Homeowner fights off knife-wielding burglars, gets 30 months; burglar spared jail

Liamalxd said:
or are you mean't to allow the attackers to harm your family?
Click to expand...

He didn't attack them until they had left the house. How did his actions in any way support/defend his family? The only effect his actions had on his family was to ensure they don't see him whilst he is in prison.

I'm amazed that so many people dont get this, but then logic and intelligence are not the usual traits of the grab a bat and beat somebody school of thought.
 
It's the same as that Farmer guy who shot someone who was running away... can't do it. If he about to rape his daughter or something then fair enough.

I do feel for the guy but you can't run after someone once they have left your property. End of.
 
BaDBoY_uK said:
I do feel for the guy but you can't run after someone once they have left your property. End of.
Click to expand...

So if I come into your house tonight, while you are away. I terrorise your wife/family and threaten them to such an extent that they genuinely fear fear for their lives. Or I even threaten to rape your wife or similar. You return home to see me standing over them with a knife to one of their throats.

Would you happily let me walk/run away or would you give chase?

I think some people here seem to think that being held at knife-point, while tied up in your own home is no big deal.

For me, the major crime was not the attempted burglary. The major offence was the tying up and threatening the family. That is what the burglar deserved a beating for.
 
sunama said:
I think some people here seem to think that being held at knife-point, while tied up in your own home is no big deal.

For me, the major crime was not the attempted burglary. The major offence was the tying up and threatening the family. That is what the burglar deserved a beating for.
Click to expand...

I'm not at all sure that many people do think that at all, in point of fact I don't think I've seen anyone even implying that it isn't serious to tie up and threaten someone. What is apparent is that quite a few people don't think that we as individual citizens have the right to administer our own justice as Mr Hussain did.
 
Actually as the Judge says, chasing after the guy and apprehending him was perfectly ok - the prosecution didn't even dispute that.

The subsequent assault by the 4 men armed with weapons which continued despite a bystander pleading to stop, funnily enough, was not ok.
 
Angilion said:
Are you aware that you undermine whatever point you might have by using such an abortion of English? It makes you look like you are resorting to a simplified pigdin because you're too stupid to use a complete language. Perhaps you are.

Of course, you'd look a fool anyway because you decided to create a false dichotomy with a strawman and attack that instead of my argument. Which, to be fair to you, is perhaps too complex for you to understand.
Click to expand...

Type like a normal person and dont pander to your superiority complex, address the point and perhaps you will treated with the respect you deserve.

Your writing content and style reeks of arrogance and has "i know better then u" stamped all over it.

I used a laptop at 5am in bed and thus the post was as it was.
 
sunama said:
So if I come into your house tonight, while you are away. I terrorise your wife/family and threaten them to such an extent that they genuinely fear fear for their lives. Or I even threaten to rape your wife or similar. You return home to see me standing over them with a knife to one of their throats.

Would you happily let me walk/run away or would you give chase?
Click to expand...

Giving chase to arrest someone would be fine. Giving chase to beat the living daylights out of someone would not be fine.

This really isn't rocket science.
 
Just to play devil's advocate, they "threatened to kill" him - what if they actually said they would kill him if he tried anything, as probably 90% of robbers and muggers will say.
 
Liamalxd said:
like I said rough estimate, I was going on the title of the piece lol
Click to expand...

The title of the piece is disinformation to create sensationalism. Maybe the OP wants to work as a journalist for the bottom end of the gutter press.

stop saying things are making people look bad for one ... it was a rough estimate how can it look bad if only made an assumption on the information I had ...
Click to expand...

Because you were making up an argument and ascribing it to other people in order to make them look bad.

well if your saying a I look bad for not looking at the last 16 pages go for it lol but otherwise nevermind.
Click to expand...

That would be fine if you were only commenting on the title of the thread, as that was the only information you had. But you're weren't doing that.

So your also saying if an animal attacked someone we would not retaliate against that individual just because they lack the mental competence the rest of us do? its still an attack no matter what/who did it.
Click to expand...

i) If you gathered 3 other people, chased a dog down the street and tried to beat it to death with clubs because it had threatened you and your family, you probably would be charged with unnecessary cruelty to an animal.

ii) The legal system differentiates between people and other animals. Most people agree with that, including me.
 
BaDBoY_uK said:
It's the same as that Farmer guy who shot someone who was running away... can't do it. If he about to rape his daughter or something then fair enough.

I do feel for the guy but you can't run after someone once they have left your property. End of.
Click to expand...

Sure you can, and you can use reasonable force to prevent them escaping and to restrain them. We all have limited powers of arrest.

