27-07-2003 15:46									#31
	Support Apolyton

I know. Hence most of the difference in attitude, I know which I prefer.

	27-07-2003 16:02									#32
	Remove this text

quote: Originally posted by MikeH We're smart enough to know the difference between reasonable and unreasonable force. Chances of a petty burglar having a gun are so tiny it's barely measurable.

Maybe in your country...

	27-07-2003 16:03									#33
	Tired of ads?

We're talking about my country.

	27-07-2003 16:04									#34
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization: The Boardgame

Yes, MikeH's country.

	27-07-2003 16:08									#35
	Inflate your Upload Space

Do a burglary, very low police response, tiny chance of getting caught.

Commit a crime with a firearm, massive police response, much more chance of getting caught, much higher penalties.

	27-07-2003 16:11									#36
	Enter the AD-FREE zone

quote: Do a burglary, very low police response, tiny chance of getting caught.

for the statement, for our lack of a decent law-enforcement power.

	27-07-2003 16:12									#37
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

I know Mike. I simply was saying what I would do. In any event a home owner should have the right to defend himself and his property without some arm chair magistrate dictating what he should or shouldn't have done. How do you know the intruder isn't armed? You see one but do you know if there's more? Is your life in danger? Can you be sure it's not? Is it worth risking your life on an "I think so" anwser?

With all of these variables is it reasonable for a man who's home has been envaded to fear for his life? I'd say so. Also the invader should have no rights to sue; that is one good tort reform we've gotten through lately in California. If you are commiting a violent felony against a property owner or tenent and you are injured while commiting this felony you don't get to sue anybody for any thing. I really like that law because it protects the victim against being victimized again by the same criminal.

	27-07-2003 16:15									#38
	Support Apolyton

If I ever decide to take up a life of crime, I think I'll head to Britain. Sounds like a consequence-free environment.

	27-07-2003 16:34									#39
	Lose 30 kilos (of popups)

Wow, I actually agree with a Bodds post. Our police force isn't big enough to combat every crime out there, but whos is?

	27-07-2003 16:38									#40
	Inflate your Upload Space

quote: Wow, I actually agree with a Bodds post. Our police force isn't big enough to combat every crime out there, but whos is?

It should be big enough to pose a reasonable risk that the criminal will be caught.

Ignore poverty excuses..inequality ramblings.. the real cause of crime is the lack of risk of being caught - something that has fallen and fallen as we have become weaker on crime, weaker on the causes of it.

	27-07-2003 16:39									#41
	Enter the AD-FREE zone

quote: Originally posted by Oerdin I know Mike. I simply was saying what I would do. In any event a home owner should have the right to defend himself and his property without some arm chair magistrate dictating what he should or shouldn't have done. How do you know the intruder isn't armed? You see one but do you know if there's more? Is your life in danger? Can you be sure it's not? Is it worth risking your life on an "I think so" anwser?

Someone (one of the Americans) once posted a thing here about how much more likely you were to get killed if you confronted your burglar with a weapon (based on US stats). You discover a burglar they are most likely to run, if they think you are going to shoot them in the back when they run, what's the point? Their best option is to fight.

quote: Originally posted by Oerdin With all of these variables is it reasonable for a man who's home has been envaded to fear for his life? I'd say so.

Not here really. Well, my reaction would be "don't take my stuff!" not, "they are going to kill me", that second probably wouldn't cross my mind.

quote: Originally posted by Oerdin Also the invader should have no rights to sue; that is one good tort reform we've gotten through lately in California. If you are commiting a violent felony against a property owner or tenent and you are injured while commiting this felony you don't get to sue anybody for any thing. I really like that law because it protects the victim against being victimized again by the same criminal.

I don't disagree with that...

	27-07-2003 16:41									#42
	Remove this text

quote: Someone (one of the Americans) once posted a thing here about how much more likely you were to get killed if you confronted your burglar with a weapon (based on US stats). You discover a burglar they are most likely to run, if they think you are going to shoot them in the back when they run, what's the point? Their best option is to fight.

You're ignoring that the threat of an armed household will likely reduce - other things equal - the likelihood and regularity of burglary.

	27-07-2003 16:43									#43
	Avatar Enlargement: We've got the solution

quote: Originally posted by Boddington's It should be big enough to pose a reasonable risk that the criminal will be caught. Ignore poverty excuses..inequality ramblings.. the real cause of crime is the lack of risk of being caught - something that has fallen and fallen as we have become weaker on crime, weaker on the causes of it.

That is true, people do commit less crimes if they are more likely to get caught. People aren't willing to pay for it though. They also won't stand for the restrictions to our personal freedoms that it would require.

Govenment announces tax rises, they lose voters. Plans to re-route money from elsewhere, voters (quite rightly) don't believe them.

	27-07-2003 16:51									#44
	Put an end to popups!

Make the NHS private and that would free up a lot of money.

Those who fund the NHS tend to pay twice for medical treatment - that isn't right.

	27-07-2003 16:54									#45
	Support Apolyton or Terrorists Win

Normal good working people not being able to afford healthcare isn't right.

	27-07-2003 16:58									#46
	Full PM-box? Change here!

quote: Normal good working people not being able to afford healthcare isn't right.

Neither is having normal good working people forced to shoot burglars because the police can't protect them.

	27-07-2003 17:02									#47
	Browse Apolyton AD-FREE

..and then jailed for doing it.

	27-07-2003 17:05									#48
	Support Apolyton or Terrorists Win

Forced to shoot a 16 year old kid in the back from 4 feet with a shotgun? I agreed that the police need to do more about this kind of thing. Thames Valley Police, where I live, have a new focus on this kind of crime. Helps having stopped officers working against cannabis users/dealing. So now they are trying to build up cases against people so they can prosecute them. Burglary is a tough crime to track if the criminal is sensible enough to wear gloves.

BTW Martin'd already had his gun/licence removed for previous 'innappropriate use' so his shotgun was also an illegal firearm.

	27-07-2003 18:32									#49
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization 2

quote: Originally posted by Imran Siddiqui If the burgler sees you with a gun and is running away, you shouldn't be able to shoot him.

That depends on how good a shot you are.

quote: Now, if he's running away with something he stole from you, I'm not sure what I'd say in that case. I guess he should be able to shoot to incapacitate him (like in the leg or something), but not to kill.

How do you define intent in a case like that?

	27-07-2003 19:15									#50
	Lose 30 kilos (of popups)

I guess the thing is, WHEN IN YOUR OWN HOME, that if your shooting or stabbing an intruder, then because it is your private property, it becomes a case of the theif merely being in the way of your bullets or knife. I'm not aware of any law that prevents me discharging a firearm or slashing a knife in my own home. It is the burglers fault for being there in the first place. Obviously, there is a common sense limit to that, which Martin breached imo.

	27-07-2003 21:13									#51
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization 2

quote: Originally posted by elijah I guess the thing is, WHEN IN YOUR OWN HOME, that if your shooting or stabbing an intruder, then because it is your private property, it becomes a case of the theif merely being in the way of your bullets or knife. I'm not aware of any law that prevents me discharging a firearm or slashing a knife in my own home.

Where discharging a firearm is concerned, there are several laws that could be invoked. Not with the knife, however.

You'd still be ****ged under the law if you killed someone- you'd be causing GBH whilsts intending to do so or reckless to the fact that it might happen. That'll do to bring murder charges.

	27-07-2003 21:14									#52
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization: The Boardgame

By that rationale there should be no penalty for killing your wife/children/friends/the Jehovah's witness you just let in in your own home then.

	27-07-2003 21:44									#53
	Support Apolyton or Terrorists Win

Doesn't work if you invited them in. Don't you watch the Simpons?!

	27-07-2003 21:49									#54
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization 2

A yes, the ultimate guide to British law.

	27-07-2003 21:59									#55
	Increase the size of your Attachments

he shouldn't be convicted of murder, but unless your life or someone else's life is being directly threatened its not right to use deadly force, he could have just shot him in the leg or just shot somewhere else to scare the **** out of him

i'm not sure if he deserves jailtime, but definitely probation, fines and he should lose his rights to own a gun

	27-07-2003 22:01									#56
	Put an end to popups!

He had already lost his gun rights.

Just out of interest, what kind of punishments do you get in the US for posession of an illegal weapon?

	27-07-2003 22:04									#57
	Support Apolyton, pre-order Civilization IV

well if he shouldn't have had the gun in the first place, lock him up and throw away the key

	27-07-2003 22:08									#58
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization: The Boardgame

Mike, I'm an American, and I think he should have been charged for murder . If the guy is running away then killing him is not reasonable force. You can only use deadly force if you are concerned for your own life... shooting a guy in the back running away from your house doesn't fall under that definition.

	27-07-2003 22:13									#59
	Full PM-box? Change here!

Yeah, that's basically what I think.

	27-07-2003 22:17									#60
	Support Apolyton, buy Galactic Civilizations

quote: Originally posted by MikeH A yes, the ultimate guide to British law.

Not law, but morality, which is international, man.