iamcal.com Since May 2000

• Happy new year!
• Newbie topic - May 2016
• Newbie topic - April 2016
• Newbie topic - March 2016
• Newbie topic - February 2016
• Newbie topic - January 2016
• Newbie topic - November 2015
• Newbie topic - August 2015
• Newbie topic - July 2015
• Newbie topic - May 2015
• Newbie topic - April 2015
• Newbie topic - March 2015
• Newbie topic - September 2014
• Newbie topic - December 2014
• Newbie topic - October 2014
• Newbie topic - August 2014
• Newbie topic - July 2014
• Newbie topic - June 2014
• Newbie topic - May 2014
• Hello!

This man is a hero.

I'm even tempted to start an on-line petition thingy to get him let off.

I can understand him getting cross - but maybe he was a bit OTT...

"Booher said the problem stemmed from a program he mistakenly downloaded from the Internet that brought a continuous stream of advertising to his computer."

Someone's been skin surfing again :)

No, the law is not wrong - staff don't deserve to be told things like this, even if they do work for a company that send out spam.

Sounds better locked up if you ask me..

interesting point there james. as you just quoted:



so he was threatening to hurt them unless they complied with the law. isn't that what the legal system is all about?

Sure, but if you find that someone isn't complying with the law, does that mean you should threaten physical violence? Surely threatening legal action would be a better idea. I had problems recently with someone parking on my land, however after some discussion and showing that it was against the law to park there, he stopped doing it. What your saying is that it would have been within my rights to tell this guy (who was about 65 odd and his wife is currently at home dying of cancer) that I would shoot him in the legs or drop some poison though his door?

Why should the situation be ANY different when the threats are made over the Internet or phone, rather than in person?

i would have shot the bastard! how dare he even think of parking on your land!!!!

(do you own a country estate?)

No.

does it make any difference how old the person is and whether anyone they know is suffering from cancer. no. you're just embelishing your story.

or are you saying if it was some young townies then you'd tell them to fuck off. surely you'd have a polite discussion with them. mr double standards.

No - I'm not saying that at all, but what i'm saying is when your talking down the phone to someone, or over the internet, you don't know the situation of the person of the effects that your words could cause.

As an example, if I had told this man that I hoped him and his family died of cancer, how do you think that would make him feel? It's not really a nice thing to do to a person, is it?

And don't forget, we don't know that this company whos staff he threatened is the bad guy in the situation. I've worked in customer service and know that even if you say you have or havn't done something, the customer doesn't always believe you and can get very agrivated - if they are breaking the law then take legal action of threaten them with it - don't break the law yourself.

Next we'll be on about Tony Martin (I think that was his name) and if he was wrong or right to shoot someone that was trying to steal stuff from his house....

Just another guy who needs to uninstall Internet Explorer (if that's possible) and install a web browser. Preferably one with a "Block Pop Ups" option.

Tony Martin shot the robber in the back. That is pure cowardice. Surely if he had fired a shot into the ceiling or wall, the robber would have got the idea that he was loaded and serious and just run. Just my two pence.

As regards spam about penis enlargement, sex pictures and video swapping (which I recently seem to be swamped by) I think it should be illegal, I mean cant ISP's find out the addresses of these peoples computers and pass their locations onto the authorities to go get them? Or better yet, employ hackers to mess with spammers machines, hehehhe....

If it was as easy as finding out their email addresses. The problem isn't twelve year olds with Hotmail accounts - it's people who know how to fake headers en masse. If it was as simple as finding out their email addresses and pass them on to the authorities, we would have eliminated spam for good in 1995.

This I appreciate, I was referring to IP addresses.

Coward?
How about absolutly shit-scared?
A fifty-five year old man gets a torch shone in his face in the middle of the night by two people who were in his house, what do you think he's going to do about it?
Fair enough, he shouldn't have killed the guy, but I'm sorry, if I discover someone burgling my house for the third time I'm going to use more than 'resonable force'.

The most ironic thing is that if the burglars (and I know they weren't burglars, but I can't seem to spell theives) shot him, the story would have hardly touched the news.

And you risk going to jail aswell, just like this guy does.

...Yes but that's no excuse for shooting someone in the back.

And also, the anti-spam guy sounds like a complete twat. Sorry. I understand he was annoyed, but resorting to threats? Bit naughty, that.

('Has', JL, not 'does').

I am well aware of this - but is this right?

I think not >=[

The burglary laws are a bit odd, but there are alternatives to "Hulk Smash Pikey's Head"

AP: He couldn't see what he was shooting - he just shot.

I appreciate your point of view Grim... I really do, but the guy could have shot out the burglars kneecaps or something >:), didnt have to shoot him square in the back! :D

AP Again: Do you know what resonable force is?

/clears throat...

Resonable force is to use methods that are equally or less dangerous that the percieved threat.

And as, when things get to court, percieved threat becomes actual threat, in theory if the buglar in your house just stands there and looks at you, that's all you can do back. You can't even shout at him.

Ho-hum, eh?

Gobbo: Allow me to point out again that he couldn't see what he was shooting at.

