It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Weaponry for Home Defence in the UK

page: 6
12
<< 3  4  5    7  8  9 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Dec, 10 2015 @ 03:30 AM
link   

originally posted by: andy06shake
a reply to: Soloprotocol

I'm afraid for all intents and purposes it does not matter if the property is rented or otherwise owned by yourself. If police decide the have reason to enter your home because they suspect someone is in danger, imagined or otherwise they will fource entry, with no warrant required. Sure you can report them, even try and sue them but without them actively showing malice not a solicitor in the land will attempt to prosecute. And chances are they will find something to charge you with just to keep themselves right. Them actively showing malice by the way would require repetition.


They'd have to have bloody good reason, warrants are not issued willy-nilly, someone has to sign off on them and that person has ultimate responsibility if there is no just cause to. To go into your home without a warrant they have to either see or hear that someone is in danger and have that seconded by another officer as witness, and even then there are protocols under which they are screwed if they cannot later justify that action to a judge. Any evidence etc is worthless if not collected appropriately.

The type of scenario that you describe would only be effective, from their point of view, if you have previous, and significant, form. In almost all cases, the Police are hamstrung, and like vampires, you have to invite them in.




posted on Dec, 10 2015 @ 04:25 AM
link   

originally posted by: Kratos40
a reply to: KingDoey

A Taser gun
A Hunting Bow
A large Machete
A supped up bb rifle semi-automatic (if its allowed in your country)


Tasers are illegal in the UK and a bb gun or other gas powered weapon requires a firearms licence if the shot energy exceeds 12 ft/lbs at the muzzle.



posted on Dec, 10 2015 @ 04:51 AM
link   
a reply to: Anaana

Well my friend did not have any previous and he could not sue them for forcing entry, still got 300 odd hours of community service and a criminal record for having an axe down his couch. If he had any previous it would have been upwards of six months in gaol.

Just dont test the argument, might be six months of your life you dont get back.

Vampires i like that. LoL
edit on 10-12-2015 by andy06shake because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 10 2015 @ 04:55 AM
link   
Police dont need a warrant to enter your home if they have reasonable suspicion that a crime is in progress.
Domestic violence, a suspected burglary, the smell of weed....all perfectly lawful entry reasons.

IF you keep an axe by your front door and they see it you are in trouble.
If the axe is part of a project where you are repairing the door/the cabinet next to the door then you are not in trouble.
If you kept your toolbox near the door and the axe happened to be on top of it- again there is no law against owning an axe and storing it by the door as long as there is a valid reason that can be understood by someone who thinks enforcing a range of unjust laws is acceptable.

If you are the type of person who sits around imagining/worrying about intruder scenarios, making sure you aren't perceived to be some sort of crazed vigilante should make up at least 40% of your time spent.



posted on Dec, 10 2015 @ 05:44 AM
link   

originally posted by: andy06shake

Say you have an axe or something similar located in you bed room, or down the side of the couch for home security. One night you have an argument with your partner and the Police are called by neighbours, few hours later everything's calmed down, the police arrive. They can and will gain entry to your property simply to determine your lady is ok and they spot said axe down the side of the sofa. They will charge you with an offensive weapon. I pretty much know this for a fact because it happened to my friend.


Your friend needed a better lawyer then, as OffWeap applies to possession in public places. Lots of things that fall under OffWeap - including things specifically listed under OffWeap - are perfectly legal to own at home. There's a handful of technicalities surrounding it, but merely possessing an axe at home shouldn't trigger them.

Just being arrested means nothing. Getting charged is more informative. If he got convicted then something else kicked off that he didn't tell you about. Or all the lawyers involved were grossly incompetent.



posted on Dec, 10 2015 @ 05:53 AM
link   
a reply to: AugustusMasonicus




what is to stop others from acquiring one themselves and using it on a group of unsuspecting civilians?


Nothing.

Just as there is nothing stopping others from picking up a house brick and smashing that group of unsuspecting civilians heads to a pulp.

You can see where i'm going with that i suppose?



posted on Dec, 10 2015 @ 06:01 AM
link   
a reply to: Jukiodone

Axe officer?

Oh yes, i was intending to sharpen it, when i was rudely interrupted by the thugs intent on murdering my family...by pure lucky coincidence, i had it in my hands at that moment when they smashed their way in...and the rest, for them, is history.

