you guys in Britain arnt allowed to defend yourselves?
good judge
Printable View
you guys in Britain arnt allowed to defend yourselves?
good judge
Can't open the page ....
Link working now.
The problem in this country is that people are only allowed to use "reasonable force" to defend themselves against burglers etc and the law does not actually define what "reasonable force" is!! Ask a policeman - he won't be able to tell you. Recently there have been campaigns to change the Law especially as over last weekend a 45 year old teacher was murdered in his home by a burgler. If someone breaks into your home, you have to assume they aren't there to do you good, so you must have the legal right to defend yourself and your family, not to mention your property. It's craziness when burglers try to sue home owners who hurt them during a botched burglery!!!! Could there be anything more insane?
Props to that judge!
I think it should be legal to set booby traps to kill burglars. Crime is out of hand. A two or three month jail sentence doesn't seem to deter these thieves very much. It's good to hear of one getting shot every now and again. Maybe it'll make the other thieves think twice before they go out thieving again. Probably not tho.
There was a guy about 10 miles up the road from where I live who had his house burgalarized more than once, so he rigged a shotgun on his back door to fire when it opened....................not a bad idea, huh??................Until the night he came home from the bar all tanked up and forgot about his little booby-trap and KABOOOM!Quote:
Originally Posted by imaeditedbysowulo
He lived though :sad:
Quote:
Originally Posted by 3fingersalute
LOL!! I'm the kind of person that would do that. It's cool tho, it should still be legal. If I'm dumb enough to walk into my own boobytrap than so be it. But I should have no rights to sue anybody for my own foolishness of walking into my own boobytrap, just as a thief should have no right to sue for anything that happens to him while attempting to rob someone.
"booby traps" are not allowed because if you are not home and your trap kills someone then what is the justification for their death? Obviously your life was not in danger because as far as the law is concerned that person was just their to steal your TV and by law their life is for some reason worth more than that TV so you used excessive force by killing that person.
Could you just injure the person instead? Sure, but then the law is going to argue that the injuries sustained could of been life threatening so refer back to the beginning of this post.
You are given the responsibilty to protect yourself (not material possessions) until the law arrives if you feel your life is "indanger." You have many options open to you whether it be a weapon, stronger locks, alarm system, living in a "good" neighborhood, or the hope that nothing bad ever happens to you.
I think if you ask a policeman he'll quite correctly answer thats not his job to decide & its a Judges call (or jury's)..Quote:
Originally Posted by Pluto
The judge in the Tony Martin case had no choice really but to sentence him for murder originally as there he had an illegal firearm .. Here the judge was able to be more 'fair' as the weapon held was properly registered, once in 'mortal fear' any householder is allowed to use whatever force might later be deemed reasonable - if you think someone is gonna kill you I'd say using the shotgun in the gun cabinet is 'reasonable' - therefore you have every right & the protection of the law .. & quite right too :thumbs:
I like Florida. Burglar is in the house, you can shoot him.
I paid for this land, I own it I should beable to do what the heck I want.
Damn shame I'm not a citizen really, although with my eyesight its not a bad thing :DQuote:
Originally Posted by jaeger
Now, what're the laws on beating someone senseless with a hockey stick/baseball bat?
I would think there's no issues with that. Once the thief/murderer is under control you should probably stop though, or until the person has made an actual effort to leave you or your property otherwise it would be the equivalent of shooting someone in the back which in the USA is not considered defending yourself.Quote:
Originally Posted by Titchski
As far as eyesight concerns. Blind people, when they choose to defend themself choose cane, taser (sp?), or small caliber firearm such as a .22-.maybe .38. They use the firearm to firearm when the attacker is "on them." Meaning the attacker is physically attacking them and the blind person is close enough to reach out and touch the muzzle of the firearm to the attacker and fire with the intent of the bullet not traveling through the attacker.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Titchski
Same over here btw, whilst in your 'mortal fear', you can do 'whatever' to subdue any attacker & protect yourself whilst he's coming forwards into the place, however smack him over the head with your cricket bat or pick axe handle (I'm too northern for 'jolly hockey' & don't talk to me about that rounders stuff ! :D) on the way out, & you haven't been 'reasonable' & maybe you are going to jail too ? :rolleyes: (of course in any real life situation the only way you can incriminate yourself is by admitting to it - you thought he was still after you, didn't you !?! ;))Quote:
I would think there's no issues with that. Once the thief/murderer is under control you should probably stop though, or until the person has made an actual effort to leave you or your property otherwise it would be the equivalent of shooting someone in the back which in the USA is not considered defending yourself
You can continue until the burglar no longer poses a threat. So: he has run off your property and is obviously not coming back, he is unconscious, or so many bits are broken that he is no longer moving.Quote:
Originally Posted by Titchski
No guns in this house, just swords. Whichever bit comes through the window first is mine.