Whoops! Sorry Grim...!

I thought you were on about using baseball bats and shit.

/wrong end of stick

Fair point to make Grim...

I still think that taking someones life is a bit far, but if it is dark and you dont know if they are armed as well, then maybe...

"He couldn't see what he was shooting - he just shot."

If this is true, fair enough. It could have been to him a 'warning shot'. Didn't turn out that way in the end though.

I dont believe he should have killed the bloke but I'd rather be a Kevin than a Meg.

Well, I probably would use a baseball bat (I have 'Louise' next to my bed at all times), but I'd make a point of not hitting him in the head.

At least I'd like to think I would, but I'd be shit scared and if Mr Buglar was coming for me then I'd just swing at him.

Next to your bed at all times? Bit paranoid arent we? Are the Wet Bandits on a crime spree in your area?

Do you wear a seat-belt while driving?

Bit of a shit arguement considering that it's a legal requirement.

try again

All the better.
You wear a seatbelt in case you get pulled over by the police?
What are the chances of that?

I dont know. I dont drive. I dont wear a seatbelt in the back of black cabs as I should.

Does anyone?

You still haven't explained why you need a baseball bat by your bed. Does it mean you have the intent to attack someone?

But on your point: By not putting a seatbelt on you are greatly decreasing your chances of being pulled over by the police for not wearing one.
By having a baseball bat to hand permenantly is not going to decrease your chances of being burgled.
It may stop them getting away with bones intact.

All I'm saying is that is there a massive risk of you being burgled? I live on my own in a shithole. I dont feel so unsafe that I need a weapon handy.

Or the need to name that weapon for that matter

Just no reason not to have it, and (AP) no, I have it with the intent to help convince the bad people drop my shit and run.

All baseball bats have names, silly =]

Actually, that's total bullshit. My apologies.

Yes, I'd hit someone with it, in the legs if possible. Then I'd tie them up and call the police.

Yup. Your belongings are much safer with you in jail.

Well, that's one way of looking at it.
But what if, the next day, that burglar, whom I let get away due to my lack of knee-capping and police calling, went on to bust into my Gran's house, who lives just up the road.

I believe I am justified in causing the theiving little runt some pain. Obviously killing or permenatly injuring him are different matters, but a bruised kneecap, perhaps a fractured shin-bone?

Fair play in my humble opinion, m'lud.

Im just being provocative. If I had a chance I'd do the same. I just dont see the need to be so prepared for it. Why not build a bomb shelter as well... just in case.

Basically, I guess what I am saying is:

How can the law protect someone who has consciously chosen to live outside it?

If I could afford it and had the space Sul, then maybe I would.

It's like every lining your arsehole with vaseline every morning just incase a donkey bumrapes you.

=]

I guess it depends on how far you want to take things.
Yeah, if I had millions of pounds and phat amounts of land, I'd probably build a bomb shelter (and use it primarily to keep my beer cool, natch).

I've got a hand-gun in my car in case someone tries to car-jack me.
I've also got a fire extinguisher in it, in case it sets on fire.
Both very unlikely, but possible.
Either item would solve it's problem, and takes up a very small amount of space.

Hehehe, I said 'phat' =]

Off home, bibi!

It's like every lining your arsehole with vaseline every morning just incase a donkey bumrapes you.

AHAHAHHHHHHHHHHHHAHAHAHHAHAHHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAH



etc

And that guy's gonna be Breaking Rocks in the Hot Sun.


In a Johnny Cash style.

Like a dead bloke?

Like an Aussie tennis player??

...oh shit...

And not Stevie V either before you ask.

Tony Martin can't be anything other than murder. You don't shoot some kid with a bloody loaded double barreled shot gun and put it down as self defence.

And you wear seatbelts because you're likely to die in a crash otherwise.

As for the Spam guy, I don't think his threats were entirely serious. If he actually did go find the spammers and cap them in the head, then he'd be a big old Spaz-Lord.

everyone is missing the most important thing.

"two people who we're in his house"

that important thing is:

w e r e spells 'were'
w e ' r e means 'we are'

;P

after he shot the first one he should have got after the second one, shot him to and buried the fuckers not call the police.
the geezer who got away from his property is scum of the earth.
he went to prison for dealing smack got out early and guess where he is now? you got it, he did something else wrongfull and is back in the nick.
fucking theiving pikey

Russ and Grim... vs the world =]

Good old Doctor Lucid having a firm grip of the facts - it wasn't a double barrelled shotgun, it was a pump action.
And you're not very likely to crash, are you? That's a bit paranoid (God, it took ages for that point to be made...)!

Chay - no capital letters, no punctuation, and a good mod (if they were concerned enough about a spelling mistake to post about it) would simply change it themselves.

A semi-auto shotgun?

Are you sure?

Er, no, pump action - sorry =]

$&^%&%£^$*&

Although semi-auto's are far more common than pump actions =]

Con-man?
Comman ca va?
commanche indian?

