Lad breaks into a house and is killed...

Le_Petit_Lapin said:
That's really hard to read.
Click to expand...

I'm still trying to work out when being called a Mongol became an insult?

Thing is it doesn't take a rocket scientist to work out that creating a memorial in a very public place over a controversial death is likely to catch all sorts of opinions.

The kids are idiots and I don't know what to think of the mum actually supporting him being called a "solja" by posting on there. In fact surely you'd be fuming and attacking the sort of people who created the tribute in the first place for being a contributing factor, part of the culture if you will, to creating the circumstances that led to his death. That is of course after you were done blaming yourself.

Is there any more news on this yet by the way? Is it black and white or is there still more to it?
 
Last edited:
Last edited:
The parents of scallies always seem to think the sun shone out of their kids behinds. God knows why.
 
Hmm, 4/5 kids were there and apparently a 14y/o kid may have had a few knife wounds from the same incident. Would make me think the guy defending the property had the right to feel threatened and just went at them happening to catch a couple of them with the knife.
 
The parents say they see no evidence he was commiting a crime? How stupid are they? Total scumbag family, pity they weren't all there with him to be stabbed to.
 
snowdog said:
People who break in other peoples homes deserve to get owned. We should adopt laws like in south Africa so you can shoot intruders, ridiculous how the law protects these scumbags who break in, trespass, and nick your stuff...
Click to expand...


You seem to have missed the fact that because people are allowed to defend their houses with a gun, people breaking into houses also typically carry a gun in SA.

Kid did wrong, however dying for burglary is a bit of a harsh punishment in my eyes, maybe there's more to it, maybe he started the confrontation, if so then fine but i doubt it.
 
malc30 said:
Correct.
But if you regularly ate an apple before you went to sleep & kept said knife in the bedroom for that purpose, Then you would be fine if you picked it up & plunged it into somebodys chest during the heat of the moment, pitch black, Burglar, just woke up etc
Click to expand...

But in that incident, you could be stabbing your own wife for all you know. Waving a sharp object around in total darkness doesn't seem like a very good form of apparent protection.

Also, I thought people are constantly being told that carrying a knife presents more risk to yourself? So leaving weapons around the house that could be used against you by the burglar doesn't seem all that sensible to me.
 
Chimerical said:
But in that incident, you could be stabbing your own wife for all you know. Waving a sharp object around in total darkness doesn't seem like a very good form of apparent protection.

Also, I thought people are constantly being told that carrying a knife presents more risk to yourself? So leaving weapons around the house that could be used against you by the burglar doesn't seem all that sensible to me.
Click to expand...


Good point/s
Like I said earlier in my experience it all happens so quick you don't get time to think about it, Be even worse if you woke to somebody in your bedroom, God knows mate I was only relaying my own experience.
I live on my own with my Frank staffy dog so things are well different if you break in here, My whole house is like a shed with car parts & tools & Man toys spread all over the house. I've got a collection of knives even though I have been stabbed myself previously, I just like them.
I'd like to think Frank would mince them up a bit & lock on to a fleshy part whilst I phoned the law, What would Actually happen God only knows.
 
 
The law should be changed and made clear that if anyone breaks in to your property you are allowed to use lethal force to defend yourself and your property.

It's a scandal that anyone is being charged with murder over this death of this scumbag. Good riddance.
 
neiljung said:
The law should be changed and made clear that if anyone breaks in to your property you are allowed to use lethal force to defend yourself and your property.
Click to expand...
No it shouldn't.

If a passenger to a car knows that the driver is drunk and the driver subsequently crashes injuring the passenger, should the passenger be able to sue for negligence? The answer is yes, of course he should, but the claim will be subject to the defence of contributory negligence. The passenger will have consented to the risks of being a passenger to the car, but he has certainly not consented to a broken neck or any other injury he might recieve.

The same applies to the theif entering a house. Your suggestion is boneheaded.
 
Nitefly said:
No it shouldn't.

If a passenger to a car knows that the driver is drunk and the driver subsequently crashes injuring the passenger, should the passenger be able to sue for negligence? The answer is yes, of course he should, but the claim will be subject to the defence of contributory negligence. The passenger will have consented to the risks of being a passenger to the car, but he has certainly not consented to a broken neck or any other injury he might recieve.

The same applies to the theif entering a house. Your suggestion is boneheaded.
Click to expand...

I'm not sure that example applies myself, They are completely different things.

The thief did not get consented into the house & should expect to be fought off if there is someone in the house.

I also don't see from other posts in here also that have said "well it might be their only option" I'm sorry but in the UK, burglary is not the only option in ones life. I have no job, I don't get given money willy nilly but do I feel my only option is to break into peoples houses & steal? Hell no I do not, I deal with life & try to make my way around it, there is no excuse for breaking & entering & no kind of justification can be given to that I'm sorry.

Should he have died for what he did? No I don't think he should have, but he got caught at the wrong place at the wrong time & he only has himself to blame for that.
 
Link to the CPS' website on the use of "reasonable force" against an intruder.

http://www.cps.gov.uk/Publications/prosecution/householders.html

The long and the short of it is that if you act honestly and instinctively then there is very little chance of prosecution. Even if you use a handy nearby object as a weapon.

So in this case, if the individual grabbed a knife and stabbed the boy in question he is unlikely to go to court. However if they grabbed him, then got the knife or chased him and stabbed him then the force used goes beyond "reasonable".

Without knowing the full facts I don't think we can say if the death falls under reasonable force. However if he was burgling the house I find it difficult to feel much sympathy for him even if there was more than "reasonable" force used.
 
Streeteh said:
You seem to have missed the fact that because people are allowed to defend their houses with a gun, people breaking into houses also typically carry a gun in SA.

Kid did wrong, however dying for burglary is a bit of a harsh punishment in my eyes, maybe there's more to it, maybe he started the confrontation, if so then fine but i doubt it.
Click to expand...

I'm thinking more of prevention though rather than punishment, the idea of burglary should be completely out of their minds, because it should bring a fear of pain and dying with it... Burglary should be stopped as a whole and not the burglars killed... Perhaps shooting is indeed too harsh, but imo they shouldn't get away with less than a broken leg or arm from a burglary, they should learn that burglary equals pain.
 
Mattey1 said:
I'm not sure that example applies myself, They are completely different things.

The thief did not get consented into the house & should expect to be fought off if there is someone in the house.

... there is no excuse for breaking & entering & no kind of justification can be given to that I'm sorry.

Should he have died for what he did? No I don't think he should have, but he got caught at the wrong place at the wrong time & he only has himself to blame for that.
Click to expand...
You are quite right; there is no excuse for breaking into a house, as there is no excuse for being a passenger in a car knowing that the driver is drunk. However, the fact there was no permission for the thief to enter the house is totally irrelevant apart from the fact the thief will quite rightly be subject to contributory negligence.

The two circumstances are directly comparable - consenting to take part in an activity which is high risk is not consent to be receiving a specific injury from that activity.

If you go paintballing, you consent that it is a dangerous activity. You do not consent to someone negligently shooting you in the eye and making you blind - who would possibly consent to that?
 
Nitefly said:
Not an activity that is lawful, but an activity it remains.
Click to expand...

Not an activity in which both parties consent to the rules and regulations.
With paintballing (and even drunk driver driving a sober friend) both parties had agreed to the arrangement.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom