Page may contain affiliate links. Please see terms for details.
I'm confused...

Ch Supt Tim Forber, said: "Clearly this is a serious incident in which a man has lost his life and at this time we believe the dead man was one of two men who were attempting to carry out a burglary at the house."
 
As ever, it depends on the circumstances. If the householder chased the robber along the street, caught and stabbed him, then he's rightly charged with murder. He's not defending himself or his property is such a case, he's punishing the robber. If he keeps a carving knife on his bedside table for just such an eventuality, the law considers that premeditation and also brings murder charges. If you're in the kitchen and grab a knife from the drawer as you discover the intruder, that's self defence.
 
Arresting someone on suspicion of committing an offence is not the same as charging them... apparently it is standard procedure for Police to arrest the suspected killer on suspicion of murder, even in cases of self defence.

At any rate, that's what they said in the case of the shopkeeper that stabbed a robber to death with the robber's own knife following a struggle - they initially arrested the shopkeeper on suspicion of murder but later released him without charge.

And, as others said, it is a different story if he chased the burglar on the street - there was the case of the man who was held with his family tied-up and at knife point for several hours by robbers, and then him and a relative ran after the robbers down the street and attacked one of them with a brick, causing him permanent brain damage - both the homeowner and the relative were sent to prison. But this is very different.
 
Arresting someone on suspicion of committing an offence is not the same as charging them... apparently it is standard procedure for Police to arrest the suspected killer on suspicion of murder, even in cases of self defence.

Wasn't meaning to prejudge the outcome, hence the "if" in my post.

However, the premise of the original post seemed to be that killing intruders would save the taxpayer £40,000 a year - a view that I felt compelled to challenge.
 
Ultimately... it is down to 'use of reasonable force'.

We do not always agree as to what constitutes reasonable force, but at both extremes it is actually easier to agree on - on one hand, blocking the exit of an unarmed intruder then stabbing him to death is not reasonable force, while on the other stabbing an intruder with his own knife after he attempts to stab the homeowner, is.

Tony Martin, incidentally, was sent to prison because he shot at the buglers while they were trying to escape.

Tony Martin (farmer) - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 
If you break into someone's home you deserve all you get.

Root cause etc.

I'd hang burglars - it's such an intrusion that lives with the victims for years.

Minor crime my ar*e :devil:
 
I wonder what was in the Transco Express Logistics Ltd [ Manchester and Heathrow] transit van parked in the drive ? Transco Express Logistics Ltd Maybe this was one instance where "taking your work home" was not a good idea?:dk:
 
Or maybe it was the Maserati and Range Rover Sport on the driveway that enticed the burglars ?
 
Who knows the true reason for the "break in". May be a burglary ? May be other reasons ? Best not to speculate until all the facts are noted.
 
Indeed... if it was legal to shoot trespassers, one could invite a person over and then shoot them, claiming they were uninvited visitors... just like ye old 'shot while trying to escape' ploy.
 
Indeed... if it was legal to shoot trespassers, one could invite a person over and then shoot them, claiming they were uninvited visitors... just like ye old 'shot while trying to escape' ploy.

Nothing wrong with that...will teach people that there's no such thing as a free lunch :p

Being (slightly) more serious, what constitutes reasonable force when you don't know how armed the burglars are?

I do a lot of bushcraft, so have a machete hanging on the wall in my room (along with a survival knife and a compound bow)... should I spear a theoretical burglar, and it turns out he's unarmed...

Does his "supposedly armed status" before I shot count, or the fact that I then found the bleeding moron on my bedroom floor not to be armed?

M
 
Shoot the burglar with the bow and arrow then put the machete in his still warm hand ;)
 
Nothing wrong with that...will teach people that there's no such thing as a free lunch :p

Being (slightly) more serious, what constitutes reasonable force when you don't know how armed the burglars are?

I do a lot of bushcraft, so have a machete hanging on the wall in my room (along with a survival knife and a compound bow)... should I spear a theoretical burglar, and it turns out he's unarmed...

Does his "supposedly armed status" before I shot count, or the fact that I then found the bleeding moron on my bedroom floor not to be armed?

M

This is a very valid point. But you seem to agree in principal that 'reasonable force' should be used, and the discussion is about how much of it is reasonable (incidentally, with all due respect to your machetes and other weapons
biggrin.gif
, your everyday kitchen knife will inflict a similarly-fatal wound).

The 'trespassers will be shot' or 'hang them high' brigade, on the other hand, seem to be arguing that punitive action should be permitted, i.e. using more force than is needed to prevent you or your family from coming to harm. This is also a valid argument - but in a different separate discussion...
 
The fact of the matter is this; if someone is creeping about your abode and you've got any sort of weapon about you, then there's a good chance that you'll use it if you've got anything about you.

I can only speak of the community that I live in/know, but the chance of a 5 year stretch would be the least of your worries if you're going to try and burgle anywhere near me. Where I was born and brought up there is still a sense of vigilism....
 
Sweetpea..

there are three options:

'reasonable preventative' action
'unreasonable preventative' action
'punitive' action

The first is permitted, the other two are not.

The problem is usually in differentiating between the first and the second.
 
Sweetpea..

there are three options:

'reasonable preventative' action
'unreasonable preventative' action
'punitive' action

The first is permitted, the other two are not.

The problem is usually in differentiating between the first and the second.

I ain't going to take a chance.

I'd rather be alive in prison then dead....
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top Bottom