FYI on Viral email…

You might have read, or received, an e-mail from gun rights enthusiasts with the following story:

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 ?

While the construct of the story is established to scare gun owners or advocates, the story of Tony Martin is a little less innocent.

Mr. Martin had numerous times before been burgalarized, he had booby traps established to twart future robbers. Indeed his rural farmhouse was agains broken into, but both burgalars were actually shot in the back and leg as they were climbing out through a window. Mr. Martin had lost his shotgun license years earlier due to firing on a motorist, perhaps on his property.

Mr. Martin petitioned the court for a reduction in sentence and won. His charged sentence was reduced to manslaughter. I believe he was paroled in 2003 having served two-thirds of his sentence. However, what I find interesting in the background of this case is the statement from the Parole board in their initial refusal for release:

The parole board, however, has continually refused him early release – saying he has shown no remorse and would continue to pose a danger to any other burglars(link)

Humor in Nature

SERIOUSLY ?   The guy would be a “danger to burglars“?  Now  we have a reference point for the mental logic of Piers Morgan AND Natalie Jackson.

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 street 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 side arm’s 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 Tony 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?


This entry was posted in 2nd Amendment, Communist, media bias, Potus Gun Ban, Socialist, Typical Prog Behavior, Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

19 Responses to FYI on Viral email…

  1. LittleLaughter says:

    I received this email regarding Mr. Martin last week. Thank you for this informative follow up. I will be emailing it.


  2. elvischupacabra says:

    We etymologists need to go into the lab and invent some new pejoratives. The old ones are no longer working as effectively.

    I’m finally speechless.


  3. Welcome to Hell On Earth.
    How do like it so far?

    Oh, by the way, is all your gold registered? No?
    Yes it is.


  4. jordan2222 says:

    Of course, we all KNOW deep inside that this could NEVER happen here. We have been totally, completely and forever deemed to be IMMUNE from tyranny by.. guess who? Yup, Fabian Socialists.

    Cross my heart and hope to die.. .If I’m lying, I ‘m dying. My hand to allah. Or something.. ..


  5. Poor man. Let that be a lesson. When in a despotic place that refuses to recognize the nature right is self defense follow the three S’s if you encounter a life threatening situation.


  6. jordan2222 says:

    Wonder why there is so little interest on this thread?


  7. ottawa925 says:

    This incident reminds me of how Alan Arkin had his apartment with his two sons set up for security in the movie Popi. He had like 30 locks on the door, a dummy in a rocker by the window, and a recording of a vicious dog barking, and still it wasn’t enough. If you have never seen Popi … I highly recommend. It’s a drama/comedy, of a father who just can’t take the violence in his neighborhood while trying to raise his two young sons. He comes up with a heatbreaking plan for them to have a better life. Here is a trailer, it’s from 1969:


  8. Bongo says:

    They slowly boiled the frog in the U.K. and conned the citizens to give up their firearms. That’s not going to happen here. Too many Americans live out in the country and in urban ghettos who need self protection. And we have the 2nd Amendment. If Obama wants war, he will have his war.


  9. czarowniczy says:

    As the Fox News video you had pasted in a few days ago said, while England has little offensive gun violence the EU has named England as the most violent country in the EU. Unsaid is the number of attacks on Brits by the various non-British immigrants that flood the country as pointing out the ethnicity of violent attackers is considered bad form, old boy. ‘Ethnics’ have been attacking Brits with knives, bits of glass that can be used and immediately discarded, bats, pipes and, let’s not forget, BOMBS. A Brit defending himself may just find his pasty white fish-and-chips eating ass in court, the full weight of the Crown weighing down upon his right to ‘defend’ himself. Perhaps the POtuS, his tender psyche damaged in youth by seeing Escape From New York fancies himself as The Duke of New York and is just trying to prevent some Snake Plisskin wannabe from shooting up his crib.


  10. Pingback: Tony Martin: Crime and controversy » Walking in the Wilderness

  11. Pingback: Piers Morgan & Obama’s Vision for America, Tony Martin’s Story | Grumpy Opinions

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s