK was associated with adultery, the husband may cite 'provocation' as a defence to murder of a wife's lover. In fact, I think they now have to cite 'loss of control' because the term provocation is not used any more. Action taken in the heat of the moment may be provoked by many different motives.
The case of the farmer, Tony Martin, was one where he was actively defending his property against a couple of intruders. He used a shotgun and killed one of the men. Had that man been running towards him when he shot him, he may have escaped a long term in jail. As the man was running away, the law assumed that he was no longer a threat and should not have been shot. There were several other factors which impinged on that case but the motive of Mr Martin was to protect his property and to take care of his personal safety.
It's easy to see how any planned actions may be seen by the courts. At the very least, planned actions will usually be regarded as taking the law into one's own hands. The matter of retribution is not left to the victims of crime for clear reasons. Cutting one's losses and making entry harder along with disguising the activities if possible and trust to luck may be useful adjuncts to keeping a workshop intact. Possibly a guard dog will help too. The replacement value is not the issue but the attachment to the tools for whatever reason will never be repaired. I will check with my house insurer but as far as I can remember, they will not insure valuable items kept in a temporary structure (shed) .
EDIT: spelling mistakes
Nor do I.I have to say that I for one don't find Spectric's views disappointing.
Enter your email address to join: