Quizzes & Puzzles5 mins ago
Protection by law.
This follows on from a question under the How It Works section.....
You should only be entitled to protection from the law if you abide by the law.
Discuss
Answers
No best answer has yet been selected by Ding-Dong. 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.Consider this example - whilst in the process of committing a burglary, the burglar falls down the stairs because, for the sake of the argument, a roller skate was left at the top of the stairs thus becoming an unexpected hazard.
Should the burglar be entitled to sue you for negligence in the civil court for an injury sustained in the furtherance of a criminal act???
I'm thinking Phil Fearon here guys!!!!
No, it's not black and white but maybe it should be. It's all about the ability to behave oneself and to respect the law of the land.
I would like to treat law breakers of all kinds in the same way as children who don't behave - i.e. they should largely be ignored when they are bleating on, and certainly should not be engaged with or receive any benefits of any kind.
I believe the actual legal principal works the other way around.
Rather You are entitled to break the law in order to prevent a greater crime being committed.
So you would be permitted to steal a car in order to prevent a murder but you may not shoot somebody to prevent them stealing a car.
Ding-Dongs suggestion would open vendettas and endless arguements of who broke the law first and thus relinquished their right to protection. OK if you fancy life in the wild west.
Incidently this defence was sucessfully claimed by the group that vandalised the hawk fighter jets bound for Indonesia. They claimed that they acted to prevent them being used to kill innocents in East Timor. To the judge's fury they were acquitted.