| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
cokey
Advocate
Joined: 23 Apr 2004
Posts: 3343
|
 Posted: Mon Jul 14, 2014 7:25 pm Post subject: Killing burglars in Britain. ALL LEGAL!!!!!!!!!!!!! |
 |
|
Just so the Americans here should know: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uMy2GZrZ5_s
_________________
"Sex: breakfast of champions" - James Hunt |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Naib
Watchman
Joined: 21 May 2004
Posts: 5014
Location: Removed by Neddy
|
| Posted: Mon Jul 14, 2014 7:43 pm Post subject: |
|
|
umm old news?
_________________
The best argument against democracy is a five-minute conversation with the average voter
Great Britain is a republic, with a hereditary president, while the United States is a monarchy with an elective king |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Bones McCracker
Veteran
Joined: 14 Mar 2006
Posts: 1599
Location: U.S.A.
|
| Posted: Thu Jul 17, 2014 4:08 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| If this is so, then why does it never happen? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
cokey
Advocate
Joined: 23 Apr 2004
Posts: 3343
|
| Posted: Thu Jul 17, 2014 4:13 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Bones McCracker wrote: | | If this is so, then why does it never happen? |
Because most houses have good security
_________________
"Sex: breakfast of champions" - James Hunt |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Naib
Watchman
Joined: 21 May 2004
Posts: 5014
Location: Removed by Neddy
|
| Posted: Thu Jul 17, 2014 5:05 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Bones McCracker wrote: | | If this is so, then why does it never happen? |
because most robberies usually occur when ppl are out. Check stats on robberies and aggravated robberies - we split them
_________________
The best argument against democracy is a five-minute conversation with the average voter
Great Britain is a republic, with a hereditary president, while the United States is a monarchy with an elective king |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
pjp
Administrator
Joined: 16 Apr 2002
Posts: 16479
|
| Posted: Thu Jul 17, 2014 11:39 pm Post subject: Re: Killing burglars in Britain. ALL LEGAL!!!!!!!!!!!!! |
|
|
If it is as accurately simple has he explains within the first 3 minutes, then it seems more "lenient" than what I'm familiar with in the US.
_________________
42 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
cokey
Advocate
Joined: 23 Apr 2004
Posts: 3343
|
| Posted: Sat Jul 19, 2014 1:06 pm Post subject: Re: Killing burglars in Britain. ALL LEGAL!!!!!!!!!!!!! |
|
|
| pjp wrote: | | If it is as accurately simple has he explains within the first 3 minutes, then it seems more "lenient" than what I'm familiar with in the US. |
I thought it was interesting that you are not expected to make fine judgements in the heat of the moment which is good
_________________
"Sex: breakfast of champions" - James Hunt |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
flysideways
Apprentice
Joined: 29 Jan 2005
Posts: 151
|
| Posted: Sat Jul 19, 2014 3:01 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| How do we reconcile this video with the stories of Tony Martin's plight? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Naib
Watchman
Joined: 21 May 2004
Posts: 5014
Location: Removed by Neddy
|
| Posted: Sat Jul 19, 2014 3:10 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| flysideways wrote: | | How do we reconcile this video with the stories of Tony Martin's plight? |
because the right to defend your property with deadly force was up until that case a gray matter open to ... Whatever side had the stronger barristers.
A couple of years later after the 99case the home office clarified the situation. It was actually posted on this forum... That's why I am surprised some here are confused
Why was this the case? Because in the uk the law was 'reasonable force' and as such prosecution solicitors would argue what was done was above and beyond reasonable force.
_________________
The best argument against democracy is a five-minute conversation with the average voter
Great Britain is a republic, with a hereditary president, while the United States is a monarchy with an elective king |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
pjp
Administrator
Joined: 16 Apr 2002
Posts: 16479
|
| Posted: Sat Jul 19, 2014 3:44 pm Post subject: Re: Killing burglars in Britain. ALL LEGAL!!!!!!!!!!!!! |
|
|
| Butts McCokey wrote: | | I thought it was interesting that you are not expected to make fine judgements in the heat of the moment which is good |
Makes perfect sense and is more than reasonable. The part I thought was most interesting was his description of the 100yr old case with the judge telling the person to kill the intruder, even though the intruder didn't know of the homeowner's presence. I believe that would not be acceptable under the few cases I'm familiar. A significant part of those cases was whether or not the homeowner was in danger. One case was even in Texas, where we from the US would expect lenient laws on the subject.
_________________
42 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
flysideways
Apprentice
Joined: 29 Jan 2005
Posts: 151
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
John-Boy
Guru
Joined: 23 Jun 2004
Posts: 439
Location: Desperately seeking moksha in all the wrong places
|
| Posted: Sat Jul 19, 2014 5:49 pm Post subject: |
|
|
If anybody breaks into your home, all bets should be off.
Simple.
_________________
Like the Roman, I seem to see "the River Tiber foaming with much blood" |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Naib
Watchman
Joined: 21 May 2004
Posts: 5014
Location: Removed by Neddy
|
| Posted: Sat Jul 19, 2014 7:04 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Well they are not and that is why there isn't a some statement 'you can kill them'
Can you torture them and then kill them? Can you subject them to a cruel and unusual death?
Can you stab them or hit them or shoot them that results in their death? Again up to the courts. We have always had the right to defend our house
https://www.gov.uk/reasonable-force-against-intruders
_________________
The best argument against democracy is a five-minute conversation with the average voter
Great Britain is a republic, with a hereditary president, while the United States is a monarchy with an elective king |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
John-Boy
Guru
Joined: 23 Jun 2004
Posts: 439
Location: Desperately seeking moksha in all the wrong places
|
| Posted: Sat Jul 19, 2014 8:56 pm Post subject: |
|
|
The point is this, I'm not going to debate the odds when (and it did almost happen a few weeks back) /if somebody breaks into my home.
