Tories to propose "Batter a Burglar" law

stuartw_b said:
I think (hope) the reiteration is to stop people like Mr Ferrie (who shot at burglars at his remote cottage in September this year) from been arrested, treat as a criminal and held for 36+ hours for clearly doing nothing more than protecting his home and wife. Yes, let the police question you but seriously why the need for such a long time in custody.
Click to expand...

There are cases of genuine self-defence, then there are cases of murder. If a potential thief is unlawfully entering someone's home it shouldn't give the home-owner the right to murder them. I'm glad the police take all these cases seriously.

If I had a gun in my house and shot a burglar who just entered my home, without telling them to leave etc, I'd expect to be arrested and probably go to jail. That's how it should be in my opinion.

PS none of what I said may relate to the case you mentioned, it's just stuff that's on my mind after reading some of the crazy comments in this thread :p
 
Meridian said:
It already is clear, to everyone except tabloid editors and (apparently) people on forums. Again: this is not a change in the law. Will people please try to understand this. The police will just be asked nicely not to arrest people who claim self-defence in or near their houses. The problem is, it is actually in the householder's own interest to be arrested in such circumstances, because it gives them a whole load of rights that they otherwise don't have. The police are still (thank God) going to investigate the circumstances. Either way, that's all that will happen (if anything) due to this "change of policy". It's a headline grabber, with no actual meaning, and this forum is full of people who have fallen for it.
Click to expand...

What rights were you thinking of for the householder in regards to being arrested, insofar as rights that would not be invoked should they be arrested at a later date? You think they are more open to litigation?

I would think part of the policy is to prevent people from having to go through the ordeal of being arrested then cleared, no matter how much of a formality it often turns out to be. So I was curious as to the advantages of immediate arrest over being investigated at a later date should the police feel it warranted?
 
Sundance said:
There are cases of genuine self-defence, then there are cases of murder. If a potential thief is unlawfully entering someone's home it shouldn't give the home-owner the right to murder them. I'm glad the police take all these cases seriously.

If I had a gun in my house and shot a burglar who just entered my home, without telling them to leave etc, I'd expect to be arrested and probably go to jail. That's how it should be in my opinion.

PS none of what I said may relate to the case you mentioned, it's just stuff that's on my mind after reading some of the crazy comments in this thread :p
Click to expand...

they shouldnt break into your home. they deserve what they get. ive been burgled several times (whilst living in sunny hull). fair enough, if i get burgled i cant chase them down the street and kill them but as far as im concerned how the hell do i know they arent armed? if they dont break in they are safe, as am i.
 
Glaucus said:
So what's actually changed.

Dissportinate violence was unlawful, it's still unlawful.



That's the case anyway.
Click to expand...

I think how the news was putting it across is the blurring/softening a little on what is classed as 'disproportionate'

ie: It may seem disproportionate in the cold light of day that you bashed the guys brains out with an ashtray, but at the time, during the night while you were scared, you felt it was an acceptable response.

Whether or not it was proportionate will still have to be judged upon, so yea , not a lot is really changing from the current state of play.
 
realBabelfish said:
not to mention a suitable skinny smack head can put their hands through the letterbox and flick the yale.

this happened a few times to us in one of our student houses until we realised what was going on.
Click to expand...

Should have stuck knives around the letter box.
 
Freakbro said:
I think how the news was putting it across is the blurring/softening a little on what is classed as 'disproportionate'

ie: It may seem disproportionate in the cold light of day that you bashed the guys brains out with an ashtray, but at the time, during the night while you were scared, you felt it was an acceptable response.

Whether or not it was proportionate will still have to be judged upon, so yea , not a lot is really changing from the current state of play.
Click to expand...
That again is allready covered, it's proportionate to you at the time and the emotions and threat you FELT regardless if that threat was real or not.
 
The law can say whatever it wants, but it will not change the outcome of what i would do to someone robbing my property(they will be battered)to death if need be to protect my family.
 
Theophany said:
You're talking about a totally different type of burglar.

People who are tooled up case the joint, they're professionals, they don't want to risk altercations. They will do the job when you're not on the premises and they will know when it is safe to enter. They're not looking for a fight.

It's the 3am smash-a-window crack addicts looking to nick a TV or laptop to feed their addiction that will stab you in the face with a knife. Their desperation fuels their preparedness for violence if confronted.
Click to expand...

