100% FREE ONLINE DATING
sponsored links
Previous
| Topic: THIS IS SCARY ! WAKE UP AMERICA ! | |
|---|---|
|
|
|
Subject: Fw: THIS IS SCARY WAKE UP AMERICA !!
Subject: This is really scary!] The trends in law seem sufficiently important to warrant circulating this email. As population densities grow, it becomes more difficult to avoid stepping on others toes. More people implies more control whether justified or not. Nevertheless, there remain some responsibilities which we ourselves must bear. Short of Alzheimer's disease, some responsibilities remain ours. The "watchers" cannot and will not do it all. ============================== It is now closer to reality than you think. 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 Hungerford mass 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. Kinda like cars. <> Sound familiar? <>WAKE UP AMERICA; THIS IS WHY OUR FOUNDING FATHERS PUT THE SECOND AMENDMENT IN OUR CONSTITUTION. <> "..It does not require a majority to prevail, but rather an irate, tireless minority keen to set brush fires in people's minds.." --Samuel Adams If you think this is important, please forward to everyone you know. No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG. Version: 7.5.552 / Virus Database New year...new news. Be the first to know what is making headlines. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
wow, way too much for me to read on a weekend
 
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Subject: Fw: THIS IS SCARY WAKE UP AMERICA !! Subject: This is really scary!] The trends in law seem sufficiently important to warrant circulating this email. As population densities grow, it becomes more difficult to avoid stepping on others toes. More people implies more control whether justified or not. Nevertheless, there remain some responsibilities which we ourselves must bear. Short of Alzheimer's disease, some responsibilities remain ours. The "watchers" cannot and will not do it all. ============================== It is now closer to reality than you think. 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 Hungerford mass 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. Kinda like cars. <> Sound familiar? <>WAKE UP AMERICA; THIS IS WHY OUR FOUNDING FATHERS PUT THE SECOND AMENDMENT IN OUR CONSTITUTION. <> "..It does not require a majority to prevail, but rather an irate, tireless minority keen to set brush fires in people's minds.." --Samuel Adams If you think this is important, please forward to everyone you know. No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG. Version: 7.5.552 / Virus Database New year...new news. Be the first to know what is making headlines.  Talk to the corrupt lawyers dude
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I need more info
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
wow, way too much for me to read on a weekend I'll SECOND that!!!!lol
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
HERE IN AMERICA......THIS IS WHAT WE HAVE (MOST STATES NOT ALL HAVE THIS LAW)
A Castle Doctrine (also known as a Castle Law or a Defense of Habitation Law) is an American legal concept derived from English Common Law, which designates one's place of residence (or, in some states, any place legally occupied, such as one's car or place of work) as a place in which one enjoys protection from illegal trespassing and violent attack. It then goes on to give a person the legal right to use deadly force to defend that place (his/her "castle"), and/or any other innocent persons legally inside it, from violent attack or an intrusion which may lead to violent attack. In a legal context, therefore, use of deadly force which actually results in death may be defended as justifiable homicide under the Castle Doctrine. Castle Doctrines are legislated by state, and not all states in the US have a Castle Doctrine. The term "Make My Day Law" comes from the landmark 1985 Colorado statute that protects people from any criminal charge or civil suit if they use force - including deadly force - against an invader of the home.[1] The law's nickname is a reference to the famous line uttered by Clint Eastwood's character Dirty Harry in the 1983 film Sudden Impact, "Go ahead, make my day." This legal doctrine is often linked to the rights of homeowners to bear arms, as defined in the Second Amendment to the United States Constitution in the case of District of Columbia v. Heller. Each state differs with respect to the specific instances in which the Castle Doctrine can be invoked, and what degree of retreat or non-deadly resistance (if any) is required before deadly force can be used. In general, one (sometimes more) of a variety of conditions must be met before a person can legally use the Castle Doctrine: An intruder must be making (or have made) an attempt to unlawfully and/or forcibly enter an occupied home, business or car. The intruder must be acting illegally -- e.g. the Castle Doctrine does not give the right to attack officers of the law acting in the course of their legal duties The occupant(s) of the home must reasonably believe that the intruder intends to inflict serious bodily harm or death upon an occupant of the home The occupant(s) of the home must reasonably believe that the intruder intends to commit some other felony, such as arson or burglary The occupant(s) of the home must not have provoked or instigated an intrusion, or provoked or instigated an intruder to threaten or use deadly force The occupant(s) of the home may be required to attempt to exit the house or otherwise retreat (this is called the "Duty to Retreat" and most self-defense statutes referred to as examples of "Castle Doctrine" expressly state that the homeowner has no such duty) In all cases, the occupant(s) of the home must be there legally, must not be fugitives from the law, must not be using the Castle Doctrine to aid or abet another person in being a fugitive from the law, and must not use deadly force upon an officer of the law or an officer of the peace while they are performing or attempting to perform their legal duties. Note: the term "home" is used because most states only apply their Castle Doctrine to a place of residence; however, some states extend the protection to other legally-occupied places such as automobiles and places of business Theres an amendment to this law to that gives the homeowner immunity to any civil action filed against him or her in case the criminal lives and say , loses a finger he cant sue ..... |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
wow, way too much for me to read on a weekend I'll SECOND that!!!!lol I'll third it. I'll wait for the infomercial, maybe Billy Mayes will make it! 
