Our Future

The #1 community for Gun Owners of the Northeast

Member Benefits:

  • No ad networks!
  • Discuss all aspects of firearm ownership
  • Discuss anti-gun legislation
  • Buy, sell, and trade in the classified section
  • Chat with Local gun shops, ranges, trainers & other businesses
  • Discover free outdoor shooting areas
  • View up to date on firearm-related events
  • Share photos & video with other members
  • ...and so much more!
  • Mooseman

    R.I.P.- Hooligan #4
    Jan 3, 2012
    18,048
    Western Maryland
    Our Future?

    Could this be in our future? I hope not.
    You're sound asleep when you hear a thump outside your bedroom door.
    Half-awake, and nearly paralyzed with fear, you hear muffled whispers.

    At least two people have broken into your house and are moving your way.

    With your heart pumping, you reach down beside your bed and pick up
    your shotgun.

    You rack a shell into the chamber, then inch toward the door and open it.

    In the darkness, you make out two shadows.

    One holds something that looks like a crowbar.

    When the intruder brandishes it as if to strike, you raise the shotgun and fire.

    The blast knocks both thugs to the floor.

    One writhes and screams while the second man crawls to the front door
    and lurches outside.

    As you pick up the telephone to call police, you know you're in trouble.

    In your country, most guns were outlawed years before, and the few
    that are privately owned are so stringently regulated as to make them
    useless..

    Yours was never registered.

    Police arrive and inform you that the second burglar has died.

    They arrest you for First Degree Murder and Illegal Possession of a Firearm.

    When you talk to your attorney, he tells you not to worry: authorities
    will probably plea the case down to manslaughter.

    "What kind of sentence will I get?" you ask.

    "Only ten-to-twelve years," he replies, as if that's nothing.

    "Behave yourself, and you'll be out in seven."

    The next day, the shooting is the lead story in the local newspaper.
    Somehow, you're portrayed as an eccentric vigilante while the two men
    you shot are represented as choirboys.

    Their friends and relatives can't find an unkind word to say about them..

    Buried deep down in the article, authorities acknowledge that both
    "victims" have been arrested numerous times.

    But the next day's headline says it all:
    "Lovable Rogue Son Didn't Deserve to Die."

    The thieves have been transformed from career criminals into Robin
    Hood-type pranksters..

    As the days wear on, the story takes wings.

    The national media picks it up, then the international media .

    The surviving burglar has become a folk hero.

    Your attorney says the thief is preparing to sue you, and he'll probably win.

    The media publishes reports that your home has been burglarized
    several times in the past and that you've been critical of local
    police for their lack of effort in apprehending the suspects.

    After the last break-in, you told your neighbor that you would be
    prepared next time.

    The District Attorney uses this to allege that you were lying in wait
    for the burglars.

    A few months later, you go to trial.

    The charges haven't been reduced, as your lawyer had so confidently predicted.

    When you take the stand, your anger at the injustice of it all works
    against you..

    Prosecutors paint a picture of you as a mean, vengeful man.

    It doesn't take long for the jury to convict you of all charges.

    The judge sentences you to life in prison.

    This case really happened.

    On August 22, 1999, Tony Martin of Emneth, Norfolk , England , killed
    one burglar and wounded a second.

    In April, 2000, he was convicted and is now serving a life term...

    How did it become a crime to defend one's own life in the once great
    British Empire?

    It started with the Pistols Act of 1903.

    This seemingly reasonable law forbade selling pistols to minors or
    felons and established that handgun sales were to be made only to
    those who had a license.
    The Firearms Act of 1920 expanded licensing to include not only
    handguns but all firearms except shotguns..

    Later laws passed in 1953 and 1967 outlawed the carrying of any weapon
    by private citizens and mandated the registration of all shotguns.


    Momentum for total handgun confiscation began in earnest after the
    Hungerfordmass shooting in 1987.

    Michael Ryan, a mentally disturbed man with a Kalashnikov rifle,
    walked down the streets shooting everyone he saw.

    When the smoke cleared, 17 people were dead.

    The British public, already de-sensitized by eighty years of "gun
    control", demanded even tougher restrictions.
    (The seizure of all privately owned handguns was the objective even
    though Ryan used a rifle.)

