Welcome Guest
( Log In | Register )
The time is now 3:31 pm
You last visited December 9, 2016, 2:19 pm
All times shown are
Eastern Time (GMT-5:00)

CarHauler's Blog

  • CarHauler's Blog has 3 entries (0 private) and has been viewed 3,921 times.
  • Lottery Post members have made 2 comments in CarHauler's Blog.
  • CarHauler is a Standard member

December 19, 2010, 11:58 pmBurglar sues farmer

Burglar sues farmer
Tony Martin Tony Martin's sentence was reduced to manslaughter
The farmer jailed for the manslaughter of a 16-year-old burglar is being sued for up to £15,000 by one of the people who broke in to his home.

Brendan Fearon, 32, was wounded in the shooting at Tony Martin's Norfolk farmhouse which ended in the death of teenager Fred Barras.

 

While Tony contemplates another Christmas in prison this man is getting on with trying to feather his own nest

Malcolm Starr

Earlier this year Fearon, of Newark, Nottinghamshire, began his bid for compensation against Martin and the farmer launched a counter-claim for damages.

But more details of the compensation claim have emerged as Fearon sues Martin for being unable to work since being shot in the legs during the raid.

A supporter of Martin, Malcolm Starr, who confirmed the writ had been issued, said the timing so near Christmas was "disgusting".

The farmer's mother, Hilary Martin condemned a legal system that allowed Fearon to sue.

Conviction reduced

Martin, 57, is currently serving a prison sentence for shooting dead Fearon's accomplice, 16-year-old Fred Barras, in August 1999 at his farm in Emneth Hungate.

 

Brendan Fearon Brendan Fearon was shot in the legs

In October last year, his conviction was reduced to manslaughter by the Court of Appeal and his sentence reduced to five years for the killing and three years for injuring Fearon.

But his release has been delayed because of administrative problems with the Parole Board.

Mr Starr said: "He (Martin) has had so much support from people with Christmas cards and he thought that it was really bad timing for anyone to be issued with such an awful thing just before Christmas," he said.

The writ states Fearon is claiming damages for leg injuries stopping him finding work, says he is concerned about his "long-term sexual functioning" and he is "very tearful" when watching a film where someone dies, according to the Daily Mail.

He is also said to claim he is afraid of fireworks, no longer enjoys ju-jitsu and kick-boxing and is depressed about television shows containing gunfire, said the paper.

Mother's anger

Mrs Martin said: "We are living in a country which is crazy, with crazy laws and no idea about what is right and wrong.

"It is quite unbelievable that this person is doing this. Absolutely absurd.

"We are talking about someone who is a criminal and I don't know how he has got the nerve to do this."

Mrs Martin said her son's life had been destroyed by what had happened.

"When Tony does come out of prison his life is ruined.

"He's got no future with the farming industry the way it is and I don't know what will happen.

"He's got to start all over again.

"He'll be 58 when he comes out and he's not a well man."

It is believed Fearon is taking the civil action as he would not be entitled to criminal injuries compensation as he was carrying out a crime when he was shot.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/england/2600303.stm

Unbelievable, how absolutely absurd. There are more details about this story to come. I encourage you to do your own research as well.

Entry #3
View and Add Comments  (0 Comments)

December 18, 2010, 8:06 pmGenocide following firearms confiscation, courtesy of JPFO.org

The Mother of All Stats

The Human Cost of "Gun Control" Ideas

The Genocide Chart © JPFO.org 2002
Government Dates Targets Civilians Killed   "Gun Control" Laws   Features of Over-all "Gun Control" scheme 
Ottoman Turkey 1915-1917 Armenians
(mostly Christians)
1-1.5 million Art. 166, Pen. Code, 1866
& 1911 Proclamation, 1915
• Permits required •Government list of owners
•Ban on possession
Soviet Union 1929-1945 Political opponents;
farming communities
20 million Resolutions, 1918
Decree, July 12, 1920
Art. 59 & 182, Pen. code, 1926
•Licensing of owners
•Ban on possession
•Severe penalties
Nazi Germany
& Occupied Europe
1933-1945 Political opponents;
Jews; Gypsies;
critics; "examples"
20 million Law on Firearms & Ammun., 1928
Weapon Law, March 18, 1938
Regulations against Jews, 1938
•Registration & Licensing
•Stricter handgun laws
•Ban on possession
China, Nationalist 1927-1949 Political opponents;
army conscripts; others
10 million Art. 205, Crim. Code, 1914
Art. 186-87, Crim. Code, 1935
•Government permit system
•Ban on private ownership
China, Red 1949-1952
1957-1960
1966-1976
Political opponents;
Rural populations
Enemies of the state
20-35 million Act of Feb. 20, 1951
Act of Oct. 22, 1957
•Prison or death to "counter-revolutionary criminals" and anyone resisting any government program
•Death penalty for supply guns to such "criminals"
Guatemala 1960-1981 Mayans & other Indians;
political enemies
100,000-
200,000
Decree 36, Nov 25 •Act of 1932
Decree 386, 1947
Decree 283, 1964
•Register guns & owners •Licensing with high fees
•Prohibit carrying guns
•Bans on guns, sharp tools
•Confiscation powers
Uganda 1971-1979 Christians
Political enemies
300,000 Firearms Ordinance, 1955
Firearms Act, 1970
•Register all guns & owners •Licenses for transactions
•Warrantless searches •Confiscation powers
Cambodia
(Khmer Rouge)
1975-1979 Educated Persons;
Political enemies
2 million Art. 322-328, Penal Code
Royal Ordinance 55, 1938
•Licenses for guns, owners, ammunition & transactions
•Photo ID with fingerprints
•License inspected quarterly
Rwanda 1994 Tutsi people 800,000 Decree-Law No. 12, 1979

•Register guns, owners, ammunition •Owners must justify need •Concealable guns illegal •Confiscating powers

As you can see above, gun control has worked out so well in the past. Reason.com details how the gun ban in England has worked out. Here is an excerpt:

In the two years since Dan Rather was so roundly rebuked, violence in England has gotten markedly worse. Over the course of a few days in the summer of 2001, gun-toting men burst into an English court and freed two defendants; a shooting outside a London nightclub left five women and three men wounded; and two men were machine-gunned to death in a residential neighborhood of north London. And on New Year's Day this year a 19-year-old girl walking on a main street in east London was shot in the head by a thief who wanted her mobile phone. London police are now looking to New York City police for advice.

None of this was supposed to happen in the country whose stringent gun laws and 1997 ban on handguns have been hailed as the "gold standard" of gun control. For the better part of a century, British governments have pursued a strategy for domestic safety that a 1992 Economist article characterized as requiring "a restraint on personal liberty that seems, in most civilised countries, essential to the happiness of others," a policy the magazine found at odds with "America's Vigilante Values." The safety of English people has been staked on the thesis that fewer private guns means less crime. The government believes that any weapons in the hands of men and women, however law-abiding, pose a danger, and that disarming them lessens the chance that criminals will get or use weapons.

The results -- the toughest firearm restrictions of any democracy -- are credited by the world's gun control advocates with producing a low rate of violent crime. U.S. Supreme Court Justice Lewis Powell reflected this conventional wisdom when, in a 1988 speech to the American Bar Association, he attributed England's low rates of violent crime to the fact that "private ownership of guns is strictly controlled."

In reality, the English approach has not re-duced violent crime. Instead it has left law-abiding citizens at the mercy of criminals who are confident that their victims have neither the means nor the legal right to resist them. Imitating this model would be a public safety disaster for the United States.

The illusion that the English government had protected its citizens by disarming them seemed credible because few realized the country had an astonishingly low level of armed crime even before guns were restricted. A government study for the years 1890-92, for example, found only three handgun homicides, an average of one a year, in a population of 30 million. In 1904 there were only four armed robberies in London, then the largest city in the world. A hundred years and many gun laws later, the BBC reported that England's firearms restrictions "seem to have had little impact in the criminal underworld." Guns are virtually outlawed, and, as the old slogan predicted, only outlaws have guns. Worse, they are increasingly ready to use them.