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
In my opinion I think the original "founding fathers" would actually turn in their graves seeing how government and The Powers that be have evolved....
 *footnote* Big Brother is watching everything...  Laws can embody standards; governments can enforce laws--but the final task is not a task for government. It is a task for each and every one of us. Every time we turn our heads the other way when we see the law flouted--when we tolerate what we know to be wrong--when we close our eyes and ears to the corrupt because we are too busy, or too frightened--when we fail to speak up and speak out--we strike a blow against freedom and decency and justice. -Robert Francis Kennedy |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
In my opinion I think the original "founding fathers" would actually turn in their graves seeing how government and The Powers that be have evolved.... *footnote* Big Brother is watching everything... Laws can embody standards; governments can enforce laws--but the final task is not a task for government. It is a task for each and every one of us. Every time we turn our heads the other way when we see the law flouted--when we tolerate what we know to be wrong--when we close our eyes and ears to the corrupt because we are too busy, or too frightened--when we fail to speak up and speak out--we strike a blow against freedom and decency and justice. -Robert Francis Kennedy I love your headline on your profile. Awesome.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
well all i can say is thank god i live in america! I guess its better to be alive in prison than dead on your doorstep..... I would just shoot in the ground and hope to scare them away. But i have a gun and i would use it if i had to. I would never give my guns up either its my right to protect myself. But you say wake up america and thats just not reality. The ani-gun addvocates have tried and failed many times! No way they will ever convince americans to give up there guns i dont believe it will ever happen. In britan maybe this is the way it is but our governments are much different even though there are many similarites. Americans are far more conservative when it comes to gun rights among other issues. I dont see this as a problem here. Besides the reverse is happening here, a lot of restictions on guns are being over-turned, so your just misinformed.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I love your headline on your profile. Awesome. Thank You Earned it in "Sarcastic BS Online Dating Websites 101" class
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
that "castle law" will be obsolete if owning a gun is a crime.
democrats will no doubt try to remove them again.... also that law can be changed at any time if it's brought to the table and enough votes are made. they are waiting for another media filled opportunity to do just that. one bad apple can make it so only criminals have firearms. 
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
if it were to happen here? cool, common sense prevails first get the intruders fingerprints all over the gun then your story is you wrestled the gun from one of them and when the second tried to came at you with a crow bar you feared for your life.. you accidently discharged the weapon killing the one.. claim its their gun... besides I would rather be tried by 6 who carry someone's casket then 12 of a jury........ yeah I can hear it now who would think that clearly.... hey you don't have to pick up that phone so quick now do you?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Edited by
Trinité
on
Sat 01/10/09 05:37 PM
|
|
well all i can say is thank god i live in america! I guess its better to be alive in prison than dead on your doorstep..... I would just shoot in the ground and hope to scare them away. But i have a gun and i would use it if i had to. I would never give my guns up either its my right to protect myself. But you say wake up america and thats just not reality. The ani-gun addvocates have tried and failed many times! No way they will ever convince americans to give up there guns i dont believe it will ever happen. In britan maybe this is the way it is but our governments are much different even though there are many similarites. Americans are far more conservative when it comes to gun rights among other issues. I dont see this as a problem here. Besides the reverse is happening here, a lot of restictions on guns are being over-turned, so your just misinformed.  