    Nine years later, at Dunblane , Scotland , Thomas Hamilton used a
    semi-automatic weapon to murder 16 children and a teacher at a public
    school.

    For many years, the media had portrayed all gun owners as mentally
    unstable, or worse, criminals.
    Now the press had a real kook with which to beat up law-abiding gun owners.
    Day after day, week after week, the media gave up all pretense of
    objectivity and demanded a total ban on all handguns.
    The Dunblane Inquiry , a few months later, sealed the fate of the few
    sidearms still owned by private citizens.

    During the years in which the British government incrementally took
    away most gun rights, the notion that a citizen had the right to armed
    self-defense came to be seen as vigilantism.
    Authorities refused to grant gun licenses to people who were
    threatened, claiming that self-defense was no longer considered a
    reason to own a gun.
    Citizens who shot burglars or robbers or rapists were charged while
    the real criminals were released.

    Indeed, after the Martin shooting, a police spokesman was quoted as saying,
    "We cannot have people take the law into their own hands."

    All of Martin's neighbors had been robbed numerous times,
    and several elderly people were severely injured in beatings by young
    thugs who had no fear of the consequences.
    Martin himself, a collector of antiques, had seen most of his
    collection trashed or stolen by burglars.

    When the Dunblane Inquiry ended, citizens who owned handguns were
    given three months to turn them over to local authorities.

    Being good British subjects, most people obeyed the law.
    The few who didn't were visited by police and threatened with ten-year
    prison sentences if they didn't comply.

    Police later bragged that they'd taken nearly 200,000 handguns from
    private citizens.

    How did the authorities know who had handguns?
    The guns had been registered and licensed.
    Kind of like cars. Sound familiar?

    WAKE UP AMERICA ; THIS IS WHY OUR FOUNDING FATHERS PUT THE SECOND
    AMENDMENT IN OUR CONSTITUTION.
     
    Last edited:

    SCARCQB

    Get Opp my rawn, Plick!
    Jun 25, 2008
    13,614
    Undisclosed location
    :patriot: If Injustice becomes law, rebellion becomes ones duty
     

    Attachments

    • tj.jpg
      tj.jpg
      63.5 KB · Views: 310

    jmcgonig

    Active Member
    Jan 18, 2012
    544
    Germantown, MD
    Yep, spooky. Just curious, in all seriousness if tomorrow all guns were banned and you had to turn them in how many would resist? Out of my cold dead hands always sounds badass, but would you seriously?

    I hate to say it, but I would bitch and moan but probably follow the law. Too much to lose, I guess. :(
     

    prmorin

    Member
    Mar 14, 2010
    91
    Reminds me of the case in Baltimroe where a man attached a 120v line to his skylight because someone had repeatedly broken in through it. Sure enough, the robber tried it again and ended up dying......the robbers family pressed charges against the homeowner becuase it was "pre-meditated"......
     

    SergeantEvil

    Active Member
    Jul 9, 2012
    239
    Those are not the facts in the OP's real story. I would suggest you do some research into the actual event before believing the B.S.
     

    cjl7

    Active Member
    Apr 2, 2012
    134
    Yep, spooky. Just curious, in all seriousness if tomorrow all guns were banned and you had to turn them in how many would resist? Out of my cold dead hands always sounds badass, but would you seriously?

    I hate to say it, but I would bitch and moan but probably follow the law. Too much to lose, I guess. :(

    I've often wondered that myself. Its easy to say you would resist, but realistically most would just conform to all of the ******** just like we conform to all of the ******** laws now. :sad20:
     

    Dal1as

    Ultimate Member
    Feb 6, 2009
    4,122
    Those are not the facts in the OP's real story. I would suggest you do some research into the actual event before believing the B.S.

    Well yes the details were left out but seriously the guy and his neighbors had been beaten and robbed multiple times and had lost thousands of dollars with the police doing nothing. What was he supposed to do? You should be able to protect your property and your house with deadly force no matter what... just like in Texas.
     

    Lou45

    R.I.P.
    Jun 29, 2010
    12,048
    Carroll County
    I potentially can fathom this happening at some point in the future in some of the libtard states, but not at the national level as there are some REAL pro 2A states that would totally dismiss a national confiscation of firearms, at least in our lifetimes. If it were to happen, it would almost be certain that this country would become a two country union(???) sorta' like the North and South back in the 1860's.
     

