If you need urgent support, call 999 or go to your nearest A&E. To contact our Crisis Messenger (open 24/7) text THEMIX to 85258.
Read the community guidelines before posting ✨
Options
Essential support for under 25s
Essential support for under 25s
Take a look around and enjoy reading the discussions. If you'd like to join in, it's really easy to register and then you'll be able to post. If you'd like to learn what this place is all about, head here.
Comments
Quit being obtuse.
I'm glad you agree that Tony Martin was locked away because he deliberately shot a burglar who was trying to escape the house.
My entire argument before was based on the case where a thief was climbing through a window, was caught out, and consequently fell out of it. I never even mentioned Tony Martin before in my argument, yet you somehow made it part of it. I don't advocate pulling out a gun on anyone. Confronting someone with a good deal of force though I do advocate. IF there injured, tough luck. What I cant grasp is why burglars are somehow entitled to rights if there injured in the confrontation.
If this guy on life support dies, frankly, its his own fault. If the house owner is prosecuted, I'll be pissed! The owner didn't pull out a gun, he confronted a burglar breaking into his home, the burglar, startled, then fell. Does the home owner deserve prosecution? or was he supposed to let the guy climb through into the house safely before any confrontation ensued?
How about if the home owner had caught the burglar in the act, knocked him out with a punch and then grabbed the unconscious man and pushed him out of his window?
There are many things that could have happened. Until we know for certain the circumstances it is wrong to jump to conclusions and start complaining about the world going mad because there is a whole set of possible scenarios in which the home owner would deserve to be arrested and charged.
What a completely ridiculous thing to say. I'm sure you live in a cloud.
NOT shoot him in the back as he ran away.
No lad, but the way you talk...your automatically promoted to judge, jury and executioner. More than likely he's just a theiving cunt who deserves to be punished...but by death ? Murderers and rapists don't get death over here so to say burgulars deserve it..is a pisstake really.
Also think about this, what if the burgular was a 16 year old kid with mental issues, who had been put upto the burgulary. They deserve a bullet too ? Of course, the majority aren't and are just theiving cunts, but its not upto somebody to decide in a split second.
You didnt really answer the question. What would you do if you caught a thief breaking in, or walking out the front door with your belogings?
You could call the police. The chances are though, you wont be near a phone and lets be honest its going to take time for the police to arrive, and by the time they do he's down the market selling it on the cheap. Would you stop him? 'or' let him walk out the door? He's not going to stop if you ask him politely, so would you use force, enough to incapacitate him?
I would use enough force I felt necesary at the time to prevent him from continuing to rob me or fro endangering me. I wouldn't however, have any intention of coursing him serious damage or killing him.
Nor would I shoot him in the back if he was running away, yes, even if he was carrying my tv.
What if you had to cause him serious harm to stop him?
Not like it's going to be a tug of war with your tv and he's stronger so he's going to be slowly getting further away from your hosue.
What? :eek2:
If you are being or feel threatened then you can use force, even if this does lead to the other persons death. You will be assumed innocent (well as much as any suspect is in the court) and you will have time to explain your motives.
So, if some old lady whacks a burgler with a golf club and he falls down the stairs and dies no one is going to say a word, she was threatened and she acted reasonably.
But, if I wait for a burgler with an illegal gun (like Tony Martin) and then when I am not being threatened I shoot to kill then leave the person dying - thats not reasonable.
I fail to see anything wrong with the current system.
Exactly.
I suggest you read the thread mateyboy.
But if someone is in your house unwantedly (like nicking stuff and shit) then i think you have the right to defend your home and your family so maybe not kill them but shoot them in the leg or something
But shooting someone running away with a TV has nothing to do with with defending your home and your family.
You do have the right to use reasonable force, see my post above for an explanation, it really is quite straight forward and completely just.
no but it is defending your property
And has been stated time and again, you dont have the right to kill people who are stealing your property.
says who?
What do you mean 'says who'? Its the law, why do you think Tony Martin was arrested?
Whether you think it should be the law or not is another matter, but using unreasonable force (see my above post) is against the law and will be punished.
Why do you think we need the law to be changed?
How is the reasonable force law not protecting homeowners?
How much force would be considered too much, torture, rape? Or is absolutely anything alright if the person has crossed onto your property?
Have you read a single post on this thread?
Those of us who belong to the human race, which fortunately is almost everybody else, do.
Tough luck fella.
In the meantime try to work out on your sense of humanity and decency because it is lacking somehow.
If that gun is illegal (like Tony Martin who wasnt allowed a gun because the Police wouldnt give him a licence) then yes, it could well be considered unreasonable.
But like I stressed in my explanation of 'reasonable force' it depends on the level of threat you feel, the actual threat you face and the force you use. Stoving someones head in from behind with an axe is unlikely to be seen as reasonable, but threatening someone with a golf club or a walking stick and then hitting them with it if they approach is almost certain to be seen as reasonable. I'm presuming you understand the distiction being made here.
Like Tony Martin?
I honestly can't see how the law could allow more latitude...