T5NYW

iTrader: (4)

Isn't this what the Public have been saying for the last 20 years. I suspect it will be another 20 years before anything is done though

The CPS find it easier to Prossecute a Victim, who incriminates himself by giving a Factual account of Events in a statement. Where as compared to the Villains Bullsh!t statement also blames the victim. Hay Ho Victim prosecuted and Crook let off! then he sue's the Victim for cutting his hand climbing through a broken window.

Perhaps the poor beat Bobby who gets most of the Brunt of Joe Publics anger, will get the respect they deserve

Tony

Patt@firstime

Just heard this too - about time things moved on!

skiddus_markus

Someone who illegally enters your property is outside the law and so should not have any of its protection.Burglars don't just rob people of their possessions they rob them of their feeling of safety and security in the home which is priceless.

crofty

Just off to load me shotgun

Chip

Think I'll wait for a test case before I shoot my next burglar.

chip

T5NYW

iTrader: (4)

True but The "Dogooders" of this world have made legislation to protect the "Poor" criminals and totally ingnored the Victims and as said a Victim who used force will yield a higher percentage of Prosecutions than a lying thieving Toe-rag

How many have you shoot so far? LOL

boxst

Hello

Finally. Not that anyone will actually take notice of course.

If someone enters your property illegally then they deserve whatever they get. I hope I never have to find out, but I would use whatever force is necessary.

Steve.

pslewis

As far as I am concerned, if you enter my house with menace then you leave all your rights at the boundary ............... its how it should be!

Pete

Mark_S

Oh God, find myself agreeing with Lewis again.

Off to slit my wrists.

Jerome

Good grief, the second time this year I've agreed with you!

Another factor with being burgled, is that they often come back a second or even third time to steal the new goods that were replaced under the new-for-old insurance policy. A good kicking may well deter them from coming back for seconds, thirds etc.

skiddus_markus

And cutting off their feet and putting stingers down for their wheelchairs will stop them for definite.

chris's scooby

So will i be able to use my chainsaw on anyone i catch, or is that a bit OTT?

Chip

Just the three!

Chip

Andrew Timmins

"He said the legal test of "reasonable force" in common law seemed weighted against victims and caused confusion."

My definition of reasonable force:

"I only killed him once"

I was talking to a policeman last weekend and he told me if you shoot someone to make sure you own several guns. His reasoning was that one gun in the home would be classed as being a weapon, several guns would be considered to be a collection. The same would hold true for knives, swords etc.

_Meridian_

iTrader: (1)

Much of this "you can't defend yourslef properly" stuff is myth, based on a one completely unrepresentative case (Tony Martin) plus reports of people being charged that are mentioned in the papers. The same papers omit to mention that in nearly every case, the charges are dropped long before the case gets to court. The fact is, the CPS know that it's very unlikely that a jury will convict a person defending life or property unless seriously excessive force is used (like shooting a 14-year old in the back with an illegal shotgun for instance) so they never bother bringing it to court. The police draw up a file for the CPS and charge the person 'cos that's their job. On the very rare occasions that such cases get to court, the defendant is nearly always found not guilty. But somehow we always end up discussing Tony Martin - a man who opened fire with a pump-action at close range; then didn't bother to see the results or to call the police, but instead went around to a neighbours for a cup of tea, leaving the burglars to call for help. If the silly sod had phoned 999 he's probably have got away with it. Then everyone thiks that was a typical case. What do you want? The right to shoot eight-year olds climbing over your fence to retrieve a ball? The right to shoot Japanese tourists armed with a video camera who knock on your door to ask directions? And yes, the latter happened in the USA.


M

imi

good post meridian....

gsm1

Agree with what Meridian has said. How is this any different from the law we already have in place? Stevens' statement is no more than populist gibberish.

GC8

This is an emotive subject isnt it? You have always been allowed to use justifiable force to defend yourself; how ever if a person loses their life I believe that there has to be a trial, but self-defence is a valid defence.

What some people seem to be lobbying for though, is the right to kill or maim a person who breaks into their home, even when they arent put at risk..... and theyre never going to get that.

Simon

Tiggs

SN is fast becoming The Sun.

(except for the common sense that appeared in the last few posts)

Turbohot

In think the man has guts
http://channels.aolsvc.co.uk/news/ar...04024009990005

mart360

but they would only do it once!!!

what needs to happen is a statement in law stateing that should you enter a persons property without being invited. never mind going equiped etc,,
you have no protection,, and any injuys sustained are tough sh*t

once a few chavs get a good kicking the message will get through..

so what if tony martin open fire,,,, you missed a key pivotal point.

he had been burgled several times before, and failed by the criminal protection service...

what would you do meridian,, invite them in for a cuppa???

lets be openly honest, the gloves need to come off, and the chavs pikeys etc need to understand if you go burglarizing ,, you could end up dead!!!

M

tracktime

should be as it is not changed.

If thief know that it is in danger when in somones house then it would be more likely to carry out a violent act .
ROB

XS-Home

Certainly makes sense, though I think he may have bought forward his stepping down from February to sometime this month........

_Meridian_

iTrader: (1)

Can you please read my post again - apparantly you didn't understand what I was saying. Thanks.

Tony Martin used an illegal firearm. I'll repeat that as well: he used a section 5 firearm - the possession of which is an offense for which he could do seven years in prison - to shoot without any warning (although I'll accept that there was a question about that). What is not in dispute is that after he shot Fred barras, he walked around to a neighbour and had a cup of tea. He didn't explain what he was doing there until some time later. He didn't call the police or an ambulance. He is also a man who had threatened ramblers with a loaded shotgun (for which he should have had his SC revoked). But even so, I'm fairly sure that if he'd phoned the police as soon as he'd left the house he would escaped punishment.

I'm not saying you can't defend your property, I'm saying the exact opposite: that in 99% of cases the current law will happily let you maim or even kill burglars as long as you use a reasonable weapon. So a Maglite is fine, so is a golfclub or baseball bat - just as long as you don't store it by the bed. Even in the airing cupboard is fine. If you've been burgled recently then a jury will very probably not mind you keeping the club under the bed - especially if you came face-to-face with them. Otherwise the issue is "premeditaion". In the 1% where the law is not happy then you are as stupid/disturbed as Tony Martin.

Remember that what matters here is NOT the law as such, but juries; and they generally are as keen on defending their property/person as you are - which means they almost certainly won't convict. And since the pay-rises of the CPS depend on successful prosecutions then the CPS won't bother taking the case to court unless you went after a 16-year old with a katana.

Again: please try to understand the difference between charges being drawn up, and something actually being done with those charges. Charging a person for killing in defence of their home is something the police simply have to do: it's the job of the CPS to decide what to do with those chages.


M

(who keeps a 3-cell Maglite by the bed. H*ll, it gets dark at night....)

Scoob99

iTrader: (1)

P.S. Lewis right again..........his he on medication

johnskelley

To use reasonable force you gotta know what the burglar has got in his hand, short of asking him, I dont know how you would tell.

Also we may assume some guy entering our house is a burglar but he may have come to rape our missus or God forbid our kids.

I dont know what reasonable force is and I hope I never have to make that decision, but if I do, I will strike with extreme intent.

_Meridian_

iTrader: (1)

No you don't - where do people get this idea, the Daily Mail?? You merely have to have a reasonable fear for yourself or your property, and the force used must be proportionate. If you hear a noise in the night, go downstairs with a heavy torch and hit a burglar, no-one cares. They only care if you carry on hitting them after they go down and stop moving. Why do people seem to find this point so hard to understand? The jury would be annoyed if you picked up an AK47 and opened fire on them, but if you grabbed a knife from the kitchen and stabbed them in the heat of the moment then you'd probably never get as far as court; and if you go there you'd almost certainly be found not guilty. Again: the important bit is premeditation - the difference between self-defence and murder.

M

vindaloo

In which case, I put it to you that this thread is useless without piccies

boomer

...but as many burglars are so drugged-up that they don't react to a severe "hitting", you could end up with them VERY badly beaten before they became unconcious. Who is to say whether the damage was caused before or after they went down?

But at the moment, the Police would almost certainly arrest you, IN YOUR OWN HOME, should you bash a burglar

mb