Speeding charge for ambulance

[Jaggy Bunnet]

What gets me about this case is that the same papers that think he should have got off with it are also the ones that say anyone carrying a gun should get life imprisonment.

He had an unlicensed firearm (and I think it was of a type which it is not possible to license in the UK) and used it to shoot two people who, in the opinion of the jury who heard all the evidence, were not directly threatening him.

Is it the case that someone in the US who used an illegal weapon (that could not be legally held even with a licence) to shoot a fleeing criminal would not be charged?

 

[Jon_in_london]

Is it the case that someone in the US who used an illegal weapon (that could not be legally held even with a licence) to shoot a fleeing criminal would not be charged?

What was so illegal about his weapon (apart from the fact that it was unlicencesed)? I thought it was just a shotgun?

I dont think it should be illegal to kill burglars but I'd agree to 25 years for possesion of an illegal weapon.

 

[Tmy]

In the US the guy could be charhged wh murder. You can defend yourslef but shooting in the back is asking for trouble. You cant use deadly force on someone whos running away. In most cases even the cops wouldnt be allowed to shoot.

 

[Sundog]

In the US the guy could be charhged wh murder. You can defend yourslef but shooting in the back is asking for trouble. You cant use deadly force on someone whos running away. In most cases even the cops wouldnt be allowed to shoot.

A few years ago, despite a strong belief that all gun nuts are dangerous, I made friends with a guy who was my chief beta tester and also a card-carrying NRA member. We became very good friends, because apart from his gun fixation, he was a nice guy - or seemed to be.

One day I got a phone call. A bunch of Hispanic teenagers had rear-ended him and jumped out of the car, running off in all directions. He pulled a gun out of his glove compartment and shot one of them dead - in the back.

He was convicted of manslaughter (!) and served four years. IMHO he should have been charged with murder. Sap that I am, I supported and helped him while he was in prison - the only friend who stuck by him. When he got out, broke and ruined, I gathered up all my extra computer gear and sent it to him to get him started again, writing web pages. This enabled him to earn an income again and he was very grateful.

When I felt I had done what was required under the rules of friendship, and knew he was now on his feet again, I discontinued our friendship because I couldn't live with what he'd done and his unrepentant attitude about it.

I no longer even consider offering friendship to a gun nut. I won't be burned like that again.

YMMV.

 

[Jaggy Bunnet]

What was so illegal about his weapon (apart from the fact that it was unlicencesed)? I thought it was just a shotgun?

I dont think it should be illegal to kill burglars but I'd agree to 25 years for possesion of an illegal weapon.

According to the Tony Martin Support Group website, it was a five shot pump action shotgun which had not been "modified so that the magazine can accommodate no more than two cartridges" as required by legislation since 1988.

 

[Ed]

What gets me about this case is that the same papers that think he should have got off with it are also the ones that say anyone carrying a gun should get life imprisonment.

He had an unlicensed firearm (and I think it was of a type which it is not possible to license in the UK) and used it to shoot two people who, in the opinion of the jury who heard all the evidence, were not directly threatening him.

Is it the case that someone in the US who used an illegal weapon (that could not be legally held even with a licence) to shoot a fleeing criminal would not be charged?

Not with shooting the bad guy. He would be charged with illeagal weapons possession. Happens with some regularity in NY.