piece on channel 4 news.
mad village in sussex condemmed for burning a caravan in its firework displaly apprantly racist.
To call people who camp on someones elses land wreck it leave loads of rubbish behind and then bog off.
I read that the villagers over-egged the pudding and wrote something "indiscrete" on the side of the caravan. If they'd just left it blank the thought police would have less to go on. As someone who has had to deal with traveller encampments I can sympathise. A group of local farmers, myself included, had to shoot about a dozen sheep-worrying traveller dogs a few years ago. They cost us about £2500 all told yet Plod's reaction was to try and get our firearms cert's revoked.
It doesn't say whether the travellers in question were genuine Romany Gypsies or what is known as "Irish Tinkers". Burning the former in efigy might be going a little too far as I think that the Nazis gassed and burnt most of the Central European Romany. If it was Tinkers though, fair enough, they get away with far too much by hiding behind the Gypsy tag that they have no real right to.
mind you the only good thing about a caravan when my ever so recious auntie brought one sent her a piece of rope for her dog so she could become a new age traveller. she was not amused .
Most of the real new age travellers have cleared off to spain or brought canal boats or got involved with housing co-ops. the rest got into smack and wiped themselves out
I vote tony Martin minister for traveller affairs
The local council built a Red Indian-style reservation for the pikeys in Norfolk. Instead of showing gratitude, they stripped every building of anything salvageable within 24 hours: copper piping, door hinges and all the roof tiles. I thought they acquired enough revenue from stealing tractors, and collecting their dole money (odd that 'travellers' don't pay counci tax).
Then they wonder why farmers and gamekeepers shoot them and their dogs. The Norfolk police reckon (off the record) that Tony Martin would have got away with it had he held his shotgun legally. Bladensburg, have had any problems with pikeys poaching and lamping around your area?
Yes, those lefties would do well to spend a week in these peoples company (they wouldnt last an hour) and then ask em how 'culturally enriched' they feel.
OK, they learn how to fight before they can talk, admirable, but the reality is far uglier than we know. I've had several experiences with these people and on two occasions I was lucky to get away with my life. They put a mate in intensive care for a week.
They kill with impunity
They steal everyting they see
They hate anyone who isnt a pikey
and most who are!
They know no fear - the constraints of the Law and common humanity means nowt to them.
Q. How do you deal with such people?
A. Ask any bona fide Paddy.
Prodigal, you are right technically you are perfectly entitled to shoot marauding dogs using whatever means you legaly hold. Local Plod seemed to think that this meant shotguns only though. However I'm sure I don't need to tell soldiers how difficult it is to drop a German Shepherd or rottweiler (or combination thereof) sized target cleanly with a shotgun at >50m, even with BB shot or bigger. So to be humane and effective we were using centrefire rifles, perfectly safely, away from habitation, avoiding overshot, on our own land etc.
Plod claimed to think this was dangerous and confiscated everybodies rifles (and shotguns and even air-rifles and pistols- my sister missed out on a place in the regional Tetrathlon finals because of this) although they couldn't actually find any real breach of the law and had to give everything back eventually. Don't know where they'd stored it though, because everything was getting rust spots and the air-pistol seals were stuffed.
The actual reason for the shirtyness though was probably because after the first days worrying we'd asked plod to do something about it and he did F.A. Next day we said "Right we'll do something about it if you won't." and plod said, "Oh no don't do anything to upset the travellers, we can't control them if they react." as it wasn't plod losing money we went ahead anyway and shot a few dogs. Funnily enough the travellers really didn't seem to mind all that much and just started keeping the dogs in more. Plod was not happy though and it mainly seemed to be because we hadn't done as we were told, even though we were within our rights.
We've never had problems with Gypsiesthough just "tinkers" and I've heard stories of people being hospitalised in East Anglia while trying to stop illegal hare-coursing on their land, with plod doing nothing about it as usual. If the to$$ers ban hunting and legal coursing I bet they still won't do anything about tinkers doing it, even if they use draconian measures against everybody else.
As for Tony Martin, I'm sorry I have no sympathy for him at all. Yes I think you are justified in shooting burglars an defence of person and property as a last resort but I don't believe that Martin's actions were justified. The old Common Law definition of self defence basically says that the injuries must be on the front, Martin however shot both his targets in the back while at least one was apparently running away, so he can't say he was acting in self defence because someone who is running away is by definition not an immediate threat. He also doesn't seem to have challenged the burglars or made any attempt to ID them by using a torch, he just started shooting in the dark, very American I thought .