Murder or just self defence?

[derry]

You can argue the point all you like. The issue is still that taking a life is a more serious offence than breaking and entering. The police always advise to avoid conflict and call them. I don't think I have ever heard any one from the Criminal Justice System advise that you take a knife to an intruder.

 

Maybe that worked when the police used to come running. Calling the police now is a waste of time they take longer to respond than a letter to Australia. In cases like this it's about time the powers that be realised in the real world, that a householder under threat either has to surrender or fight any way they can, unless the burglers run for it. As for the knife, we all know there is an epidemic of knife carriers on the street again nothing being done about it.

 

The authorities sadly have surrendered the streets to the criminals and have no interest in supporting the population.

[derry]

Mind you, my 10 stone dog roams around the garden at night, I probably would have to pick up the bits next day. What do I get for that? and no the dog can't get out as there is a 6ft fence surrounding the garden.

[Micky]

The authorities sadly have surrendered the streets to the criminals and have no interest in supporting the population.

 

This is indeed a very good point, we do appear, in places to have surrendered the streets to criminals. Are we now expected to do the same with our homes?

[NickG]

Mind you, my 10 stone dog roams around the garden at night, I probably would have to pick up the bits next day. What do I get for that? and no the dog can't get out as there is a 6ft fence surrounding the garden.

 

Possible manslaughter

Under the Guard Dogs Act 1975, the use of a guard dog at any premises except agricultural land or dwelling houses is not permitted unless a handler is present on the premises and controls the dog at all times, and warning notices are displayed at the entrances. If the handler is not present the dog must be secured.

[benjii]

In your opinion but not in the opinion of the law. The vast majoirty of burlaries are carried out with no harm coming to anyone other then the loss of property. As has been said earlier, most of the people would crap themselves and run away if disturbed. They aren't breaking in to kill you or you family. They are breaking in to steal. We do not have capital punishment in this country and vertainly not for burglary. Nothing gives you the right to take the law into your own hands. You can use reasonable force to defend yourself but that would not include sticking a knife into somone depedant on the circumstances.

 

Tell me, someone lifts your wallet from your pocket in the street (ie steals from you). Do you think that gives you the right to kill them?

 

Of course burglary is wrong but as much as you might not like it, it is not punishable by death.

 

Personally I am happy to live in a country civilised enough to pratice laws commesurate with the crimes.

 

What is utter utter bullsh*t is the macho stance that says you break into my home and you are dead. Utterly ridiculous.

 

The 90% of people you talk about (have you actually asked that many people?) would not stick a knife in someone first and worry about it later otherwise the death tool would be enormous.

 

Agree. Nutshell.

 

And that last sentence is pure gold!

[benjii]

Just turn that hypothetical argument around and have a think about it for a while. You'd quite happily allow a burgerlar to knife your family because of the fear of what may happen in a court. You are cool with that, yes?

 

Obviously not, but how many burglars are intent on knifing people? They aren't often homicidal maniacs, they are thieving ****s.

 

That is why the puffy-chested, **** for brains, ludicrous character from Eastenders, "I'll fackin do yaaa!!!" brigade are being disproportionate, silly and ultimately, self-defeating if they do stick by their half-witted principles as their family will be the losers come what may. They are basically saying, "if someone comes in my house I will lose self-control and will personally cause the break-up of my family by committing murder".

 

In certain circumstances, the use of lethal force is justifiable. To adopt a position which says, "I will kill anyone I find in my house, come what may" is self-evidently stuuuupid.

[Rut]

Hate to say it but if this happened in the USA it would not be a major issue.

 

A burglar crossed someone's threshold and got killed. It's the risk a burglar takes here. The law is very much on the side of the homeowner. The fact they they will have to re-live the incident for the rest of their lives seems punishment enough without charging them with a crime.

 

Also (at least here in Indiana) if a burglar is caught (alive) and found guilty they don't muck around with fines & community service. They get sent down for pretty long stretches. 5+ years for a first offence is commonplace. No - it doesn't wipe out burglaries totally but you really do need to be extra desperate to go down that path...

[benjii]

Hate to say it but if this happened in the USA it would not be a major issue.

 

A burglar crossed someone's threshold and got killed. It's the risk a burglar takes here. The law is very much on the side of the homeowner. The fact they they will have to re-live the incident for the rest of their lives seems punishment enough without charging them with a crime.

 

Also (at least here in Indiana) if a burglar is caught (alive) and found guilty they don't muck around with fines & community service. They get sent down for pretty long stretches. 5+ years for a first offence is commonplace. No - it doesn't wipe out burglaries totally but you really do need to be extra desperate to go down that path...

 

5+ years = good idea.

 

Shooting them = bit over the top, mind you given the larger than average number of gun-toting maniacs in the States there is probably a sense of wanting to get the first shot in.

[Micky]

Obviously not, but how many burglars are intent on knifing people? They aren't often homicidal maniacs, they are thieving ****s.

 

That is why the puffy-chested, **** for brains, ludicrous character from Eastenders, "I'll fackin do yaaa!!!" brigade are being disproportionate, silly and ultimately, self-defeating if they do stick by their half-witted principles as their family will be the losers come what may. They are basically saying, "if someone comes in my house I will lose self-control and will personally cause the break-up of my family by committing murder".

 

In certain circumstances, the use of lethal force is justifiable. To adopt a position which says, "I will kill anyone I find in my house, come what may" is self-evidently stuuuupid.

 

Totally agree about the "I'll fackin do yaaa!!!" brigade Benjii. I also accept that most burglars want to get in and out without detection. But it doesn't always work out like that, leaving the homeowner with some tough choices. I just wonder what some people might be thinking if it was the homeowner that had died in this instance - real glad that the burgler is ok though?

 

When I think about my own personal circumstances, if I was burgled, probably to nearest 'weapon' with which i could arm myself is a knife in the kitchen. Others have eluded to clubs or baseball bats that they have close at hand, which could just as feasibly end up causing a fatality.

 

Minimum or reasonable force, once you have armed yourself, is really quite difficult to guage.

[mcjwills]

Once they open my wallet theyll die of dissapointment anyway

 

Yeah last thief that broke into my house felt so sorry for me, left all his swag from his previous visits that night with a note that I needed it more than he did.

[Smirking_Saint]

Mind you, my 10 stone dog roams around the garden at night, I probably would have to pick up the bits next day. What do I get for that? and no the dog can't get out as there is a 6ft fence surrounding the garden.

 

Dogs are pretty easily dealt with and distracted by anyone that really wants to get in, however it does tend to put off the everyday oppurtunists.

[sadoldgit]

Just turn that hypothetical argument around and have a think about it for a while. You'd quite happily allow a burgerlar to knife your family because of the fear of what may happen in a court. You are cool with that, yes?

 

How may burglers actually commit murder?

[Smirking_Saint]

How may burglers actually commit murder?

 

How do you know what type of burglar it is ?

[sadoldgit]

How do you know what type of burglar it is ?

 

It is not difficult. A burgler is someone who breaks into your home to steal something. I imagine if someone wanted to kill you they could do that anywhere, not just in your home. Burglers are called burglers because they burgle. You are confusing them with murderers.

[Micky]

How may burglers actually commit murder?

 

By stabbing, shooting or hitting the homeowner first...??

[Micky]

It is not difficult. A burgler is someone who breaks into your home to steal something. I imagine if someone wanted to kill you they could do that anywhere, not just in your home. Burglers are called burglers because they burgle. You are confusing them with murderers.

 

They also do not want to get caught and thus banged up - that is when burglers tend to turn more violent. Just for the record, what would you do, or what would you suggest one does when confronted with somebody burgling your home?

[Smirking_Saint]

It is not difficult. A burgler is someone who breaks into your home to steal something. I imagine if someone wanted to kill you they could do that anywhere, not just in your home. Burglers are called burglers because they burgle. You are confusing them with murderers.

 

Not really, you are confusing people with crimes.

 

They are not labelled you know, I mean, how do you know ?? A burglar has a swag bag and a murderer is a person, mouth frothing carrying a bloodied bread knife I suppose ?

 

So you walk down stairs and see the swag bag, wipe your brow.

 

SOG - "thank f*ck for that.....thought you could be a murderer"

 

Burglar - Hahaha "You silly old sod, I just came for your DVD collection of Judge Judy mate, hope your not making a coffee, I've got your Kettle"

 

FFS

[dune]

It is not difficult. A burgler is someone who breaks into your home to steal something. I imagine if someone wanted to kill you they could do that anywhere, not just in your home. Burglers are called burglers because they burgle. You are confusing them with murderers.

 

But how are you to know the intent of an intruder?

 

There was a case a few weeks ago of some scumbag who broe into pensioners homes - sometimes he robbed them, sometimes he robbed and raped them.

 

If someone breaks into your home IMO they should have no legal protection at all and homeowners should not be punished for any action they take.

[Smirking_Saint]

But how are you to know the intent of an intruder?

 

There was a case a few weeks ago of some scumbag who broe into pensioners homes - sometimes he robbed them, sometimes he robbed and raped them.

 

 

As long as you got your lawnmower/hoover back...........

[derry]

Possible manslaughter

Under the Guard Dogs Act 1975, the use of a guard dog at any premises except agricultural land or dwelling houses is not permitted unless a handler is present on the premises and controls the dog at all times, and warning notices are displayed at the entrances. If the handler is not present the dog must be secured.

 

It isn't a guard dog it's a pet. The message is clear, if he is out the security lights are on, to get to the dog a 6ft fence has to be scaled. The dog will bark so the intruder who doesn't get the message has wilfully disregarded the visual signs. It is a dwelling house and the dog sleeps in a conservatory with the door open. It is a great deterrent.

[aintforever]

Who knows. Depends on the circumstances and the context in which he was using the force.

 

If the fella was coming at him and the only weapon to hand was a knife which he used to fend the guy off then probably not guilty. If he wasn't under attack but then went to get a knife and stabbed the fella anyway then guilty.

 

Anywhere in between then it depends on the situation.

 

Surely if someone is in your house you are under attack?

 

The way I see it if someone breaks into your house you cannot just assume they are unarmed just because you cannot see their weapon, your best way to be totally sure of your safety is to knock them unconscious or kill them. The important thing is you are stopping them being a threat, their death is irrelevant.

[sadoldgit]

No it isn't. I spoke to one of our lawyers today for clarification. For years the law has made provision for protection of your person or property. You are allowed to defend yourself using "reasonable force." Causing the death of another person immediately puts you at risk of a serious charge, including murder. As I keep saying, you can stop them being a threat by calling the police. Most of them will leg it anyway, unless they have been unluckly enough to stumble into your abode, in which case....

[Micky]

No it isn't. I spoke to one of our lawyers today for clarification. For years the law has made provision for protection of your person or property. You are allowed to defend yourself using "reasonable force." Causing the death of another person immediately puts you at risk of a serious charge, including murder. As I keep saying, you can stop them being a threat by calling the police. Most of them will leg it anyway, unless they have been unluckly enough to stumble into your abode, in which case....

 

What utter rubish.

[egg]

Surely if someone is in your house you are under attack?

 

The way I see it if someone breaks into your house you cannot just assume they are unarmed just because you cannot see their weapon, your best way to be totally sure of your safety is to knock them unconscious or kill them. The important thing is you are stopping them being a threat, their death is irrelevant.

 

 

 

Your home being burgled does not necessarily mean that you are under attack.

 

The law looks at whether force is necessary and then whether the degree of force is reasonable in the circumstances.

 

If you go get a knife and stab a burglar when you are no danger, and ie the bloke is leaving then you are in trouble.

 

If you are in physical danger and reach out to grab the nearest thing to hand to defend yourself (not your home) and use it to fend off an attack you may be ok depending on the degree of force used..

 

Example, you lash out and that's the end of it then that's probably reasonable. If the guy drops and you keep stabbing cos the guy is scum then you have gone too far.

[egg]

Sog, your lawyer colleague gives a simplistic explanation. Death in an attack does not mean that the force is excessive, and certainly would not necessarily lead to a murder charge rather than manslaughter.

Granted, if you kill someone you are on the backfoot but no means on the way to the gallows. The context and degree of force make a huge difference.

[aintforever]

Your home being burgled does not necessarily mean that you are under attack.

 

The law looks at whether force is necessary and then whether the degree of force is reasonable in the circumstances.

 

If you go get a knife and stab a burglar when you are no danger, and ie the bloke is leaving then you are in trouble.

 

If you are in physical danger and reach out to grab the nearest thing to hand to defend yourself (not your home) and use it to fend off an attack you may be ok depending on the degree of force used..

 

Example, you lash out and that's the end of it then that's probably reasonable. If the guy drops and you keep stabbing cos the guy is scum then you have gone too far.

 

I suppose it's what is deemed 'necessary" that is the issue.

 

Your first example of the burglar leaving the house - he could quite easily be just loading stuff into a car and come back and shoot/stab you. I would say it's reasonable to be fearful of that scenario. Obviously if you chase them down the road it's wrong but if they are on your property they are threatening you IMO.

 

Also if you carry on stabbing someone who's on the floor - unless they are unconscious they are still capable of shooting/stabbing you - you could argue that whilst there is that chance you are also acting in self defense.

[egg]

I suppose it's what is deemed 'necessary" that is the issue.

 

Your first example of the burglar leaving the house - he could quite easily be just loading stuff into a car and come back and shoot/stab you. I would say it's reasonable to be fearful of that scenario. Obviously if you chase them down the road it's wrong but if they are on your property they are threatening you IMO.

 

Also if you carry on stabbing someone who's on the floor - unless they are unconscious they are still capable of shooting/stabbing you - you could argue that whilst there is that chance you are also acting in self defense.

 

 

 

Being fearful of a possible scenario is not enough.

 

Basically you are right though that what is necessary in the circumstances is the issue. I wouldn't be overly confident of defending the fella in the examples you give though.

[Secret Site Agent]

I think reasonable force might be enough here to get the accused off. Thing is, life is shades of grey and the law does try and respect that - 4 *masked* men trying to break into a house - I think picking up a weapon is justified.

 

Basically, if I'm on the jury, they're not guilty.

 

If it was a 14 year old boy being shot in the back by a bloke with a shotgun, different I reckon

 

But you have to admit that both victims here succeeded in doing what the justice system couldn't.

 

They wont re-offend. They are no longer a menace to society.

[aintforever]

Being fearful of a possible scenario is not enough.

 

Basically you are right though that what is necessary in the circumstances is the issue. I wouldn't be overly confident of defending the fella in the examples you give though.

 

It is a tough one because there are so many grey areas and each case has it's individual circumstances.

 

But when does Being fearful of a possible scenario actually turn into a scenario? Do you have to wait until you see the knife. Or wait until he turns towards you with it. Or wait until it's held against your throat?

 

The way I see it the moment someone enters your property your life is under threat, wether they APPEAR to unarmed or POSSIBLY leaving the property or not.

[Micky]

It is a tough one because there are so many grey areas and each case has it's individual circumstances.

 

But when does Being fearful of a possible scenario actually turn into a scenario? Do you have to wait until you see the knife. Or wait until he turns towards you with it. Or wait until it's held against your throat?

 

The way I see it the moment someone enters your property your life is under threat, wether they APPEAR to unarmed or POSSIBLY leaving the property or not.

 

As far as I can glean, once he has refused to return your possessions, refused to leave your property and now has a knife against your throat - it it then time to phone the police.

[sadoldgit]

As far as I can glean, once he has refused to return your possessions, refused to leave your property and now has a knife against your throat - it it then time to phone the police.

 

I think the point is that you call the police immediately, not after a long discussion with him!

 

To give you some idea of where you stand legally - burglary is an either way offence. This means that the case can be heard in either the Magistrates Court or the Crown Court depending on the seriousness of the case or if the defendant elects for a Crown Court trial. Manslaughter or muder are indictable only offences, that is they are offences that can only be heard in the Crown Court because of the serious nature of the offences and the greater sentencing power of the court for guilty verdicts.

[sadoldgit]

What utter rubish.

 

Really, go look at the records and see how many burglaries end with violence between the two parties. The last thing they want is to get nicked and most are more scared than the people they are robbing.

[Micky]

Really, go look at the records and see how many burglaries end with violence between the two parties. The last thing they want is to get nicked and most are more scared than the people they are robbing.

 

I'd rather not, I'd really rather not. I wouldn't have a clue where to start to look and for what it's worth I probably agree that most burglaries do not end up in violence.

 

But that fact remains that some do. And the fact remains that those that do are solely the responsibility of the burgler - nobody asks to have their home burgled.

 

Therfore when a burgler is confronted they should expect the worst, the very worst - that is the risk they run, that is the nature of their profession.

 

Because you asked me to do some homework, perhaps you'd like to do the same:

 

"....most are more scared than the people they are robbbing." Go on, where on earth did you get that from, where in your CPS department do you have that stat?????

 

I'm really beginning to dispair for the honest hardworking man in the street. Please don't shout at the burgler - you'll scare him.

 

I'm just.... speachle.......

[sadoldgit]

I'd rather not, I'd really rather not. I wouldn't have a clue where to start to look and for what it's worth I probably agree that most burglaries do not end up in violence.

 

But that fact remains that some do. And the fact remains that those that do are solely the responsibility of the burgler - nobody asks to have their home burgled.

 

Therfore when a burgler is confronted they should expect the worst, the very worst - that is the risk they run, that is the nature of their profession.

 

Because you asked me to do some homework, perhaps you'd like to do the same:

 

"....most are more scared than the people they are robbbing." Go on, where on earth did you get that from, where in your CPS department do you have that stat?????

 

I'm really beginning to dispair for the honest hardworking man in the street. Please don't shout at the burgler - you'll scare him.

 

I'm just.... speachle.......

 

Its got nothing to do with shouting. It comes back to using reasonable force. LIke it or not, if you stab someone to death the court is going to take some convincing that is reasonable. You need to justify taking a life compared to taking a telly.

[sadoldgit]

I'd rather not, I'd really rather not. I wouldn't have a clue where to start to look and for what it's worth I probably agree that most burglaries do not end up in violence.

 

But that fact remains that some do. And the fact remains that those that do are solely the responsibility of the burgler - nobody asks to have their home burgled.

 

Therfore when a burgler is confronted they should expect the worst, the very worst - that is the risk they run, that is the nature of their profession.

 

Because you asked me to do some homework, perhaps you'd like to do the same:

 

"....most are more scared than the people they are robbbing." Go on, where on earth did you get that from, where in your CPS department do you have that stat?????

 

I'm really beginning to dispair for the honest hardworking man in the street. Please don't shout at the burgler - you'll scare him.

 

I'm just.... speachle.......

 

I read the case files ever day. Come and talk to our lawyers. You start from the assumption that people who break into your home are intent on doing you harm. They are not, they just want to steal things from you. That is not an offence punishable by death.

[Micky]

I read the case files ever day. Come and talk to our lawyers. You start from the assumption that people who break into your home are intent on doing you harm. They are not, they just want to steal things from you. That is not an offence punishable by death.

 

So in your case files it says that the poor old burgular was really scared, even more so when confronted.

 

I don't start on that assumption at all. I start on the assumption that:

 

I live in a 4 bedroom house

 

My wife and I occupy 1 bedroom

 

My 2 young children occupy 2 other bedrooms

 

If I hear a burgular come into my house, my first problem is getting to my children before the scumbag does. Highly unlikely that I am going to be able to do that, in the dead of night, without said scumbag hearing.

 

My next problem is getting to a phone, calling 999 and whispering down it in order try to get help.

 

Confrontation in the home is highly likely, therefore so is some sort of violence.

 

And no, I don't start from that assumption. I don't know how many times I (we) have to tell you, we know that it shouldn't end up in death, but occasionally it does.

 

If we go by your assumption(s) that burgulars are scared of the homeowner and that they only want to steal possessions, why did the 4 masked men not go running from the house when they heard the 3 people upstairs moving around and making their way downstairs?

[egg]

So in your case files it says that the poor old burgular was really scared, even more so when confronted.

 

I don't start on that assumption at all. I start on the assumption that:

 

I live in a 4 bedroom house

 

My wife and I occupy 1 bedroom

 

My 2 young children occupy 2 other bedrooms

 

If I hear a burgular come into my house, my first problem is getting to my children before the scumbag does. Highly unlikely that I am going to be able to do that, in the dead of night, without said scumbag hearing.

 

My next problem is getting to a phone, calling 999 and whispering down it in order try to get help.

 

Confrontation in the home is highly likely, therefore so is some sort of violence.

 

And no, I don't start from that assumption. I don't know how many times I (we) have to tell you, we know that it shouldn't end up in death, but occasionally it does.

 

If we go by your assumption(s) that burgulars are scared of the homeowner and that they only want to steal possessions, why did the 4 masked men not go running from the house when they heard the 3 people upstairs moving around and making their way downstairs?

 

 

 

Sadoldgit has explained the legal position as have I. He works for the cps and I have been a lawyer for 18 years.

 

Like it or not the law is what it is.

[Micky]

Sadoldgit has explained the legal position as have I. He works for the cps and I have been a lawyer for 18 years.

 

Like it or not the law is what it is.

 

I accept the law. I don't accept that the homeowner should face massive grey areas in which to work when they need to make an interpretation of the law in a split second that may be the difference between being seriously injured or worse.

 

Spouting lines of advice such as 'Phone the police' and 'the burgler is more scared of the homeowner' is hardly great advice from either a lawyer or somebody who works in the CPS.

 

You say that 'the law is 'what it is'', what is that? On many counts, many have said that 'the law is an ass' - perhaps this is one of those counts.

[egg]

I accept the law. I don't accept that the homeowner should face massive grey areas in which to work when they need to make an interpretation of the law in a split second that may be the difference between being seriously injured or worse.

 

Spouting lines of advice such as 'Phone the police' and 'the burgler is more scared of the homeowner' is hardly great advice from either a lawyer or somebody who works in the CPS.

 

You say that 'the law is 'what it is'', what is that? On many counts, many have said that 'the law is an ass' - perhaps this is one of those counts.

 

 

 

I've not said call the police etc. Yeah do that but I get the point that sitting there politely waiting for the police may not be the answer. Instinct would tell me grab a bat and deal with the situation.

 

It's true that most burglars aren't there for trouble. Most would **** themselves and run if confronted. They just want stuff to sell for drug money. They don't want to be caught, and just want to find another house to burgle.

 

The issue is what is reasonable if there is a confrontation. You can use reasonable force but that doesn't mean battering the living **** out of someone. It also doesn't mean that you can do so just in case you may come under attack.

 

Grey areas are littered throughout the law but I think it's hard to argue that homeowners should be able to kill an intruder as of right.

[Micky]

I've not said call the police etc. Yeah do that but I get the point that sitting there politely waiting for the police may not be the answer. Instinct would tell me grab a bat and deal with the situation.

 

It's true that most burglars aren't there for trouble. Most would **** themselves and run if confronted. They just want stuff to sell for drug money. They don't want to be caught, and just want to find another house to burgle.

 

The issue is what is reasonable if there is a confrontation. You can use reasonable force but that doesn't mean battering the living **** out of someone. It also doesn't mean that you can do so just in case you may come under attack.

 

Grey areas are littered throughout the law but I think it's hard to argue that homeowners should be able to kill an intruder as of right.

 

I'm not. With the rest, I agree.

[PaulSaint]

Kenneth Clark quote from today

 

"Asked about what this would mean in practice, he said: "If an old lady finds she's got an 18 year old burgling her house and she picks up a kitchen knife and sticks it in him she has not committed a criminal offence and we will make that clear."

He added: "We will make it quite clear you can hit the burglar with the poker if he's in the house and you have a perfect defence when you do so."

Mr Clarke said legal protection would not extend to anyone shooting a burglar in the back when they were fleeing or "getting their friends together to beat them up"."

 

More here:

 

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-13957587

Edited 29 June, 2011 by PaulSaint

[sadoldgit]

So in your case files it says that the poor old burgular was really scared, even more so when confronted.

 

I don't start on that assumption at all. I start on the assumption that:

 

I live in a 4 bedroom house

 

My wife and I occupy 1 bedroom

 

My 2 young children occupy 2 other bedrooms

 

If I hear a burgular come into my house, my first problem is getting to my children before the scumbag does. Highly unlikely that I am going to be able to do that, in the dead of night, without said scumbag hearing.

 

My next problem is getting to a phone, calling 999 and whispering down it in order try to get help.

 

Confrontation in the home is highly likely, therefore so is some sort of violence.

 

And no, I don't start from that assumption. I don't know how many times I (we) have to tell you, we know that it shouldn't end up in death, but occasionally it does.

 

If we go by your assumption(s) that burgulars are scared of the homeowner and that they only want to steal possessions, why did the 4 masked men not go running from the house when they heard the 3 people upstairs moving around and making their way downstairs?

 

You cite one case. Do you know what actaully happened? Why do you think someone who breaks into your house is remotely interested at getting at your children?

Confrontation is "highly likely" if you decide to chase the villian. And why whisper. You want the bloke to hear so that he knows the cops are on the way. Most people have moble phones if not cordless phones in the bedroom. You can go on making excuses all you like but if you really want a fight vote for dear old Ken Clarke and you will be sorted. or maybe even dead because the chances are if this bill gets passed burglars will start to carry knives and guns.

[sadoldgit]

Kenneth Clark quote from today

 

"Asked about what this would mean in practice, he said: "If an old lady finds she's got an 18 year old burgling her house and she picks up a kitchen knife and sticks it in him she has not committed a criminal offence and we will make that clear."

He added: "We will make it quite clear you can hit the burglar with the poker if he's in the house and you have a perfect defence when you do so."

Mr Clarke said legal protection would not extend to anyone shooting a burglar in the back when they were fleeing or "getting their friends together to beat them up"."

 

More here:

 

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-13957587

 

Thi is quite chilling and will, if made law, make homes less safe not more safe. More householders will end up injured or dead. It will not deter burglars but it will ensure that they go on jobs tooled up. I can't believe the quote about encouraging little old ladies to stab people. Unbelievable.

[Micky]

You cite one case. Do you know what actaully happened? Why do you think someone who breaks into your house is remotely interested at getting at your children?

Confrontation is "highly likely" if you decide to chase the villian. And why whisper. You want the bloke to hear so that he knows the cops are on the way. Most people have moble phones if not cordless phones in the bedroom. You can go on making excuses all you like but if you really want a fight vote for dear old Ken Clarke and you will be sorted. or maybe even dead because the chances are if this bill gets passed burglars will start to carry knives and guns.

 

I am NOT making excuses. If I hear intruders in my house my first thought would be for my children - sorry if that train of thought appears strange to you - to me it is second nature.

 

Now you are suggesting that we invite confrontation by allowing the scumbag to hear us and then 'gambling' that he is going to do a runner. All very well, but again, in the real world it doesn't always pan out like that.

 

I don't want to invite a fight at all, but I maintain that the homeowner has been forced into the situation by the invader - he has the right to defend himself and his family.

[derry]

Thi is quite chilling and will, if made law, make homes less safe not more safe. More householders will end up injured or dead. It will not deter burglars but it will ensure that they go on jobs tooled up. I can't believe the quote about encouraging little old ladies to stab people. Unbelievable.

 

Good, because I can then blow the bastards head off in self defence.

[Micky]

Good, because I can then blow the bastards head off in self defence.

 

Ahhhhh, I see you've not quite mastered this 'reasonable force' concept either Derry....!

[Al de Man]

It's been comfirmed by the CPS that the home-owner will not be prosecuted. I think it's safe to say 99% of the population would agree with the decision.

 

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-manchester-14248097

[Micky]

I accept the law. I don't accept that the homeowner should face massive grey areas in which to work when they need to make an interpretation of the law in a split second that may be the difference between being seriously injured or worse.

 

Spouting lines of advice such as 'Phone the police' and 'the burgler is more scared of the homeowner' is hardly great advice from either a lawyer or somebody who works in the CPS.

 

You say that 'the law is 'what it is'', what is that? On many counts, many have said that 'the law is an ass' - perhaps this is one of those counts.

 

I stand corrected - in this instance common sence prevailed - long may it continue in my opinion.

[Hatch]

good news.

[tony13579]

The law still is still an ass. All three victims of crime were arrested. two held for 24? hours and the third for much longer. and probobly incured huge legal bills over the last month.