And How Long Would He Have Got In This Country?

[youngmafbog]

I am talking about the victim, not the robber. We know the robber would be let out with a smack (Dont worry right-on brigade, I am talking about a metaphorical smack) on the wrist so he could sue the pants off the victim.

http://news.sky.com/story/1043864/armed-robbery-victim-reduces-suspect-to-tears

[jake-the-peg]

I think he'd have been fine under British law

The key phrase was "until he dropped the knife"

If he'd have continued to hit him after that it would be a very different story

- and rightly so.

[bazwillrun]

"If he'd have continued to hit him after that it would be a very different story "

certainly would have been a different story.....man drops knife, see worker drop bat , man goes to try and attack worker again....

all because worker didnt make sure he really was disabled !

[jake-the-peg]

You wouldn't get done for continuing to hold the bat either.

You're desperately trying to find some sort of "Bruce Willis" justification for murdering someone who tried to commit a robbery.

The law is quite clear and very sensible

You can use reasonable force

A bat against a knife is very reasonable

Beating someones brains out while they lie on the ground is murder - no matter who the victim is or what they've done

[bazwillrun]

The justification is very simple, the villain was not incapacitated so the worker had no idea what could have been done to him next.

if you dont put yourself first in a situation like this then you deserve all you get.
luckily this time the bloke was a complete sap and started crying.....next time though !...