Ninehigh
|
| posted on 21/1/10 at 12:04 AM |
|
|
Yeah that's the problem there's no definition of "reasonable"
|
|
|
|
|
Simon
|
| posted on 21/1/10 at 12:10 AM |
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Andi
Its all about the very very grey area of "reasonable force"
In a nutshell, reasonable force is to use a lesser force than the perpetrator if you are being attacked.
If they are scarpering then your too late.
Yes, the grey area needs to be black and white, get caught breaking and entering , face the consequences.
Re the scarpering, I've heard that if you do a runner in the states and the victim is quick/strong enough, they'll drag you back to their
house, then shoot you
ATB
Simon
|
|
|
clairetoo
|
| posted on 21/1/10 at 12:32 AM |
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Ninehigh
Yeah that's the problem there's no definition of "reasonable"
I'd define reasonable as killing the burgler and burying the body in the woods ..............since no one knows where he is or what he is up to
when he's out committing these crimes , he would simply disappear .
Its cuz I is blond , innit
Claire xx
Will weld for food......
|
|
|
morcus
|
| posted on 21/1/10 at 03:45 AM |
|
|
Sorry to be picky but he should be hanged, not hung.
IMO, beating someone to death after they've threatened you and your family at knife point when you know they won't be adequatly punished
by the legal system is a perfectly reasonably reaction. I don't think its a good thing to do, but I think most people would do the same in the
same situation. Almost everytime something like this the supposed 'victim' is a career criminal who's never worked an honest job.
Like the whole Tony Martin thing where the 'victims' were career criminals who'd robbed him before.
It always seems to be that career criminals, who's legal representation is payed for with our taxes, win in these sorts of things, If they let
us sort it out ourselves the savings would be huge. (Just imagine how much money it must cost to hold a trial).
In a White Room, With Black Curtains, By the Station.
|
|
|
dan8400
|
| posted on 21/1/10 at 07:21 AM |
|
|
It is easy to get caught up in the whole "reasonable force" issue and whether or not you can batter someone in the street..... fact is,
if the guy wasn't robbing he wouldn't have been beaten up
karma anyone...????
Dan
|
|
|
scudderfish
|
| posted on 21/1/10 at 11:08 AM |
|
|
"reasonable" is left at that so that a jury of your peers can decide if it was reasonable or not. They chose not.
|
|
|
nick205
|
| posted on 21/1/10 at 11:58 AM |
|
|
The intruder gave up his rights the moment he stepped onto Hussain's property univinted, unwanted and with harmful intent. To then threaten and
imprison a family can only strengthen that argument.
IMHO Hussain acted in the moment with more than just cause. I don't believe he should be applauded, but rather left to continue his life in
peace - I suspect the emotional strain on him and his family will live with them forever more!
Would I do the same...?
I'd like to think I would, but knowing myself I suspect I would have been relieved the intruder was out of the house and stayed with my family
to ensure their safety.
I also suspect I would then have had to deal with untold anger and self-doubt when the intruder was either not caught or caught and given a smack
bottom by the courts.
|
|
|
scootz
|
| posted on 21/1/10 at 07:25 PM |
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Rek
The whole system is biased towards the professional offender who knows how to play the system. The average law abiding Joe doesnt stand a chance. for
an example see the recent warning Myleene Class (might not have spelled the name right!) got for being inside her house and shouting that she had a
knife.....
"Hertfordshire police warned her she should not have used a knife to scare off the youths because carrying an "offensive weapon",
even in her own home, was illegal"
Don't know about England, but in Scotland a knife is not an Offensive Weapon in your own home. Just the same as a baseball-bat behind the front
door with a nail in it... perfectly okay if it stays there!
Take either outside without reasonable excuse... it becomes an offensive weapon!
As for the Myleene Klasse story ... my advise to anyone in that situation is to only arm yourself with a weapon if you KNOW you have the ability
(physically AND mentally) to follow through. Most decent folk don't, but it's more than likely that chummy is quite prepared to take it
off you and use it against you!
It's Evolution Baby!
|
|
|
scootz
|
| posted on 21/1/10 at 07:33 PM |
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by nick205
IMHO Hussain acted in the moment...
That's the problem - by legal definition the moment had gone and unfortunately due to our ridiculously rigid legal-system that's all that
matters!
It's Evolution Baby!
|
|
|
scootz
|
| posted on 21/1/10 at 07:41 PM |
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Andi
In a nutshell, reasonable force is to use a lesser force than the perpetrator if you are being attacked.
That's not right... it depends entirely on the situation. It's generally accepted that it's the just the right amount of force to
defend yourself, your property, or others.
For instance (and again I can only speak for Scotland), Scot's Law even provides for using deadly-force in certain circumstances. The first
example that comes to mind is rape... in Scotland a woman who is being ravished with intent to rape can legally kill her attacker to PREVENT
the act taking place. Of course, she will have to satisfy the court that her version of events is true.
It's Evolution Baby!
|
|
|
Ninehigh
|
| posted on 24/1/10 at 07:39 AM |
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by scudderfish
"reasonable" is left at that so that a jury of your peers can decide if it was reasonable or not. They chose not.
I want everyone who agreed with me here on my jury, I've seen the acts of my so-called "peers" and I don't want people like
that to be likened as equal to me
|
|
|