Crack addicts do not smash a window and make noise, they snap a lock and get in silently with a bunch of cheap tools. With some of the crappier euro locks out there I can literally be in your house in near silence in next to no time. Is frightening how easy (and well known.) it is, and there's nothing "professional" about it.

We've had loads of cases in my area where they are getting in peoples houses while they are sleeping and taking peoples car keys and whatever else and just walking through the front door as easy as if they had a key.
 
Last edited:
Muffin` said:
Conservatives in sense shocker, long may it continue
Click to expand...

THIS, im also impressed I saw a politician talking absolute sense yesterday in regards to benefits money.

Saying that those who work have to stay with their parents as they cannot afford a house, and those that get a house for having babies needs to stop.

CORRECT - FINALLY - WOW

Vote cons !
 
Meridian said:
It already is clear, to everyone except tabloid editors and (apparently) people on forums. Again: this is not a change in the law. Will people please try to understand this. The police will just be asked nicely not to arrest people who claim self-defence in or near their houses. The problem is, it is actually in the householder's own interest to be arrested in such circumstances, because it gives them a whole load of rights that they otherwise don't have. The police are still (thank God) going to investigate the circumstances. Either way, that's all that will happen (if anything) due to this "change of policy". It's a headline grabber, with no actual meaning, and this forum is full of people who have fallen for it.
Click to expand...

It's not clear. At the moment it's judicial precedent rather than statute. Get a Whitney lefty judge and you are done for whereas statutory law removes ambiguity.
 
i wouldn't care if the law said 'attack a burglar and you will get a instant 2 years' as i would still beat the crap out of the ass wipe and watch as my dogs tore his legs to pieces.


this news update is worthless anyways.
 
Combat squirrel said:
THIS, im also impressed I saw a politician talking absolute sense yesterday in regards to benefits money.

Saying that those who work have to stay with their parents as they cannot afford a house, and those that get a house for having babies needs to stop.

CORRECT - FINALLY - WOW

Vote cons !
Click to expand...

I sense the PC bleeding heart liberals incoming.....
 
I think the Cons are quite clever, making a law for something that was lawful in the first place.
 
LOL...at replies here.

Having first knowledge of "burglars" they rarely go "tooled up". Most dont even carry an item for fear of being stopped and searched by police. They will not risk carrying a weapon to protect themsevles from this new law. They will carry on committing the same modus operandi of the opportunist and hope for that window/door to be open. Most are too fixated on heroin to "plan".

Good law to come through, people need claification.
 
kitch9 said:
I sense the PC bleeding heart liberals incoming.....
Click to expand...

any mention of the millionaires and billionaires actually paying their tax? nope, didnt think so.

any signs of them helping create jobs for those unemployed people? nope.

sure, stop the benefits cheats but when so many people are out of work the ones trying to find work shouldnt be butt ****ed.

any news on how the tories are apologising for edward heath abusing young boys?
 
scorza said:
The law is not fair - there have been too many cases where a home owner has defended their household and instead of being treated like a victim of crime, or a witness to a crime, have been arrested, spent 30 hours in a police cell before facing months of anxiety waiting for a trial while the CPS put together a criminal case against them.
Click to expand...

Too many cases being a total of 11 cases taken to prosecution over a 15 year period according to the article or alternatively less than one case per year?

Why are you so against a case being investigated properly and instead want it to be no more than a cursory glance for the police to judge that there is no case to answer? Arresting someone who is involved in a violent altercation provides them with rights, rights it must be pointed out they wouldn't have were they not placed under arrest. It's unfortunate that sometimes people will be arrested when they are the victim of a crime but if it means the case is investigated properly and justice done then that's a price well worth paying.

The law is not unclear with regard to reasonable force - what appears to be the problem is that a number of people want an unfettered right to indulge in any form of punishment they choose for burglars. It's a horrible crime and one that anyone would hate to be subjected to but equally it shouldn't mean that you can kill just because it would make you feel a bit better.

hurfdurf said:
Ban everyone in this thread who does not understand the current law and has bought into the Daily Mail headlines
Click to expand...

Don't tempt me.
 
He's just trying to boost his popularity, he's also suggested that we will be given a referendum on the EU but only if he is re-elected of course..... 3yrs isn't enough time to organise one apparently.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom