SAS hero jailed: Sergeant sentenced to two years after gun found

[JJ_]

Yeah I guess the British don't care one bit about their men in uniform. He probably nearly died several times but yep law is law who cares! :rolleyes:

Send in SEAL team six and extract him and bring him to the U.S lol.

They'll probably chuck in a grenade and kill the poor sod during the rescue, like they did with hostage Linda Norgrove. Seals are cowboys :D

[McKay]

Because it disarms the people because it has camera's on every block because it bans animals based on breed are just a few things and to me that would oppress me I would have to give up my dog which I consider family I would have to give up my right to protection I would have to give up my knives all because im considered dangerous with them. But if you really want to know what I was talking about when I said oppressive regimes I meant places like China.

Why do Americans have such an issue with Security Cameras, they're not "on every block". We don't even have "blocks" in the UK, they will be in major streets in Towns and Cities, Oh no they have some footage of me walking down the street. I have nothing to hide. Infact I was assaulted once, they caught it all on CCTV and that was all the evidence required to put that person in prison. As for Pitbulls, they are legal in the UK, they have some regulations required for their keeping as they are dangerous animals.

They must be neutered.

They must be insured.

They must be muzzled and kept on a lead in public.

They must be microchipped.

They must be registered.

[MikeChipshop Member]

Because it disarms the people because it has camera's on every block

Just had a look out my window... nope, no cameras.

[KingCracker]

Why do Americans have such an issue with Security Cameras, Oh no they have some footage of me walking down the street. I have nothing to hide. Infact I was assaulted once, they caught it all on CCTV and that was all the evidence required to put that person in prison.

Because the Majority of the people here hate big government, a lot of people came to the U.S from countries like china,north korea and others. They don't want to see our country go in that direction. Not saying the U.K is North Korea but when you take steps to control the citizenry where does it end?

[FlintyV]

Because it disarms the people because it has camera's on every block because it bans animals based on breed are just a few things and to me that would oppress me I would have to give up my dog which I consider family I would have to give up my right to protection I would have to give up my knives all because im considered dangerous with them. But if you really want to know what I was talking about when I said oppressive regimes I meant places like China.

It doesn't seem like you have a solid understanding of what life in Britain is really like.

[McKay]

Because the Majority of the people here hate big government, a lot of people came to the U.S from countries like china,north korea and others. They don't want to see our country go in that direction. Not saying the U.K is North Korea but when you take steps to control the citizenry where does it end?

People in America hate "Big Government"? The American Government feels like one of the biggest there is in the West.

[KingCracker]

People in America hate "Big Government"? The American Government feels like one of the biggest there is in the West.

if you want to talk about foreign policy that's a topic for another thread but domestically most people want to keep government as small as possible.

[MikeChipshop Member]

Because the Majority of the people here hate big government, a lot of people came to the U.S from countries like china,north korea and others. They don't want to see our country go in that direction. Not saying the U.K is North Korea but when you take steps to control the citizenry where does it end?

And America doesn't control it's citizens at all then?

[FlintyV]

Because the Majority of the people here hate big government, a lot of people came to the U.S from countries like china,north korea and others. They don't want to see our country go in that direction. Not saying the U.K is North Korea but when you take steps to control the citizenry where does it end?

Control the citizens? It's what the laws are for. It's a huge leap to say banning guns makes Britain into North Korea and China. I'm also surprised to hear about North Korean immigrants.

It's kind of the point a government, to govern the population.

[fintechfooty]

And this is an example of why I don't want the U.S to turn into England+ having a "evil" gun that's "sole purpose is to kill" will get you prison time, that's B.S to the highest degree.

Personally I am an advocate of having the right to own a gun, but your quotation marks are annoying me. What are other uses for guns? Oh theres a cat stuck in the tree, let me shoot the branch down? Get real. They're PURPOSE maybe at some point in time used to be for making noise, or doing exactly what I said above, BUT unfortunately now, they're more times than not used to kill. So yeah I see why this man, an ex-combatant, who has the skills to kill, would be sentenced to jail. Nobody is above the law. It's just unfortunate that the Government does not think that to be the case.