If you have an axe nearby, and you have that axe purely for home defence...that is a crime, signalling a predetermination to use it as a weapon against whomever.

If you have an open fire, regularly use it during the processing of your own firewood and happen to have the axe (machete etc.) nearby when attacked in your home, because you were using it for the firewood, or were cleaning or servicing it, and then you used it as a weapon against the attackers..that is not illegal as there is no evidence the axe was present purely as a weapon.



posted on Dec, 10 2015 @ 06:06 AM
link   

originally posted by: MysterX
You can see where i'm going with that i suppose?


Not really.



posted on Dec, 10 2015 @ 06:08 AM
link   
I'd invite them in and bore them to death as I do with most of my visitors.It wouldn't be long before they hand their weapons over to me and insist that I put them out of their misery.

So no need for any physical weapons in the UK,we just use our intellect as our most potent weapon.It's completely legal,ethical,doesn't need a licence and doesn't leave any traces that it's been used that could be found by even the best forensics team in the world.



posted on Dec, 10 2015 @ 06:10 AM
link   
a reply to: AugustusMasonicus

In that case, there's little point in me elaborating further.



posted on Dec, 10 2015 @ 06:19 AM
link   

originally posted by: MysterX
In that case, there's little point in me elaborating further.


Why make a comment if you are not willing to explain it?



posted on Dec, 10 2015 @ 06:22 AM
link   

originally posted by: Anaana

...To go into your home without a warrant they have to either see or hear that someone is in danger and have that seconded by another officer as witness, and even then there are protocols under which they are screwed if they cannot later justify that action to a judge. Any evidence etc is worthless if not collected appropriately.


What? A second witness? What?!?

Have a read of Blench (link below). The only evidence of concern was a phonecall to the police - and at the end of the phonecall, the caller told the police that everything was now ok and there was no need to come. The owner of the property even told the attending police to go away. Police entry to the property was still lawful.

www.bailii.org...

The UK (in contrast to the US) uses an inclusionary evidential approach. In other words, nearly everything relevant is admissible unless there was a massive and egregious breach of the defendants rights. Unless they're beating a confession out of you with a lead pipe, pretty much everything will be admissible. The idea is that it is better to get to the truth by considering all the evidence, than preventing the truth from being found by refusing to consider evidence gathered in a less-than-ideal manner.



posted on Dec, 10 2015 @ 06:22 AM
link   
a reply to: AugustusMasonicus

I would have gladly explained the point, even if the contextual point i made is very obvious and self explanatory to someone with even a modicum of reasonable discernment, if i hadn't got the overwhelming sense you were being deliberately obtuse for one reason or another.

I'll let you think about the point, and hope that you realise what was being said.

I can explain to you, but i cannot comprehend for you.



posted on Dec, 10 2015 @ 06:25 AM
link   
a reply to: MysterX

As I do not see the relevance to my post I have no idea what you are trying to say or the context.

Like I said above, if you are not willing to explain a post, why make it?



posted on Dec, 10 2015 @ 07:21 AM
link   
a reply to: EvillerBob

I dont think he behaved very well at the time so Police also added resisting arrest and breach of the peace to go with possession of an offensive weapon. PF dropped other charges and went with the offensive weapon. Classic tactic, after all once the Sheriff here's hidden Axe hes luck to get away with community service.

As to the proficiency of his solicitor, he was only a young guy at the time and not exactly well versed or indeed financially capable of affording a good brief. A lot of the better solicitors wont take on legal aid cases.

My point still stands through hiding weapons around the house with an intent to use them on would be intruders can and will get you prosecuted.

edit on 10-12-2015 by andy06shake because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 10 2015 @ 10:32 AM
link   

originally posted by: andy06shake
a reply to: EvillerBob

...once the Sheriff here's hidden Axe...


Sheriff? I'm guessing Scotland then. The situation may well be different there; I'm only qualified in E&W and some of the laws diverge at certain points.

Self defence is a big, messy area. There are lots of things that are actually legal, but you'll still get arrested and charged so the courts have to sort it out. For instance, it's actually legal to carry a weapon for self defence in certain situations. Not a lot of people know that, including the police. Legal or not, you're going to end up in court trying to prove that the law applies to your specific situation - and hoping that you're not the one to get the caselaw overturned on appeal even if you're successful at first instance.



posted on Dec, 10 2015 @ 03:27 PM
link   
Two things worth considering that won't even get you arrested in the UK:

1. A really bright flashlight.
2. A plan.

The first one I think explains itself. Your odds of successfully bludgeoning an attacker with a makeshift weapon are a lot better if the attacker is temporarily blinded.

Second, look at your home from a tactical point of view. Where are there chokepoints? Where are there blind corners? What are the potential points of entry and escape? Notice I mentioned escape there? If you have a battle plan and your opponent does not, that's good for you. Plus, no one can even prove you had a plan.



posted on Dec, 10 2015 @ 06:21 PM
link   
a reply to: PocketRevolution

I was not aware there was anytime it's acceptable to carry a weapon for self defence purposes in the U.K. at least not any any kind of urban areas.

So when is it acceptable and under what circumstance?
edit on 10-12-2015 by andy06shake because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 11 2015 @ 04:08 AM
link   

originally posted by: andy06shake
a reply to: PocketRevolution

I was not aware there was anytime it's acceptable to carry a weapon for self defence purposes in the U.K. at least not any any kind of urban areas.

So when is it acceptable and under what circumstance?


I suspect you're replying to me, not PocketRevolution. I'm a little short on time so I'll give the short version of the answer.

Evan v Hughes [1972] 3 All ER 412 is the most often cited authority and sets out the key principle:



...it may be a reasonable excuse for the carrying of an offensive weapon that the carrier is in anticipation of an imminent attack and is carrying it for his own personal defence.


I'd also offer up something else for consideration.

The link below is to an appeal case, R v McAuley [2009] EWCA Crim 2130. To summarise - someone tried to claim self defence as "good reason", the court said the jury would be told it was not an acceptable defence in law, so the defendant entered a guilty plea. On appeal (which is where the link below comes in), the Court of Appeal agreed that there was sufficient case law to support self defence as a "good reason" in certain situations - potentially including the situation the appellant had found themselves in - so a jury should have been allowed to consider it.

www.bailii.org... i-bin/markup.cgi?doc=/ew/cases/EWCA/Crim/2009/2130.html&query=r+and+v+and+mcauley&method=boolean



12. It seems to this court that, from the authorities already referred to, it could amount to a "good reason" under section 139(4) if the appellant was carrying the knife for his own protection and that he could show on the balance of probabilities that he was in fear of an imminent attack. The judge's ruling here amounts to saying that the facts as he understood them to be could not as a matter of law amount to a fear of an imminent attack.

13. That may be, at first sight, an understandable conclusion but we bear in mind what was also said in Bown at paragraph 18, namely that a court should be slow to rule that the evidence is, as a matter of law, incapable of amounting to the defence under section 139(4). The words "good reason" are both very general words and very ordinary ones, being words which Parliament must have intended would normally be applied and interpreted by a jury or other fact-finding tribunal such as Justices. The reference in Evans v Hughes to "imminent attack" does not write those words into the statute and it remains for a jury to determine how imminent, how soon, how likely and how serious the anticipated attack has to be to constitute a good reason for possession of the bladed article. It may be that a threat five days beforehand from an earlier assailant would be held by a jury not to suffice, but we do observe that in the Evans v Hughes case the Divisional Court was not prepared to interfere with the Magistrates' decision that there was a reasonable excuse where the defendant had been attacked seven or eight days earlier and remained in fear. The Divisional Court did indeed say that this was a "borderline" case, but it did indicate by its decision that it was open to the Magistrates to find that it was a reasonable excuse.


Basically, there has to be a realistic, specific, and imminent threat to you. You can't carry something around "just in case".

Again, to reiterate, you'll still end up in front of the court to get this sorted out.


edit on Ev09FridayFridayAmerica/ChicagoFri, 11 Dec 2015 04:09:10 -06004642015b by EvillerBob because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 11 2015 @ 04:32 AM
link   
Crossbows are completely legal and you don't need to have any kind of licence. I bought one for 80 quid and can fire a bolt through a wooden door. It's also accurate up to about 50 yards.
Have a look on bladesandbows.co.uk they also have a massive selection of machetes, axes, Katana etc. You just need to be registered on the electoral roll to prove you're 18 and they will deliver to your door.



new topics

top topics



 
12
<< 3  4  5    7  8  9 >>

log in

join