“Gun control extremists have at least two things in common with Islamic extremists. They have a willingness to die for their fundamental beliefs, and the sanctimony to demand that others die with them.”—Dr. Mike Adams
Leicestershire, UK. In the early morning hours of Sunday, September 2, Andy and Tracey Ferrie were sleeping in their home when intruders forced their way in. While his wife Tracie called 999, (UK equivalent of 911) Andy Ferrie grabbed his legally-owned break-action shotgun and fired at two of the four home invaders.
The attack was thwarted although Ferrie had injured two of criminals. The four burglars, ranging in ages from 23, 27, 31, and 33, were later arrested at Leicester Royal Infirmary where the injured had been taken for treatment of their wounds.
As for Andie and Tracie Ferry? They were arrested and held over by the Crown Prosecution Service on a charge of Grievous Bodily Harm (GBH), to the burglars— despite this couple having been the victims of burglaries multiple times!
My friends across the pond have often lamented to me that when a break-in such as this occurs, under British Law, few options exist other than to simply passively comply with such burglars for fear of legal jeopardy, despite being the victims of crime. It is truly remarkable that not only does the UK have tight gun restrictions, but UK law, as evidenced here, appears to actually protect criminals from immediate consequence!
Or does it?
Burglars Joshua O’Gorman and Daniel Mansell pleaded guilty and then asked the Court for leniency because they got shot. Queen’s Council, Judge Michael Pert responded,
“I make it plain that, in my judgment, being shot is not mitigation. If you burgle a house in the country where the householder owns a legally held shotgun, that is the chance you take. You cannot come to court and ask for a lighter sentence because of it.”
O’Gorman whined to the Leicester Crown Court that as a result of his being shot he was left with blurred vision, severe pain and problems with his balance…and that he, “was traumatized.”
Judge Pert’s response….
“Some might argue that being arrested and locked up for 40 hours is a trauma.”
Judge Pert went on to say the arrest of Mr. and Mrs. Ferrie on suspicion of grievous bodily harm is just as disturbing.
Judge Pert did not stand alone. Lord Chief Justice Lord Judge opined,
If your home is burgled and you’re in there, you have a right to get rid of the burglar.”
The Lord Chief Justice continued, citing Sir Edward Coke,
“Your Home is your castle”
Alan Duncan, MP – Rutland and Melton was a very vocal supporter of the Ferries.
“If this is a straightforward case of someone using a shotgun to defend themselves against burglars in the dead of night, then I would hope that the police will prosecute the burglars and not my constituents.”
Anti-Gun Liberals: You lose!
This incident serves as a very stark example of a country whose very purpose in stamping out gun crime and reducing gun violence has run amok, letting criminals and thugs rule by force. Now, however, this would appear to be a backlash for ordinary, law-abiding citizens to embrace a fundamental and natural right of self defense, a tenet inherent in our very human natures.
It is too early to tell, but one cannot help but wonder if UK citizens have had about enough of crime and being victims and now are going to fight back and reclaim society for themselves.
In year 2011 Britain had 1,361 violent crimes per 100,000 people. That is three times the U.S. Crime Rate.
While the UK murder rate, at 1.3 per 100,000 is lower than that of the U.S., at 4.7 per 100,000, Such comparisons are not an, “apples to apples” comparisons. Fact is, the United States has 186 areas where the urban population is >250,000 people. That is six times that of the U.K., with only 32 metros where the population is >250,000 people.
Since 1992 the U.S. violent rate of crime has plummeted 50 per cent. The U.S. Murder rate is down 54 per cent. That has happened in the face of U.S. gun ownership which has been skyrocketing over the last 20 years.
In 1992, roughly ten states legally allowed their citizens to carry firearms for personal protection. By 2011, the number spiked to nearly 40 states and women are the fastest growing segment of society to own guns.
In 2012, countless citizens used firearms to thwart violent crime. Many instances they did so without a shot ever being fired. On December 30, in my entry, The Armed Citizen and Lying Gun Grabbers, I detailed ten such examples. I freely admit that I cherry-picked people over the age of 65, (many of which were women,) who defended themselves with firearms. The examples of voluminous, but the lame stream media will not report on it. Local and regional media are the only sources.
Lets be real clear. The details in this story are but one anecdote. The statistics are not and can be found at FBI.gov. CDC statistics are flawed because they advocate for gun control—a government-funded agency with a clear gun control agenda. But the anecdote here supports the statistics, the right of self defense and common sense.
Undeniably, a firearm possessed by a frail 79-year old woman places her on even par with a 210-pound thug who has just kicked in her door in the dead of night. That is just another hard cold fact that is ignored in the faux “happy little world of liberals” and lives in a real-life world where thugs can rule the day in an unarmed defenseless society.
Liberals advocate gun control, abolition of the death penalty, limitless spending on so-called rehabilitation of criminals, given their distaste for punishment or accountability at the cost of citizens unable to defend themselves. Liberals seek to make the stakes low for those who choose crime as a way of life under a quixotic notion that every societal ill can be fixed with the money of others. Don’t believe me? Okay. Just ask any law-abiding UK citizen or Aussie. Remember, in 2011 in the UK, violent crime rate was 1,361 per 100,000 people….Home Office Statistic, not mine. Ask them…they live it.