[Tarvis123]

And America doesn't control it's citizens at all then?

Nope, because we are allowed guns YAHOO. /s

Good lord- this thread again - the hypocrisy - I don't even.

[KingCracker]

Control the citizens? It's what the laws are for. It's a huge leap to say banning guns makes Britain into North Korea and China. I'm also surprised to hear about North Korean immigrants.

It's kind of the point a government, to govern the population.

Yes of course laws are for controlling citizens but when there are to many laws that's when it becomes a slippery slope. I never compared Britain to North Korea all I was saying is you pass one law there will be more to follow and where will it end? Americans aren't used to the government controlling their lives like that. Thomas Jefferson said the only legitimate use for a government is to secure the rights of the people. Passing laws that restrict me is not securing my rights. I don't want to see my country restrict me.

[theyarecomingforyou]

Because it disarms the people because it has camera's on every block because it bans animals based on breed are just a few things and to me that would oppress me

What are you talking about? The US bans animals based on breed as well. If you're referring to the restrictions on certain breeds of dog that's because they are dangerous, just like firearms. As for cameras, there is criticism of that policy in the UK but most cameras are owned by private companies and there is usually no legal obligation to hand such footage over to the police/government. And most of the cameras cover town and city centres - there are no cameras on any road near where I live; heck, I'm not even sure our town centre has any cameras (apart from private businesses). More importantly that's a pretty ridiculous criticism when US police forces are using unmanned drones for law enforcement.

You have a very poor understanding of UK culture.

[KingCracker]

What are you talking about? The US bans animals based on breed as well. If you're referring to the restrictions on certain breeds of dog that's because they are dangerous, just like firearms. As for cameras, there is criticism of that policy in the UK but most cameras are owned by private companies and there is usually no legal obligation to hand such footage over to the police/government. And most of the cameras cover town and city centres - there are no cameras on any road near where I live; heck, I'm not even sure our town centre has any cameras (apart from private businesses). More importantly that's a pretty ridiculous criticism when US police forces are using unmanned drones for law enforcement.

You have a very poor understanding of UK culture.

Do you think I agree with that? Do you think many others agree with that? I can point you to a forum where its pretty much a given where no one agrees with drones being used. Its happening and a lot of people don't like it. I guess that's where we differ the British seem to except laws regardless. As far as the U.S banning dogs. No the U.S doesn't ban any breed that I know of. Certain cities have bans but as a whole the U.S doesn't.

[Singh400]

The law is the law, he doesn't get special privileges no one forced him to sign up to the SAS.

Indeed the law is the law, but as we've seen all too often it only applies to some. Not all.

[FlintyV]

Yes of course laws are for controlling citizens but when there are to many laws that's when it becomes a slippery slope. I never compared Britain to North Korea all I was saying is you pass one law there will be more to follow and where will it end? Americans aren't used to the government controlling their lives like that. Thomas Jefferson said the only legitimate use for a government is to secure the rights of the people. Passing laws that restrict me is not securing my rights. I don't want to see my country restrict me.

And you don't think the US has passed laws restricting people's rights?

[KingCracker]

And you don't think the US has passed laws restricting people's rights?

Sure I do, do I think its wrong yes I do. Do I think they restricted us as much as some other countries no I don't.

[Lamp0]

Do you think I agree with that? Do you think many others agree with that? I can point you to a forum where its pretty much a given where no one agrees with drones being used. Its happening and a lot of people don't like it. I guess that's where we differ the British seem to except laws regardless. As far as the U.S banning dogs. No the U.S doesn't ban any breed that I know of. Certain cities have bans but as a whole the U.S doesn't.

There is seriously something wrong with you.

[KingCracker]

There is seriously something wrong with you.

Well I have yet to see any discourse from anything we've discussed.

[Gone]

The law is the law, he doesn't get special privileges no one forced him to sign up to the SAS.

I hate this typical and stupid, asinine argument that people like you always seem to bring into situations like this. No **** nobody forced him to sign up.

Yes he broke the law. It is ironic though that he can serve the military and not have a weapon at home. But it is your law, which is way different than the law in the US. In my view, maybe this SAS Sergeant should have come the the United States, where if he is not mentally screwed up or a felon, then he can buy as many guns and ammo that he wishes.

Also, 300 rounds is not a lot of ammo.

[FlintyV]

Even if you disagree with a law you can't be allowed to break it just because you don't agree with it.

It's odd people are saying he should have gone to America. If you break a law in your country do you go and live somewhere else where it's legal?

[chrisj1968]

on one hand they , the country want to label him a hero but treat him worse then dirt. and I'm happy for my 2nd amendment right. governments Looooove to disarm their subjects. helps them to keep them under an iron fist. Hence why the 2nd amendment was written for we the people in the US. I love the founding fathers for that great foresight

crazy how they hype the gun to be semi automatic. of course, the glocks are all semi-auto.

[ozgeek]

Yep, Laws are created by the public support. If public wants to ban guns then the government follows through it.

Guns are not entirely banned in Australia, just restricted. They created the law to restrict weapons because the public cried "ban guns!" and voted people to see it into law. Guns exists for one purpose - kill. That all it does is to launch projectiles that can harm people. Because we are born upon human rights - a right to live, even criminals. That is why we don't have the death penality since 1960s.

They don't ban computers because computers exists for good terms - helping our lives. Same as cars, even though they are used as weapons by some. The good points outwheight the bad and therefore no reason to ban computers or cars. Can you define one GOOD reason why guns exist. And no self-defense is not one of them. Because you kill someone, you live, he don't. What if the criminal have a famiily that suffered because you killed him on the basis of self-defense. That is not something we want live with.

So, people voted for guns to be banned because they have no purpose here other than to kill which contracts human right to live.

Kingcracker, I'm sure in your country it is ok to kill people but it is NOT okay in other country. Please show some respect fo other countries and their cultures.

[KingCracker]

Yep, Laws are created by the public support. If public wants to ban guns then the government follows through it.

Guns are not entirely banned in Australia, just restricted. They created the law to restrict weapons because the public cried "ban guns!" and voted people to see it into law. Guns exists for one purpose - kill. That all it does is to launch projectiles that can harm people. Because we are born upon human rights - a right to live, even criminals. That is why we don't have the death penality since 1960s.

They don't ban computers because computers exists for good terms - helping our lives. Same as cars, even though they are used as weapons by some. The good points outwheight the bad and therefore no reason to ban computers or cars. Can you define one GOOD reason why guns exist. And no self-defense is not one of them. Because you kill someone, you live, he don't. What if the criminal have a famiily that suffered because you killed him on the basis of self-defense. That is not something we want live with.

So, people voted for guns to be banned because they have no purpose here other than to kill which contracts human right to live.

Kingcracker, I'm sure in your country it is ok to kill people but it is NOT okay in other country. Please show some respect fo other countries and their cultures.

Saying that you shouldn't kill someone that's trying to kill you because of the criminals family is hilarious. You think the criminals family gives a damn about me if I die? Funny though when ever some thug gets killed or arrested for murder their family come out and say he was a good kid or the cry and say my baby! My baby! Sure ur baby just got killed because your baby was trying to kill someone else.

[FlintyV]

on one hand they , the country want to label him a hero but treat him worse then dirt. and I'm happy for my 2nd amendment right. governments Looooove to disarm their subjects. helps them to keep them under an iron fist. Hence why the 2nd amendment was written for we the people in the US. I love the founding fathers for that great foresight

He broke the law. I don't see how this is so hard for people to understand.

There's no "iron fist" here, we're a democracy. I wouldn't call it foresight considering most nations with restricted guns seem to be doing just fine. I can't imagine them going "yup, in 2012 they'll be needing guns".

Maybe it made sense to allow people to have guns at the founding of America to protect the republic in its infancy, but now? Hardly.