ChatterBank0 min ago
Should Householders Be Allowed To Tackle Burglars By Using Force
83 Answers
What do people feel about this. I am in agreement that people should have the right to defend their property.
http://
http://
Answers
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by gordiescotland1. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
Anyone caught on my property who has the express purpose of stealing the things I've worked and paid for would be beaten to within an inch of their life, gaffer taped and placed in the boot of my car, after which they'd be transported to the top of the nearest mountain and dumped.
I say this because the vast majority of local bobbies say they'd do exactly the same.
I say this because the vast majority of local bobbies say they'd do exactly the same.
One thing we should all understand is that the law as it stands is NOT some sort of protection for criminals.
The danger with using force against burglars is that you enter their world of violence and, in their eyes, you become fair game for reprisals. The idea of “I showed ‘em” seems right in principle, but there’s every chance they – or their associates – will in turn “show you” (and other members of your household) far worse.
The danger with using force against burglars is that you enter their world of violence and, in their eyes, you become fair game for reprisals. The idea of “I showed ‘em” seems right in principle, but there’s every chance they – or their associates – will in turn “show you” (and other members of your household) far worse.
-- answer removed --
The idea of “I showed ‘em” seems right in principle, but there’s every chance they – or their associates – will in turn “show you” (and other members of your household) far worse.
-----------------------
I'll take that chance, as they took the same chance whilst entering my property illegally. Who's to say they don't have that mindset as they break and enter anyway?
-----------------------
I'll take that chance, as they took the same chance whilst entering my property illegally. Who's to say they don't have that mindset as they break and enter anyway?
mikey,
In the scenario I described in my first post it wouldn't even get to a Court of Law.
You leave the scrote on the mountain, then return home and remove all traces of him having been there, all weapons for home use (baseball bat etc) and any trace of gaffer tape.
IF said scrote does decide to involve the law because of his broken leg, one denies all knowledge when the bobby arrives and acts dumb.
"Sorry officer, I have no idea how Billy Burglar came by his injuries, he must have picked on the wrong household, still, must be an occupational hazard for an habitual thief, eh?"
That's how most Police Officers in the canteen said they'd deal with it!
In the scenario I described in my first post it wouldn't even get to a Court of Law.
You leave the scrote on the mountain, then return home and remove all traces of him having been there, all weapons for home use (baseball bat etc) and any trace of gaffer tape.
IF said scrote does decide to involve the law because of his broken leg, one denies all knowledge when the bobby arrives and acts dumb.
"Sorry officer, I have no idea how Billy Burglar came by his injuries, he must have picked on the wrong household, still, must be an occupational hazard for an habitual thief, eh?"
That's how most Police Officers in the canteen said they'd deal with it!
Let’s start with basics. In the first 5 comments we have:
I'd break the b*stards legs
I would certainly 'have a go' at anyone
Would be beaten to within an inch of their life
They go out with something broken
So the idea is that we should be allowed to use ‘reasonable force’. OK, let’s imagine we can. Discovering an intruder in the house would be a terrifying experience for many people and, quietly rightly, we would also be very angry. At this point – knowing we are allowed to use force – do we take a few moments to consider exactly what the law will allow us to do? Can we be that rational? Our intruder also knows we can use force and is very likely to be tooled up for that eventuality.
Surely you can see where this is going. The boundary between acceptable/unacceptable force simply doesn’t exist in this heightened state of fear and anger, and those four comments above illustrate that such a boundary would be largely ignored anyway.
Your intruder would be very aware of that.
The law isn't protecting him - it's designed to protect YOU.
I'd break the b*stards legs
I would certainly 'have a go' at anyone
Would be beaten to within an inch of their life
They go out with something broken
So the idea is that we should be allowed to use ‘reasonable force’. OK, let’s imagine we can. Discovering an intruder in the house would be a terrifying experience for many people and, quietly rightly, we would also be very angry. At this point – knowing we are allowed to use force – do we take a few moments to consider exactly what the law will allow us to do? Can we be that rational? Our intruder also knows we can use force and is very likely to be tooled up for that eventuality.
Surely you can see where this is going. The boundary between acceptable/unacceptable force simply doesn’t exist in this heightened state of fear and anger, and those four comments above illustrate that such a boundary would be largely ignored anyway.
Your intruder would be very aware of that.
The law isn't protecting him - it's designed to protect YOU.
Related Questions
Sorry, we can't find any related questions. Try using the search bar at the top of the page to search for some keywords, or choose a topic and submit your own question.