Right decision?

[R1Geezer]

http://news.bbc.co.uk...ghamshire/8629395.stm

[anotheoldgit]

Geezer

I notice you have put a question mark after your headline.

By that I can only presume you are doubtful about the verdict.

See my post, "What is the difference"?

[jake-the-peg]

Difficult to tell from this information but it sounds so.

At least in this case he wasn't chased down the street, rugby tackled and beaten senseless with a cricket bat by the bloke's brother

(that's real self-defense)

[R1Geezer]

My view is well known on this matter AOG, I was wondering what others thought

[jake-the-peg]

And AOG you got an answer in the first post

Tony Martin shot the bloke in the back as he was running away

You still seem unable to tell the difference between self-defence and a Lynch mob

Incidently Martin's shotgun was a pump action one which we all know have been illegal since Hungerford and he was subsequently arrested for theft of numberplates.


But you still seem intent on considering him a hero - so don't let us dissuade you from lionising criminals

[anotheoldgit]

/// But you still seem intent on considering him a hero - so don't let us dissuade you from lionising criminals ////

I along with thousands of others.

All I am asking is a level playing field, if one is sent down so should the other.

[R1Geezer]

jake and co you always go on about shot in the back yada yada, you always conveniently forget it was dark and that martin had been plagued by burglaries for years with plod doing nothing. Personally I think one less peice of theiving scum is a result.

[jake-the-peg]

OK Geezer lets get your opinion here where do you personally draw the line

Should I be permitted to tie up a burglar and torture him to death

Should I be permitted to find out where he lives go around the next day and cut his throat in front of his familly

If one happens to be a teenage girl - should I be permitted to tie her up and rape her?

Where do you draw the line yourself between what is "self defense" and what is vengence

[Davethedog]

There is a clear difference between this case and Martin.

Martin shot the guy outside his home, the fact that it was dark and that he had not indended to kill was a reason why the crime was downgraded to Manslaughter from murder.

In this case the "witness" at first stated that he had been purseued so they were charging the guy but it now turns out he was lying as he was the only witness, and he has totaly discredited himself and the death was inside the house the assertion of self defence is unchallengable..

There are clear differences.

[sp1814]

AOG

The reason R1Geezer put a question mark after the words 'Right decision' is because he is framing it as a question, to which people may or may not give answers

Hence, 'Answer'bank.

[R1Geezer]

Jake you always go off on this hysterical what if tangent. Clearly those things are out of order. I'm not saying that anything goes I'm saying that if I find a burglar in my house and brain him with a cricket bat and he ends up dead then there is no way I should be prosecuted.

[sp1814]

"I'm saying that if I find a burglar in my house and brain him with a cricket bat and he ends up dead then there is no way I should be prosecuted."

Hmmm...dodgy.

If you came home to find some drugged up burglar carrying a machete, and you picked up a cricket bat and swung at it him and he lunged at you, killng him. You could argue justifiable homicide.

If however, you came home and saw someone breaking into your toolshed, then quietly went into your house, picked up a cricket bat, crept outside and smashed him over the head from behind, then it's jail for you I'm afraid.

[tamborine]

Nottingham have a killer on their streets.

[saxy_jag]

I'm sorry, but as much as we have rights and protection according the law, we forfeit those rights if we choose to disobey the law, even if it's a law we don't like. It's a bit like religion - we can't pick and choose which bits we like.

I had a break in last June. All my cameras and my laptop - containing a good proportion of my photostock - were stolen. I have no idea whether my dog attacked them or not, but I hope she did. The investigating officer agreed with me. I got the distinct impression that if the burglars had ever tried to sue for my dog injuring them, they wouldn't have got much support from the law.

[sandyRoe]

This killer was coloured and Tony Martin was white. How their juries could find this one innocent and Martin guilty is beyond me.
The whole world is in a state of chassis.

[brionon]

Break into my house and I'll sit you down and ask ''Is it to Rape and Murder or just to steal?'' then I'll make my decision -to kill you !

[flip_flop]

Yes, of course it is the right decision.

I know its a very simple argument which people will, no doubt, try and shoot down in flames, but I'm a firm believer in the obvious premise that if you aren't commtting a burglary, you can't get injured should you be discovered.

Should you be discovered, and you are injured, well tough - you've left all of your rights at the front door when you decided to enter uninvited with a view to helping yourself to goods you have no right to.

Unfortunately, the law doesn't agree with me.

I've been burgled and it is a heinous crime - the sense of violation is awful. The little charmers in my case also decided to crap all over the house.

[Oneeyedvic]

saxy_jag ///I'm sorry, but as much as we have rights and protection according the law, we forfeit those rights if we choose to disobey the law, even if it's a law we don't like. It's a bit like religion - we can't pick and choose which bits we like. ///

Presumably then, you would be happy for the police to shoot anyone who they see speeding or parking illegally.

I also think you will find that religions do pick and choose the bits that they want.

[Davethedog]

Sandtroe why don't you read the story three lines and so wrong its not true.

[R1Geezer]

SP1814: "If however, you came home and saw someone breaking into your toolshed, then quietly went into your house, picked up a cricket bat, crept outside and smashed him over the head from behind, then it's jail for you I'm afraid. "

Yes it is under the current system. that's the whole point the current system is wrong, what should I do rather than belt him over the head? Challenge him perhaps, right oh he turns around stabs me or shoots me, sorry SP I'll go with the bat over head first if you don't mind.