previous post next post  

The rights of an englishman...

By The Armorer on March 25, 2004 | | Comments (13)

...to be prey, have just been reinforced. Rise up at the ballot box people - take back your rights.

From Manchester Online:


Man who killed armed intruder jailed

A Salford man who stabbed to death an armed intruder at his home was jailed for eight years.

Carl Lindsay, 25, answered a knock at his door in Salford, Greater Manchester, to find four men armed with a gun.

When the gang tried to rob him he grabbed a samurai sword and stabbed one of them, 37-year-old Stephen Swindells, four times.

Mr Swindells, of Salford, was later found collapsed in an alley and died in hospital.

Lindsay, of Walkden, was found guilty of manslaughter following a three-week trial at Manchester Crown Court.

He was sentenced to eight years' imprisonment.

WTF? I guess stabbing someone four times whose holding a gun on you is "excessive force"? I'm sorry - I've got a few Brit readers, can any of you, off line or in the comments shed light on the logic of this case? As reported, I can only assume that mad cow has affected the entire judicial system.

...After the case, Detective Chief Inspector Sam Haworth said: "Four men, including the victim, had set out purposefully to rob Carl Lindsay and this intent ultimately led to Stephen Swindells' death.

"I believe the sentences passed today reflect the severity of the circumstances."

I can only hope that this man was badly misquoted.

Three other men were charged with robbery and firearms offences in connection with the incident, which took place in February last year.

Again I ask my readers - I don't have the time to surf for this this week - does anybody know what happened to the perps? Man, here's a guy in his house who is living the shopworn phrase, "Better to be judged by six than carried by twelve."

Idiots.

The whole article is here.

Share This Article:

Share |

Categories:

13 Comments

By triticale on March 25, 2004 6:43 AM
It is now being reported that the swordsman was a drug dealer. That does not make the action of the bandits any less reprehenible (unless, perhaps, if the dealer was a burn artist). There is in fact something particularly scummy about those who prey on people who cannot report them to the police.
 
By John of Argghhh! on March 25, 2004 7:22 AM
Hmmm, that muddies up the water a bit, but just because you're a crook yourself doesn't mean you shouldn't be able to defend yourself. I've seen several cases out of Blighty where samurai swords (I assume the repros) are the 'bad implements'. A ban can't be too long in coming if they play true to form in the Home Office. I wonder what they'll do when they've banned everything but rocks?
 
By Jerry the Geek on March 25, 2004 1:27 PM
"I wonder what they'll do when they've banned everything but rocks?" Ban rocks? BTW, in reference to observations that the dead goblin was stabbed in the back ... four times ... it seems to me that he wasn't moving fast enough on his way out the door. Probably there was a little confusion when all four goblins tried to get through the doorway at the same time. Personally, I've got no problem with where the wounds were administered. As the old joke goes: "I didn't do it, it was an accident, and besides the guy was asking for it." Eight years for slicing up one of a gang that broke into your house with a gun. Humph! They shoulda given him a medal. If he'd had a gun, he might have got all four of them! But don't get me started ....
 
By Keith on March 25, 2004 5:44 PM
It's symptomatic of lefty governments--they take away the right of citizens to run their own lives, disarm them on the pretext that the State will protect them (which it patently cannot) and then use the threat of jail to keep law-abiding people toeing their socialist line. Same in New Zealand and here in Australia. The government of the State of Victoria has just introduced legislation to force owners of swords to keep the weapon locked in a safe, protected by a burglar alarm. meanwhile, Lebanese and Vietnamese gangs are running around with handguns, which they seem to be able to buy at will. It'd be a sick farce if not for the fact that this is reality, 2004 style. A Kerry administration would follow the same course. At least in the U.S. citizens still have recourse to arguing their constitutional rights. We don't.
 
By John of Argghhh! on March 25, 2004 5:54 PM
And yet, those self-same governments can't explain why, after all those 'safety' laws, no is any safer. Well, no one except criminals. Oh well, after I get the basement rebuilt, it will qualify as a safe, so my swords will meet the letter, if not the intent, of the law. Feel free to come visit if you're in the area, Keith!
 
By Keith on March 25, 2004 6:23 PM
Well, I thank you for that invitation. Same here--if you ever feel like visiting a really remote area (air access only for 4 months of the year) and being up to your waist in crocodiles, snakes and wild pigs, feel free to drop in. There's always a cold beer and some spare .416 ammo for plinking around here. :o)) cheers.
 
By Teresa on March 25, 2004 8:45 PM
Okay I knew I saw something on Volokh. It links to this blog which appears to be a good explanation of what happened. You'll have to scroll down (it's blogspot... nuff said) to the titled post "More Corruption in Europe". It's a ways down the page - almost to half way on my browser. SheepFreeZone It's interesting. I'm not sure we're getting all the necessary details to make a decision from the papers.
 
By Darth Misha I on March 25, 2004 9:30 PM
Frankly, I don't give a shit if the perp was facing him, running away from him or doing an Irish Jig on top of his coffee table. He and his three goblin friends made a decision to break and enter, then proceeded to threaten a man IN HIS OWN HOME with a firearm. As far as I'm concerned, a perp waives all rights as a human being the moment he's on my premises without my express permission. If he doesn't want to be dead, all he has to do is to not break in.
 
By Keith on March 25, 2004 11:34 PM
Darth Misha has it in one--the bastard breaking into a person's home chooses to do so. The homeowner has no choice about being the victim of the break-in. The message ought to be really, really simple--"break into someone's home and you will run the risk of being shot, with no legal consequences for the shooter" Anything short of this is just insanity. It amounts to ordering citizens to be victims. There's a lovely little Marlin .357 lever-action carbine next to my bed. Loaded. Anyone breaks in, they get shot and to hell with the legal niceties.
 
By John of Argghhh! on March 26, 2004 5:19 AM
The concession I make to the legal niceties is I won't shoot fleeing felons (but I have no problem with those who do, so I suppose you'd like me on your jury). I will endeavor to ensure that all entrance wounds are in front. The weapon of choice at Castle Argghhhh! is our Winchester Model 97 Trench Gun, a WWI and WWII veteran who still serves proudly, and is very comfortable in the trench-like confines of the house.
 
By Mr Free Market on March 26, 2004 12:16 PM
If you think that case was bad, try this one...
 
By Matt Rustler on March 27, 2004 6:44 PM
Noticed that someone here linked to us, so I popped on over. I've put some further thoughts here, particularly in response to Darth Misha's comment.
 
By Matt Rustler on March 27, 2004 6:49 PM
Oh, by the way, in answer to your question, John, the bad(der) guys got 14 years each.