If this guy had chased down someone who was guilty (we don't know that Mr Saleem was guilty), brought him down and forcibly restrained him until the police arrived, I'd be applauding him. If he had hit the person enough to daze them or knock them out in order to restrain them, I'd be fine with that. Reasonable force, no problem. If he'd hit the person a *bit* more, I'd be inclined to let it slide under the circumstances. If he'd also spat on the person, urinated on them or humiliated them in some other non-injuring way to express his hatred and contempt for them, I'd turn a blind eye to that too, under the circumstances.

Which, according to some burbling liars, means that I think it's wrong for people to defend thier families, blah blah blah.
 
Last edited:
B&W said:
Type like a normal person and dont pander to your superiority complex, address the point and perhaps you will treated with the respect you deserve.

Your writing content and style reeks of arrogance and has "i know better then u" stamped all over it.

I used a laptop at 5am in bed and thus the post was as it was.
Click to expand...

And I judged you on your actions, which was fair because you chose of your own free will to do them.

So you've proved that you are capable of using a complete human language. Which makes it worse when you chose not to, but that's another argument. Staying with this one, there's still the other point:

Of course, you'd look a fool anyway because you decided to create a false dichotomy with a strawman and attack that instead of my argument. Which, to be fair to you, is perhaps too complex for you to understand.
Click to expand...

Although since it now appears that you can understand my argument, your reply makes you look more malicious than foolish.
 
Angilion said:
If he'd also spat on the person, urinated on them or humiliated them in some other non-injuring way to express his hatred and contempt for them, I'd turn a blind eye to that too, under the circumstances.
Click to expand...

When performing a citizen's arrest, you are standing in the shoes of "the law" and "the law" is not supposed to show contempt.

So you're still wrong, I'm afraid.
 
vonhelmet said:
When performing a citizen's arrest, you are standing in the shoes of "the law" and "the law" is not supposed to show contempt.

So you're still wrong, I'm afraid.
Click to expand...

I am in a better position to determine what I think than you are, so your fear isn't necessary.

I did not claim that it was legal. I said that I would turn a blind eye to it, under the circumstances. Which is why I wrote "I'd turn a blind eye to that too, under the circumstances." rather than "It would be legal to do that."

My word, this thread is hard work. No matter how explicitly I spell out my position, someone will somehow read something completely different.
 
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...untouchable-householder-tormented-jailed.html

Yes i know its the Daily Fail but if what they are saying is true then again kudos to Hussain who gave a him a good beating...shame he didnt actually kill the ****er.

As for the justice system in this country??..****ing joke if you ask me...look at the guys list of crimes and tell me why the hell he hasnt or wasnt jailed??....i mean heck if he can get away with all those crimes...i best quit my job and go on a crime spree myself then boast that the law cant touch...which tbh hes right...looking at that list it does seem the law is below him.
 
I read this guys story in The Sun on saturday, I still think he deserves his sentence. What he did was clearly wrong and now he is crying about it. Boohoo.
 
Spawn said:
As for the justice system in this country??..****ing joke if you ask me...look at the guys list of crimes and tell me why the hell he hasnt or wasnt jailed??....i mean heck if he can get away with all those crimes...i best quit my job and go on a crime spree myself then boast that the law cant touch...which tbh hes right...looking at that list it does seem the law is below him.
Click to expand...

I agree that its ridiculous he isn't in jail. He should be. The guy is a menace.

I have no PERSONAL sympathy for what happened to him, it makes no odds to me and I'm not going to shed a tear over a career criminal being brutally assaulted BUT that doesn't make what the other guy did any less wrong.

The other guy got what he deserved - the only bad thing about this case is that Salim didn't get jailed.
 
Spawn said:
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...untouchable-householder-tormented-jailed.html

Yes i know its the Daily Fail but if what they are saying is true then again kudos to Hussain who gave a him a good beating...shame he didnt actually kill the ****er.

As for the justice system in this country??..****ing joke if you ask me...look at the guys list of crimes and tell me why the hell he hasnt or wasnt jailed??....i mean heck if he can get away with all those crimes...i best quit my job and go on a crime spree myself then boast that the law cant touch...which tbh hes right...looking at that list it does seem the law is below him.
Click to expand...


Non of that changes the fact you can not take the alw in to your own hands, nor should you be allowed to.

Crimes, why does it not say convictions, that probably expalins why he did not serve more time and yes he was jailed several times, your link even says so.
 
Last edited:
Spawn said:
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...untouchable-householder-tormented-jailed.html

Yes i know its the Daily Fail but if what they are saying is true then again kudos to Hussain who gave a him a good beating...shame he didnt actually kill the ****er.

As for the justice system in this country??..****ing joke if you ask me...look at the guys list of crimes and tell me why the hell he hasnt or wasnt jailed??....i mean heck if he can get away with all those crimes...i best quit my job and go on a crime spree myself then boast that the law cant touch...which tbh hes right...looking at that list it does seem the law is below him.
Click to expand...
You really think that the death penalty is a just punishment for burglary?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom