No, it works perfectly fine for self defence since the guy would still be dead and I would not be. What happens afterwards is basically entirely not relevant since I'd still be alive and the other person would not be. As to the law itself, legally I am absolved of the need to 'weigh up the pros and cons' in the 'heat of the moment' and I do not have to wait to be attacked in my own home. I can also legally kill another person in my own home if I feel that I am in peril (even if it's demonstrated that I was wrong in hindsight.) so long as I don't disable and then execute the man.
Don't get me wrong it's a shitty and ambiguous and retarded law when it should be 'Man in house when he shouldn't be is fair game.' But it's not really that limiting. There have been only 11 prosecutions of people defending themselves between 1990 and 2011; of those I can actually recall the two big ones off the top of my head, one of them involved a man ambushing the intruder (deemed okay), knocking him out (deemed okay) dragging him into the garden, throwing him in a pit and then setting him on fire (not okay); and one where some pakis let the guy get away, and then beat him until he was retarded at a later date.
So like what? Two instances in the last 240 years? (I'm counting the civil war) Irelands been kicking off with their shit for like 800 years like clockwork. Every time something weird happens in Stormont I'm itching to ring my friends and be like 'Hey, you guys need a place to hide while Sinn Fein are doing the
thing again?' because they have a chimp out like potato niggers are wont to do and start planting bombs like flowers every fifty years or so. Hell I think the IRA murdered a journalist like a year ago.
First off:
Secondly, then they're not actually
using them then are they? That was in fact my entire fucking point; gun owners in America don't do shit when the government pushes them. They just go to their homes, and they run away. Is that the smart choice? Hell yes! They'd get their shit dropped in if the government ever actually 'came' for them because no cunt would support them. They'd just arrest you guys in waves every couple of years, or slowly erode your laws. But that's the point of what I was saying. The guns don't matter, it's the will to actually tell the government to fuck off when they step on you instead of just putting up with it.
Your entire response sums up the fucking problem; you guys don't care about the cities and seem to literally have a 'I just wanna grrrriiillll!!' mindset about everything; it doesn't matter if you defend your slice of suburbia, or your nice rural utopia because the nigwashing is still coming. The cities are bad yes and don't go to them, but that doesn't mean they will stay in the cities; the US border force was flying out somalians to fucking maine for christs sakes. The whole argument I was making was that the guns aren't relevant to changing a government and resisting tyranny, because they don't work unless the people using them are up for going to war with the government, and most simply aren't. It was not 'Why don't the boogaloo happen REEEEEEEE!!!' because I'm not a fucking
retard.
No, that's you conflating defensive uses of a firearm with action against tyranny which is what was being discussed. I'm not 'telling you about your country' I'm telling you that when the government has done shit people didn't like and gun owners went out trying to look all scary, the government did it anyway, and the gun owners didn't do shit with their guns. A firearm is a threat of violence, and brandishing it in protest of the government is not a fashion accessory, it is you telling the government that if they do not back down you will be using violence against them.