Grim - I'm with you on the self defense styley - and I learnt to shoot with a pump action shot gun by my father

I learnt to shoot with a pump action love gun by my father but I dont want to talk about it :(

grim has a hand gun in his car?! why has no one commented on this? hello?
I personally dont agree with carrying weapons partly because they can be used against you...

I also think that people that don't wear seatbelts are a bit stupid.. i mean one second of 'inconvenience' in return for your life.. in fact, i won't even start my car until everyone has their seatbelt on. although saying that, i don't agree with those stupid over the lap seatbelts.. some guy was completely paralysed from the waist down because of one.. although i guess it beats being catupulted through your windscreen eh..

LOL!

At Sul, that is.

i dont wear a seatbelt in my car because it is highly uncomfortable to drive with it on, and i am never going to have a crash-fact

How exactly can the nasty car jacker use my gun against me when I'm going to point it at him and shout 'GET THE FUCK AWAY FROM MY CAR, BIATCH!'.

P.S. Grim...'s right to bear arms is protected by law =]

He can say: "Yeah. Police? I asked this bloke for directions and the mentalist nearly blew my goddamn head off! Why of course I have his licence plate". Revenge acheived. Do not pass go, do not collect £200.

Ah so we're not talking about in the this country then. The one where you live. Right.

Nah, the police don't seem to care.
Copper: What's that?
Me: My car-jacker gun.
Copper: Is it loaded?
Me: Nope.
Copper: Okay.

Grim has no right to bear arms, Grim isn't an American, Grim bears arms Grim goes to jail.

RUSS, that's the most stupid, ignorant, naieve thing i've ever heard... uncomfortable to drive in, my arse, (i bet you're the kind of guy that wont wear condoms because you 'lose the sensation' (sorry, just trying to incite another debate..woo the debate thread))
besides, it doesnt matter how good a driver you are, other people can be dangerous... i'm a fucking great driver but that doesnt mean i can do anything when some stupid woman comes careering round a blind corner on the wrong side of a narrow road doing the school run in her 4x4 and ploughs into me.

Its within the realms of possiblity that RUSS added a pinch of irony there.

Do you see me in jail?
Think not.

And no-one's asked the obvious question yet.

I dont drive down narrow roads, i use my 3 times a week bumper to bumper all the way to my destination. how can i possibly crash?

i dont wear condoms - never needed to - i live in essex.

VM & trim...: That's how I read it...

: ()-

Maybe not...

seat belts uncomfortable? wtf? its not like its any hassle at all to wear it. I never get in a car and think "oh god i have to put a seatbelt on, damn it" its automatic, you just get in and put the belt on

i just get in and don't put it on, not sure if i know anyone irl who does where them

i see no irony there, just stupidity, but i apologise for my anger, its his life, if he wants to die then let him

"AP: He couldn't see what he was shooting - he just shot."

Thats one reason I can think of to stick him in jail. If you can't see and just shoot then you should be kept a long long way from guns at all times. Aren't pump actions illegal?

You have a gun!!!!! Jesus.

Indeed. Why would you have a bloody gun??? Is it because it makes you feel "gangsta"?

pump action shotguns aren't illegal, but they're pretty rare compared to semi automatic under-over ones. annoying to have to pump between each shot when they can only hold 3 :/

Semi automatic?

Cal shows his l33t knowledge of shotguns with one minor flaw - Under-over shotties are doubled barrelled, but I know what he means =]

Semi auto shotguns can hold up to seven cartidges (although unless you are on your own land you can only legally load three).
When the gun is fired some of the 'thowback' (explosion from the gunpowder) is used to activate a mechanism that loads another cartridge into the barrel.

And still no-one has asked the obvious question about my 'Car-jacker defence'...

TONIGHT MATTHEW I AM GOING TO BE TED NUGENT!!!!1

"i just get in and don't put it on, not sure if i know anyone irl who does where them"

I'm sorry but that is fucking awful.

Why? what business is it of yours?

its my business if a twat not wearing a belt hits me and comes crashing out of his car and into my face.
its my business if a twat in the back of my car not wearing a belt is catapulted into the back of my seat causing me serious injury.

i don't give a flying fuck if RUSS ends up dead through having an accident whilst not wearing his belt. but if there was anyone else involved as there is with a lot of accidents it could be a very different picture.

its the fact that its no hassle to put a belt on in the first place. its not like its a complex procedure, it takes about 3 seconds maximum.

i bet you a tenner i never crash into you

Is that it? thats easily solved. RUSS, don't go crashing into either the front or back of Chay.

What if RUSS crashes into you ontop of a windy mountain road and the collision catapults a comapratively uninjured RUSS to safety while your seatbelt ensures a fall and fiery doom for you?

Seatbelts cause far more accidents than they protect against.

However, they cause minor injuries and stop major ones, so...

......make sure you dont crash.simple

*cough* www.snopes.com/autos/techno/seatbelt.asp

Vicky: im willing to take that risk.

Good points in that article, but i'm not saying he shouldn't wear a seatbelt, Im talking about a possibility significantly more likely than RUSS flying through Chay's window after a motorised mishap.

Haha! "Risk-O Inferno"!