Monday, 4 May 2009

Update on the Piet Honeyborne murder

I have received some further information on the latest South African farm murder which I posted about on Saturday.

It appears that Bella Honeyborne survived because she had an extra firearm in the bedroom, which she discharged through the window, apparently alerting her husband's killers that she was armed and willing to shoot. (A reason perhaps to reconsider my views on gun ownership?)

It also turns out that Piet Honeybourne survived a near death experience a few years ago having suffered a heart attack following an attack by African bees. He was revived at the time, only to be later slaughtered in his own home, at the dead of night, by up to five attackers.

Although no property was apparently taken, the killing will no doubt again be attributed to "crime" rather than the systematic racist genocide which it clearly is.

These killings continue to be largely ignored by the English language media, so we have to rely on the Africaans press for details.

_____________________________________
I would like to thank to thank those who are keeping me informed with newspaper items and updates regarding there horrific events.

9 comments:

Dr.D said...

Armed citizens are by far the best limitation on criminal activities and on government encroachments.

Most attackers are cowards, and if they think that there is any possibility that they may be shot, they will run away. Thus an aggressive show of force is by far the best response. It certainly does not do to let them get close enough to disarm the defender. The defender must shoot early on.

With respect to the government, I think it was Jefferson who said, "When the government fears the people, things are well; when then people fear the government you have tyranny."

The only thing stopping Zero right now is the armed citizens of America.

alanorei said...

A young man, Charl Van Wyk, armed with a .38 calibre revolver halted a massacre at a South African church, St James's, Kenilworth, Cape Town, in 1993 by firing the weapon at a gang of marauding blacks who invaded the church armed with automatic and/or semi-automatic weapons and grenades.

They were intent on murdering the whole congregation (they killed 11 and wounded 58) but the one shot from this young man's weapon (that wounded one of them) scared them off.

The Wikipedia article says this in part (various other sites can be found by google):

The St James Church massacre was a massacre perpetrated on St James Church in Kenilworth, Cape Town on 25 July 1993 by four cadres of the Azanian People's Liberation Army (APLA). 11 members of the congregation were killed and 58 wounded. In 1998 the attackers were granted amnesty for their participation by the Truth and Reconciliation Commission.Amnesty (that's what the article says) - God help us (seriously).

It's things like this that really get your back up against the multi-culti's.

P.S. You probably know about a scheme in the US, Dr. D, many years ago where ordinary citizens in a town were permitted to carry concealed weapons for a time to protect themselves against muggers. This permission was removed after several (black) muggers got shot dead. Apparently the self-defence scheme was interfering with the muggers' '(un)civil rights.'

To be fair, I understand in Congress about 20 years ago, a (white) liberal senator said, "Most of the people who go to the gas chamber are poor, black and friendless."A (black) conservative senator replied, "Most of the people they shot are poor, black, friendless and DEAD."It's good that wisdom gets asserted occasionally.

notareargunner said...

In Rhodesia all the whites who wanted to be armed were armed. Farmers where formed into defence organisations with the farms and ranches highly protected. In South Africa it is getting more difficult to get the right weapon to defend yourself.
For years, my former partner, a foreign legion veteran carried a 38 revolver, a girlies gun as I used to chide him. That was until an intruder entered his sleeping quarters and he shot him in the throat, but did not kill him. The law decided that the injury carried a tariff on my partner and he had to pay out a considerable sum in injury compensation to his attacker. The first instance he got, he purchased a 9mm high power and a Panther 44.
Dead criminal cannot sue for compensation under Roman Dutch Law.

Anita said...

Over a year ago I spent considerable time , energy and money, (gladly) to print off official S A police photos, truly horrific, of farm victims , men, women and children murdered on SA farms. I sent these to swedish, danish, german and british newspapers and to british TV stations. Having previously spoken to the editors and told them that I would be forwarding these to them. I said that I understood obviously that any of these large (19) photos could not be printed but requesting them to write an article on this genocide taking place in SA against white farmers. The photos I know were received by them and I subsequently phoned. The comment of the swedish editor typfies the reaction of them all. He said, "I can't afford to do it". This just about sums it all up. The murder of white farmers will never I repeat never go into print. It is politically incorrect.

Dr.D said...

Alanorei, most states in the US have what are called "concealed carry laws" which allow ordinary citizens to carry concealed pistols. It does much to keep the peace in those parts of the US, because those who would indulge in violence never know who is sitting beside them and what they have in their pocket or in their purse. I have a close friend who is always armed, and I mean always. Sitting in his home, I have asked him, "Are you carrying right now?" and had him pull out a fully loaded .44 magnum.

I don't have a pistol permit because I am way too shaky; I can't hit anything at all with a pistol! But I am delighted to have people all around me who are carrying. It makes me much more safe. I know that they know that they dare not shoot carelessly or frivolously; the penalties are immense. The system works, and it is a wonderful crime deterrent.

alanorei said...

Thanks, Dr. D

Very informative.

A .44 magnum will settle any mugger's aspirations, for sure.

I believe it is still the most powerful handgun around.

Jeff ( Va. Rebel ) said...

Sarah - glad to hear you may be revising your thoughts concerning gun ownership.

Enjoy your comments here Dr.D ... and not all of us in the states ask "mother may I" either !

notareargunner said...

This is becoming a debate on what type of weapon to carry.
So let me expand. In 1980 I was asked by the front line soldiers of the SADF (South African Defence Force) to evaluate the new weapons they we thinking of buying. I collected all the latest information - pre internet days, so was harder to do - and laid out the case against any with 556 (223) ammunition. Waged against me were all the brass who had swallowed the American is best rubbish, despite the Boer having a\ history or competence with high powered hunting weapons - the stench of corruption was somewhat overpowering.
In the end I purchase a small herd of disease ridden cows and had the export dispose of the animals with their toys. They expended lots of rounds and left the beast suffering terribly.
Then I gave them their tried and trusted 7.62 weapons and several from Switzerland and Scandinavia that were just on the market. The beasts were felled with single shots, from both close range and further than 300 yards away.
I know it sounds horrific, but if you are faced with seasoned terrorists and not the brand or beer swilling heroes that attack churches, you really need to do more than FRIGHTEN by noise.
It is a debate I won with the British police, but not with the ignoramuses out there who believe that all gun carriers are Annie Oakley and you can shoot guns out of perps hands or wound them in the legs.
A weapon is a deterrent and as such does one thing- it kills. If you are not prepared to kill the one trying to kill you, then hide behind the police person or soldier who will. (Did you notice I went PC on you???:))

Anonymous said...

You are absolutely correct Anita, they do not dare tell the truth, and it is not just out of political correctness, the authorities will find ways of punishing them.

They have signed a pact with the devil, and the truth pays the price.

John Moss