I'll grab something heavy and mostly blunt and ask questions later. It would be better if I could avail myself of a firearm - tends to be a better leveller than relying AD&D style on a hand to hand die roll.
_________________
Like the Roman, I seem to see "the River Tiber foaming with much blood" |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
flysideways
Apprentice
Joined: 29 Jan 2005
Posts: 151
|
| Posted: Sat Jul 19, 2014 9:38 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| If you require the mercy of the Court, it is not a right but a privilege subject to the fiat of your rulers. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
pjp
Administrator
Joined: 16 Apr 2002
Posts: 16479
|
| Posted: Sun Jul 20, 2014 5:00 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Naib wrote: | | Well they are not and that is why there isn't a some statement 'you can kill them' |
Then the guy in coke's video is wrong and then so is the claim of the thread title.
_________________
42 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Naib
Watchman
Joined: 21 May 2004
Posts: 5014
Location: Removed by Neddy
|
| Posted: Sun Jul 20, 2014 8:34 am Post subject: |
|
|
| pjp wrote: | | Naib wrote: | | Well they are not and that is why there isn't a some statement 'you can kill them' |
Then the guy in coke's video is wrong and then so is the claim of the thread title. |
Because you watched as a yank 'why shouldn't I kill them' as oppose to as a Brit 'what if I kill them'
_________________
The best argument against democracy is a five-minute conversation with the average voter
Great Britain is a republic, with a hereditary president, while the United States is a monarchy with an elective king |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
flysideways
Apprentice
Joined: 29 Jan 2005
Posts: 151
|
| Posted: Sun Jul 20, 2014 11:50 am Post subject: |
|
|
Naib, that video clearly contradicts the CPS guidance.
| Quote: | | This only applies if you were acting in self-defence or to protect others in your home and the force you used was disproportionate – disproportionate force to protect property is still unlawful. |
Advice to shoot someone in the back, unannounced, with no threat made or yet implied ... Good luck. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Naib
Watchman
Joined: 21 May 2004
Posts: 5014
Location: Removed by Neddy
|
| Posted: Sun Jul 20, 2014 1:45 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| flysideways wrote: | Naib, that video clearly contradicts the CPS guidance.
| Quote: | | This only applies if you were acting in self-defence or to protect others in your home and the force you used was disproportionate – disproportionate force to protect property is still unlawful. |
Advice to shoot someone in the back, unannounced, with no threat made or yet implied ... Good luck. |
I'm not the one backing the vid
_________________
The best argument against democracy is a five-minute conversation with the average voter
Great Britain is a republic, with a hereditary president, while the United States is a monarchy with an elective king |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
flysideways
Apprentice
Joined: 29 Jan 2005
Posts: 151
|
| Posted: Sun Jul 20, 2014 3:41 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Naib wrote: | | flysideways wrote: | Naib, that video clearly contradicts the CPS guidance.
| Quote: | | This only applies if you were acting in self-defence or to protect others in your home and the force you used was disproportionate – disproportionate force to protect property is still unlawful. |
Advice to shoot someone in the back, unannounced, with no threat made or yet implied ... Good luck. |
I'm not the one backing the vid |
Understood. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Naib
Watchman
Joined: 21 May 2004
Posts: 5014
Location: Removed by Neddy
|
| Posted: Sun Jul 20, 2014 4:37 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| flysideways wrote: | | Naib wrote: | | flysideways wrote: | Naib, that video clearly contradicts the CPS guidance.
| Quote: | | This only applies if you were acting in self-defence or to protect others in your home and the force you used was disproportionate – disproportionate force to protect property is still unlawful. |
Advice to shoot someone in the back, unannounced, with no threat made or yet implied ... Good luck. |
I'm not the one backing the vid |
Understood. |
you sure? the vid may not be 100% legally accurate (which in itself is dangerous) BUT to the average brit it does clarify things.
"Englishmans home is his castle" ... "until someone invades and I cannot do anything because if I touch him I go to prison".
THIS is what is constantly being portrayed in the media over a very, very, very long time and that is equally not 100% legally accurate. Brits have always been allowed to defend their property with force that could result in death BUT the legal system has resulted in a stack of cases providing citation for case law providing enough caselaw backing to complicate things... "your honour the victim did not deserve to be hit over the head 5 times, 4 was enough... there is no evidence to state he was going to rape the victims of the house [oh his past criminal activity showing that is what he does is not the point]".
At the end of the day it is the CPS that takes an individual to court and they were instructed a few years ago to clarify that reasonable force to defend your property can still legally include legal manslaughter ESPECIALLY since "reasonable force" is such a subjective term and there were enough high profile cases to bring enough doubt to the minds of the british public that they cannot do anything.
_________________
The best argument against democracy is a five-minute conversation with the average voter
Great Britain is a republic, with a hereditary president, while the United States is a monarchy with an elective king |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
pjp
Administrator
Joined: 16 Apr 2002
Posts: 16479
|
| Posted: Sun Jul 20, 2014 10:35 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Naib wrote: | | pjp wrote: | | Naib wrote: | | Well they are not and that is why there isn't a some statement 'you can kill them' |
Then the guy in coke's video is wrong and then so is the claim of the thread title. |
Because you watched as a yank 'why shouldn't I kill them' as oppose to as a Brit 'what if I kill them' |
The who is irrelevant to the outcome, which is the dead intruder at the judge's recommendation. Granted that was 100 years ago, but the current person is using that as demonstration of why it remains OK today.
_________________
42 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
Off the Wall
