 |
|
David Floyd
|
|
The bottom of a large bottle of beer
Jan 1970 time: 05:17
|
|
quote: A law like you want would make it legal to a bullet in the brain of a burglar you've already apprehended. Call me overly concerned with the human rights of criminals, but that's just not going to happen. |
What would one be doing "apprehending" burglars?
"Excuse me sir, but you're under arrest!"
If you do that, the burglar will either a)run away, or b)attack you. You have no guarantee that b) won't happen, so your best bet is not to try to act like a police officer, and instead use force in defense of yourself/your home.
|
|
|  |
 |
|
David Floyd
|
|
The bottom of a large bottle of beer
Jan 1970 time: 05:17
|
|
Gibsie,
quote: God, you're thick, aren't you? Get those neurons firing, and do your best to imagine a situation where a homeowner has stopped a burglar but not killed them. Go on, you can do it. |
I certainly can imagine such a scenario, but any conceivable scenario would expose you to more danger. If you just shoot, you handle the problem while minimizing the danger to yourself. I'm not worried about the burglar, because he wouldn't be in such a position (lying on the floor bleeding, that is) if he hadn't broken in to begin with.
Laz,
quote: Burglaries get carried out by children as young as 8 years old. If someone discovers an 8 year-old child in their house, and beats their brains out with a hammer, do you think they should automatically escape prosecution? |
I think there is a difference between shooting a burglar and beating someone to death who is already incapacitated. That is, if you hit a burglar in the head with a baseball bat, and knock him out/disarm him, etc., then you have removed any conceivable danger, and repeatedly hitting him in the head while he's unconscious is unnecessary.
Whoha,
quote: Quit coming up with extraneous theories to explain why people shouldn't defend themselves |
Might as well ask a fish not to swim - that's all they've been doing for the past 8 pages, coming up with either outlandish scenarios or pointing out obvious exceptions that do nothing to address the main point.
|
|
|  |
 |
|
David Floyd
|
|
The bottom of a large bottle of beer
Jan 1970 time: 05:17
|
|
quote: There you go. Whoha agrees with the concept of test of reasonability too. Any other Americans up for it? |
Obviously I already agreed with you - at this point, the debate is about what is reasonable, so let me ask you a yes/no question: If a burglar breaks into my house, should I be able to shoot him, on the basis that reasonable people will agree that someone who breaks into your house poses an immediate threat to you?
|
|
|  |
 |
|
child of Thor
|
|
well even the 8 year old kids carry guns these days(well some do) 
But i get your point - but as i was saying, i dont think freeing up the homeowner from prosecution would result in a rash of burgler killings, i dont think most british people are wired that way - we are not even close to a florida.
When you confront a burgler many things go through your mind. How big is the guy, how armed, how competant/dangerous?
If he was a gun toting 8 year old i would naturaly be more proportionate/carefull than if he was a fully grown adult. hell i dont want to wake up in a cold sweat 15 years later, still suffering nightmares cause i beat a child to death.
So it goes both ways - fighting hard and(accidently)killing someone isn't an easy option. But in the heat of the momment when you and your family are being threatend by a potentaily lethal intruder, i feel the actions you take to protect yourself in your own home should be covered by a law that is on your side.
The case of the burgler sueing for his broken back is a case in point(although i think in that one it was thrown out of court?). Why go to the vast expense in money and time of having these things have a chance of going to court?
Why not just send out a message to the criminals in our society that we will not tolorate their behaviour anymore?
If you choose an illegal profession then prepare to live outside the legal protection that society can offer.
Live by the sword, die by the sword?
A strong message from government on this will have a beneficial effect, especialy in area's where the criminals have been making people lives misery for far too long.
Sadly i dont think a strong enough change in the law will be passed, and we will have this discussion again in a few years, after more innocent people have lost their lives in their own homes 
|
|
|  |
All times are GMT. The time now is 05:17. Apolyton Time is 00:17. |
top of page
|
| archivepost |
|
Forum Rules:
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
|
HTML code is ON
vB code is ON
Smilies are ON
[IMG] code is ON
|
|
|
|
|
|