Nearly five centuries of growing civility ended in 1954. Violent crime has been climbing ever since. Last December, London's Evening Standard reported that armed crime, with banned handguns the weapon of choice, was "rocketing." In the two years following the 1997 handgun ban, the use of handguns in crime rose by 40 percent, and the upward trend has continued. From April to November 2001, the number of people robbed at gunpoint in London rose 53 percent.

Read more:http://reason.com/archives/2002/11/01/gun-controls-twisted-outcome

Last Edited: December 18, 2010, 8:19 pm

Entry #2
View and Add Comments  (2 Comments)

December 18, 2010, 7:59 pmATF to Require Multiple Sales Reports for Long Guns

Hello,

I would like to thank everyone for visiting my new blog. This is my inaugural entry. I think that an appropriate first entry is the news that firearms dealers might have to now report to the ATF on all multiple long gun purchases. You can read some of my thoughts on this matter on  rdgrnr's Blog: http://www.lotterypost.com/blogentry/44690/viewcomments . I decided it was better to start my own than piggyback on someone else's. Here is the story from NSSF:

ATF to Require Multiple Sales Reports for Long Guns

December 17, 2010 By Larry Keane View Comments


The Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF) is moving to require federally licensed firearms retailers to report multiple sales of modern sporting rifles beginning January 5, 2011. Specifically, the ATF requirement calls for firearms retailers to report multiple sales, or other dispositions, of two or more .22 caliber or larger semi-automatic rifles that are capable of accepting a detachable magazine and are purchased by the same individual within five consecutive business days.

Today’s Washington Post suggests that the reporting mandate would be limited to retailers along the Southwest border; however, the Federal Register Notice does not limit the geographic scope of the reporting requirement.

This ATF “emergency” mandate was originally pushed by the anti-gun Mayors Against Illegal Guns (MAIG) coalition, headed by New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg, more than a year and a half ago. And the Post reports that the Department of Justice has “languished” over this plan for several months.  Given this timetable, it’s hard to see exactly where the “emergency” is.

The National Shooting Sports Foundation opposes this reporting requirement because it further burdens America’s law-abiding firearms retailers with yet another onerous regulation that will do nothing to curb crime.  Multiple sales reporting of long guns will actually make it more difficult for licensed retailers to help law enforcement as traffickers modify their illegal schemes to circumvent the reporting requirement, thereby driving traffickers further underground. This is not unlike how criminals maneuvered around one-gun-a-month laws in states like Virginia – which is still considered an “exporting source state” by anti-gun organizations like the MAIG despite its restrictions on the number of firearms law-abiding residents may purchase.

Multiple sales reporting for long guns is an ill-considered mandate and one that ATF does not have the legal authority to unilaterally impose. In fact, ATF has not specified under what legal authority it presumes to act. The decision as to whether ATF can move forward with this agenda-driven mandate will be left to Cass Sunstein who heads the White House Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs (OIRA).  This is the same Cass Sunstein who in a 2007 speech at Harvard University said, “We ought to ban hunting, if there isn’t a purpose other than sport and fun. That should be against the law. It’s time now.”

NSSF will be submitting comments in opposition to this registration scheme and is encouraging all firearms retailers, sportsmen and enthusiasts to do the same.

Please voice your concern by doing the following:

1. Call the Office of Management and Budget, Office of Information and Regulation Affairs, Department of Justice, Desk Officer at (202) 395-6466.

2. E-mail Barbara A. Terrell, ATF, Firearms Industry Programs Branch at Barbara.Terrell@atf.gov

3. Call your Senators and Representative: United States Capitol Switchboard: 202-224-3121

Points to make:

1.Multiple sales reporting of long guns will actually make it more difficult for licensed retailers to help law enforcement as traffickers modify their illegal schemes to circumvent the reporting requirement. Traffickers will go further underground, hiring more people to buy their firearms. This will make it much harder for retailers to identify and report suspicious behavior to law enforcement.
2.Long guns are rarely used in crime (Bureau of Justice Statistics).
3.Imposing multiple sales-reporting requirements for long guns would further add to the already extensive paperwork and record-keeping requirements burdening America’s retailers – where a single mistake could cost them their license and even land them in jail.
4.Last year, ATF inspected 2,000 retailers in border states and only two licenses were revoked (0.1%). These revocations were for reasons unknown and could have had nothing to do with illicit trafficking of guns; furthermore, no dealers were charged with any criminal wrongdoing.
5.According to ATF, the average age of a firearm recovered in the United States is 11 years old. In Mexico it’s more than 14 years old.  This demonstrates that criminals are not using new guns bought from retailers in the states.
6.Congress, when it enacted multiple sales reporting for handguns, could have required multiple sales of long guns – it specifically chose not to.

http://www.nssfblog.com/atf-to-require-multiple-sales-reports-for-long-guns/ View Comments

Obama is bringing his troops home in time to attempt to quell the uprisings which are imminent. After the dollar collapses, not if, but when, all bets are off. What do you think people are going to do when they go to the store, and the store no longer accepts the US dollar? Hint: they are not going to be very happy. What about when their utilities get shut off. What will they do when they don't have their daily entertainment. What if you were the holder of a Mega Millions or Powerball Jackpot, or a $1,000,000 winner on an instant scratch off ticket, on the day that your state's lottery announced that they would no longer be able to pay out any more prizes? I'll tell you. You will end up with a lot of very angry people.

Now he wants to be able to see who is buying long guns, and put them on a watch list. If you go and buy yourself a .22 sqirrel rifle, and one for your kid, you will be on the feds watch list. I wonder if this will have to do with the actual diameter of the bullet, or the name of the cartridge? For example, there are Cartridges with .218, .219, .220, .221, .222, .223, .224 and .225 in there designation that all use .224" bullets. Maybe some very high powered cartridges need to be developed with a bullet diameter of .219.

See, the government is not stupid enough to try to do what Dianne Feinstein, Senator from California said that she wanted to do, she summed it up best herself in an excerpt from her interview on 60 Minutes.

All told, H.R. 2038 is a giant step closer to the goal stated by Clinton ban sponsor Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.), on CBS' "60 Minutes"-- "If I could have gotten 51 votes in the Senate of the United States for an outright ban, picking up every one of them, Mr. and Mrs. America, turn them all in, I would have done it."

"Mr. and Mrs. America, turn them all in." Those are the only words gun owners should ever need to remember. Never has the anti-gun agenda been stated more succinctly or, for that matter, more honestly.

Read more: http://www.nraila.org/Issues/Articles/Read.aspx?ID=114

No, they are going to do it one law at a time. Firearms registration is just around the corner. Then what? I will tell you what. Just like in England, Australia, Nazi Germany and just about every country that has done it, confiscation. Yes, a list of registered gun owners will allow the government to come to our homes, one at a time, if we let them. They are going to try and take our guns in many incremental steps. They tried the failed Clinton Gun Ban, and it proved to be a failure, especially when it was disclosed that less than 1% of crimes were committed with those types of firearms, according to the FBI. All that did was make a 15 round Glock magazine a novelty item, and they cost around $75 to $100 or more each. Now that the law has sunset, you can buy the same magazine for $15 to $25 just about anywhere.

Speaking of Nazi Germany, our Jewish readers may want to take a look at the following website, Jews for the preservation of firearm ownership, http://jpfo.org/ . From that website, I will post about genecide in disarmed populations, straight from their website, on my next blog entry.

They will increment their total disarmament one little step at a time. If you are not an NRA member, I urge you and your families to join the National Rifle Association, the oldest civil rights group in America. You should consider a lifetime membership. You can join here: http://membership.nrahq.org/ Be sure to watch the video. I remember first hand the trickery that CNN pulled on that one. Many Americans who are simply unaware of firearms characteristics simply would have believed the story if the NRA hadn't called their bluff. Without the NRA, we probably would most likely be completely disarmed by this point, assuming that we complied. The what if is a scary thought. Join today. Renew your membership if yours has expired. 

Entry #1
View and Add Comments  (0 Comments)