naive... ((heavy sigh)) lol FACT: Barack Obama voted to allow reckless lawsuits designed to bankrupt the firearms industry.1 FACT: Barack Obama wants to re-impose the failed and discredited Clinton Gun Ban.2 FACT: Barack Obama voted to ban almost all rifle ammunition commonly used for hunting and sport shooting.3 FACT: Barack Obama has endorsed a complete ban on handgun ownership.2 FACT: Barack Obama supports local gun bans in Chicago, Washington, D.C., and other cities.4 FACT: Barack Obama voted to uphold local gun bans and the criminal prosecution of people who use firearms in self-defense.5 FACT: Barack Obama supports gun owner licensing and gun registration.6 FACT: Barack Obama refused to sign a friend-of-the-court Brief in support of individual Second Amendment rights in the Heller case. FACT: Barack Obama opposes Right to Carry laws.7 FACT: Barack Obama was a member of the Board of Directors of the Joyce Foundation, the leading source of funds for anti-gun organizations and “research.”8 FACT: Barack Obama supported a proposal to ban gun stores within 5 miles of a school or park, which would eliminate almost every gun store in America.9 FACT: Barack Obama voted not to notify gun owners when the state of Illinois did records searches on them.10 FACT: Barack Obama voted against a measure to lower the Firearms Owners Identification card age minimum from 21 to 18, a measure designed to assist young people in the military.11 FACT: Barack Obama favors a ban on standard capacity magazines.12 FACT: Barack Obama supports mandatory micro-stamping.13 FACT: Barack Obama supports mandatory waiting periods.2 FACT: Barack Obama supports repeal of the Tiahrt Amendment, which prohibits information on gun traces collected by the BATFE from being used in reckless lawsuits against firearm dealers and manufacturers.14 FACT: Barack Obama supports one-gun-a-month sales restrictions.9 FACT: Barack Obama supports a ban on inexpensive handguns.9 FACT: Barack Obama supports a ban on the resale of police issued firearms, even if the money is going to police departments for replacement equipment.9 FACT: Barack Obama supports mandatory firearm training requirements for all gun owners and a ban on gun ownership for persons under the age of 21.9 1. United States Senate, S. 397, vote number 219, July 2, 2005. (http://www.senate.gov/legislative/LIS/roll_call_lists/roll_call_vote_cfm.cfm?congress=109&session=1&vote=00219) 2. Independent Voters of Illinois/Independent Precinct Organization general candidate questionnaire, Sept. 9, 1996. The responses on this survey were described in “Obama had greater role on liberal survey,” Politico, March 31, 20087. (http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0308/9269.html) 3. United States Senate, S. 397, vote number 217, Kennedy amendment July 2, 2005. (http://www.senate.gov/legislative/LIS/roll_call_lists/roll_call_vote_cfm.cfm?congress=109&session=1&vote=00217) 4. David Wright, Ursula Fahy and Sunlen Miller, "Obama: 'Common Sense Regulation' On Gun Owners' Rights," ABC News' "Political Radar" Blog, http://blogs.abcnews.com, 2/15/08. (http://blogs.abcnews.com/politicalradar/2008/02/obama-common-se.html) 5. Illinois Senate, March 25, 2004 SB 2165, vote 20. 6. “Fact Check: No News In Obama's Consistent Record.” Obama ’08, December 11, 2007. (http://www.barackobama.com/factcheck/2007/12/11/fact_check_no_news_in_obamas_c.php) 7. “Candidates' gun control positions may figure in Pa. vote,” Pittsburgh Tribune-Review, Wednesday, April 2, 2008, and "Keyes, Obama Are Far Apart On Guns," Chicago Tribune, 9/15/04. (http://www.pittsburghlive.com/x/pittsburghtrib/news/s_560181.html) 8. 1998 Joyce Foundation Annual Report, p. 7. (http://www.joycefdn.org/pdf/98_AnnualReport.pdf) 9. “Obama and Gun Control,” The Volokh Conspiracy, taken from the Chicago Defender, Dec. 13, 1999. (http://www.volokh.com/posts/1203389334.shtml) 10. Illinois Senate, May 5, 2002, SB 1936 Con., vote 26. 11. Illinois Senate, March 25, 2003, SB 2163, vote 18. 12. “Clinton, Edwards, Obama on gun control,” Radio Iowa, Sunday, April 22, 2007. (http://learfield.typepad.com/radioiowa/2007/04/clinton_edwards.html) 13. Chicago Tribune blogs, “Barack Obama: NIU Shootings call for action,” February 15, 2008, (http://blogs.trb.com/news/politics/blog/2008/02/barack_obama_comments_on_shoot.html) 14. Barack Obama campaign website: “As president, Barack Obama would repeal the Tiahrt Amendment . . .” (http://www.barackobama.com/issues/urbanpolicy/#crime-and-law-enforcement.) hey you don't have to pick up that phone so quick now do you?pitchfork Now would be the time they put you on hold for 911 
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
ps.. I have had a 38 put to my head before... and its not a pleasant feeling thinking you are about to die.... it was the one time I didn't have my weapon with me... and yes I was in law enforcement..
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
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 country is that? |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
what country is that? I am sure he is checking on Snopes to validate the email fwd
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Oh God, now I know why I did not go to college...I hate to read
|
|
|
|
|