    3/2ACR Vet

    Active Member
    Jul 6, 2012
    561
    Baltimore City
    You need to add a few elements to your story....

    You should make note that your protagonist, rather than going through the legal means to purchase and own a firearm (the procuring of a shotgun certificate and a firearms ownership permit), deliberately purchased the firearm illegally.

    Also, in your story, the protagonist fires once, incapping one intruder, who dies, and causing the other to flee.

    In the court documented account of the actual event, the man fired once at the intruders, hitting them both and causing them to turn and flee, whereupon he pursued them, firing twice more at their backs, the final shot, at almost point blank range, being the fatal shot that caught the one man as the intruders tried to climb out a window.

    As tragic as the story is for the man attempting to defend his own property, I can't see how this case would turn out any differently in the US, even with our existing laws today.

    The weapon was purchased illegally.

    The intruders were no longer a threat after the first shot.

    He pursued them through the house, not standing his ground, but advancing.


    He was irresponsible, and someone died because of it.
     

    mbz300sdl

    Gone living free now!!!
    Apr 12, 2010
    10,644
    South Carolina
    Yep, spooky. Just curious, in all seriousness if tomorrow all guns were banned and you had to turn them in how many would resist? Out of my cold dead hands always sounds badass, but would you seriously?

    I hate to say it, but I would bitch and moan but probably follow the law. Too much to lose, I guess. :(

    I don't have much to lose except my guns so try it
     

    BlueHeeler

    Ultimate Member
    Apr 28, 2010
    7,086
    Washington, DC
    You need to add a few elements to your story....

    You should make note that your protagonist, rather than going through the legal means to purchase and own a firearm (the procuring of a shotgun certificate and a firearms ownership permit), deliberately purchased the firearm illegally.

    Also, in your story, the protagonist fires once, incapping one intruder, who dies, and causing the other to flee.

    In the court documented account of the actual event, the man fired once at the intruders, hitting them both and causing them to turn and flee, whereupon he pursued them, firing twice more at their backs, the final shot, at almost point blank range, being the fatal shot that caught the one man as the intruders tried to climb out a window.

    As tragic as the story is for the man attempting to defend his own property, I can't see how this case would turn out any differently in the US, even with our existing laws today.

    The weapon was purchased illegally.

    The intruders were no longer a threat after the first shot.

    He pursued them through the house, not standing his ground, but advancing.


    He was irresponsible, and someone died because of it.

    This. The Tony Martin case is not necessarily a good example of defensive ownership and government intrusion.
     

    ridethemessiah

    Ultimate Member
    Aug 27, 2012
    1,161
    Cecil County
    Yep, spooky. Just curious, in all seriousness if tomorrow all guns were banned and you had to turn them in how many would resist? Out of my cold dead hands always sounds badass, but would you seriously?

    I hate to say it, but I would bitch and moan but probably follow the law. Too much to lose, I guess. :(

    you're right, many would turn over their arms. molon labe sounds good but no matter how well stocked you are you can't single-handedly disarm or neutralize an entire police department, let alone the whole government. so what do you do? catch word that the government is siezing arms, call all of your gun-owning friends, they call theirs, meet at the front lawn of the white house? i know that we need to defend our liberties and i'll be god damned if my govt says i cant own firearms, but if we're really going to resist it, we gotta think ahead and organize something in advance before the govt knocks on our doors. we are no match for them standing alone. GB and australia are fine examples. there was no massive revolt in those places because the citizens stood no chance.
     

    Hynes57

    Active Member
    Aug 4, 2010
    455
    Charles Town, WV
    I appreciate those of you that point out the missing parts of this story and i agree 100% this man was at fault. I realize the OP's point when posting it and i agree with the need to be vigilant about having our rights stripped. However, it makes me angry when folks hurt the cause by selectively removing parts from the record that hurt our arguement. Get another example. There are so many examples of gun owners using their firearms to protect life. Use one of those! It makes pro 2A people look dishonest and hurts the cause when we get creative......
     

    Users who are viewing this thread

    Latest posts

    Forum statistics

    Threads
    274,922
    Messages
    7,259,108
    Members
    33,349
    Latest member
    christian04

    Latest threads

    Top Bottom