Run , hide , tell in case of terror attack in England

[ralph]

--- http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/ ... ttack.html --- video instruction to English on how to react to active shooting . Telegraph video !!

[GFB]

Screw all that..shoot..shoot some more.

When you can move in close, kick teeth in.

[ralph]

yeah , pretty interesting , probably the same in Australia and really ALL countries . Remember 'mumbai' and one at some mall in 'africa' !!

[Zelda]

Odd that the only place I have seen anything like this is on an American forum.

I should think given the choice any innocent bystanders reaction would be to run, hide, tell.......I don't need a video to tell me that.

[ralph]

its just an interesting video Zelda .

[Zelda]

I couldn't actually get the video to load for me Ralph, I read the text though.

[ralph]

just tried it again and it loaded up fine . ---------------- As a comment , your English newsapers seem to be lots more informative than the run of the mill US newspaper site . Not just because of this story but because they just seem to cover more news and are more in depth . Example would be the latest San Bernadino shooting . Coverage by , think it was Daily Mail was great with lots of info and photos . By the way , I think that you are English and that's the reason for the comment Zelda .

[Zelda]

It's probably my comp Ralph, but I cant see the vid.
Yes I am English, the newspapers here are good, always best to read more than one though because they all have their own agendas.
Odd that you single out the Mail, it's sneered at by many as either being too lightweight or for being too controversial, depending on where you stand politically.

It's definitely the best paper to quote if you want to start a heated debate on a British forum though.

[ralph]

I use the 'Daily Mail' as an example although I look at more than the 'DM' . I also check out some in Sweden , think its the LOCAL and its pretty informative on Swedish news and events . Also been following other European news papers when I can read them because I only read English . Interesting news coming out of Europe due to the flood that is storming Europes shores .

[jellowrestling]

Screw all that..shoot..shoot some more.

When you can move in close, kick teeth in.

+1

[Red Oak]

When Self Defence is in general outlawed, along with the means for effective Self Defence what else can a Subject do ?

[Zelda]

We can defend ourselves, just not use 'unnecessary force'...and that's open to interpretation.

[GFB]

We can defend ourselves, just not use 'unnecessary force'...and that's open to interpretation.

What would be considered "unnecessary force" when someone decides to start shooting people, or to throw pipe bombs?

[jellowrestling]

We can defend ourselves, just not use 'unnecessary force'...and that's open to interpretation.

And that's the problem. As long as there are liberals, almost any force is deemed "unnecessary". I mean, why didn't you just run away? Who gives you the right to injure or kill another person? What if you misinterpreted their actions? What if the other person had a bad childhood? Perhaps he was just trying to get enough money to feed his children and pay his iPhone bill.

There was a case here (in the U.S.) a couple of years ago where a man with a crowbar broke into a house with a woman and her child in it. They retreated behind two locked doors in the house (that's three locked doors total). When he got to the crawl space where they were cornered, the woman shot him five times with a .45 (he lived). I had liberal members of my extended family argue that she had no right to shoot him, that she could have simply run out the back door of the home.

In Texas, the person initiating the assault/crime takes on pretty much all the liability. The person defending him(or her)self can use whatever force he/she deems necessary to ensure the protection of self, family or property. In some states there is a preponderance of liberals, so criminals are given more rights in the matter.

In Texas, anyone shooting a terrorist is a hero. Period.

[Zelda]

Without doubt we have a different mindset re guns. I prefer our way.

We are allowed to defend ourselves, there is usually a public outcry if someone is charged with assault when they have been defending their home or their family.
Sitting in wait for someone, or shooting them in the back, running after an intruder and beating them senseless would be considered extreme and probably result in you not the intruder being charged with the more serious crime.

In the event of a terror attack who knows....I have a feeling before to long some of us will find out though.

[Red Oak]

According to my British Friends using a legally owned firearm in self-defense will result in them being charged with a Crime.

[ralph]

thing is that in England you can be got for 'disproportionate force' if for example a gun were used to defend against being beaten with fists unless you are the Queen or the retired Tony Blair whose bodyguard left her Glock 19 in a Starbucks toilet while she spent a penny . Also , since guns are supposed to be locked up separate from ammo except when in use for 'SPORT' or vermin control or other sporting purposes you might be accused of 'instant arming' . Disproportinate force are the words that in many cases are used to describe Israeli actions of self defense against the 'palis' simply because the Israelis are good at kicking pali azz and the idea of disproportionate force also applies to self defense in England . I of course and most Americans approve of disproportionate force because that overwhelming force allows a fight to be won . --------------------------------- looking for and I welcome correction on any of this if I am incorrect . See the case of a Gent named 'hassein' [think] who was prosecuted and sent to jail because he used a base ball bat to fend off some home invaders . Years ago , I may have forgotten all details . Anyway , interesting thread , hope you correct me if I am wrong , after all , I'm an American [yank] and I don't talk about English gun law very often Zelda !!

[GFB]

Without doubt we have a different mindset re guns. I prefer our way.

Our 2nd amendment is a primary reason why we are citizens, and you are subjects.

[Zelda]

This is interesting. It mentions the case Ralph mentioned and also answers Red Oak.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-19886504

[planosteve]

Without doubt we have a different mindset re guns. I prefer our way.

Our 2nd amendment is a primary reason why we are citizens, and you are subjects.

Not really. You can be sentenced to life in prison here for writing 1 hot check.