Renters count as homeowners, so knock yourself out.... well, not yourself
I would probably fail and actually knock myself out
High Court: Homeowners can use 'disproportionate force' against burglars
- Thread starter scorza
- Start date
I would probably fail and actually knock myself out
What a bizarre interpretation. This is UK law being found to be in keeping with our commitment to European law, specifically the Human Rights law which was, er, written by British lawyers in the first place.
In any case, the case is subject to appeal to a higher court including - ta da! - the European Court of Human Rights.
Regarding the case itself: I think the coalition's changes were bad law (they fixed a problem which didn't need fixing) but the court's judgement that they don't conflict with human rights law seems correct.
Appears to be the standard select few waiting for a chance to batter someone to death with a keyboard 
.
The bit I dont get is the family were trying to bring charges against the police officer who cuffed the guy when he was unconscious
.
It appears to be a case of parents couldn't understand how their beautiful caring child could break into someones house and that its everyone's fault but his own.
.The bit I dont get is the family were trying to bring charges against the police officer who cuffed the guy when he was unconscious
.It appears to be a case of parents couldn't understand how their beautiful caring child could break into someones house and that its everyone's fault but his own.
Man of Honour
- Joined
- 29 Mar 2003
- Posts
- 57,676
- Location
- Stoke on Trent
It's nice to have it confirmed because it's very easy to lose track of what you can do with various cases.
Appears to be the standard select few waiting for a chance to batter someone to death with a keyboard
The bit I dont get is the family were trying to bring charges against the police officer who cuffed the guy when he was unconscious
It appears to be a case of parents couldn't understand how their beautiful caring child could break into someones house and that its everyone's fault but his own.
Welp, some keyboards are indeed quite dangerous, i bet throwing something that is basically a sheet of 5mm steel is probably going to hurt.
Actually, you're wrong there. The law has changed. The problem is it's changed in very nuanced way, and certainly is not the clarification Grayling claimed.
You are correct in that it has always been permissible to use reasonable force, if you honestly believed it to be reasonable, provided it was not subsequently deemed disproportionate. Now, you can use force you honestly believe reasonable even if a subsequent review deems it disproportionate .... but not if it's grossly disproportionate.
The difference is not in what you believed when you defended yourself, but in quite where that subsequent review grades it in the range of proportionate - disproportionate - grossly disproportionate.
Oh, and the burglar has to be in, or entering, a dwelling but not in the garden. And the new definition only applies to the level of force used to defend people, not property, whereas the previous definition (reasonable, up to and including lethal provided it's not disproportionate) applied to property as well, and still does.
So, before, the householder was allowed to use reasonable force provided it was proportionate, and now is allowed to use reasonable force even if subsequently deem disproportionate, provided it's not grossly disproportionate.
How in hell does this help "clarify", as Grayling claimed, the situation for the public. It all still depends, if the public are to understand where the line is, the precise legal interpretation of those terms.
It does lift the bar to prosecution slightly higher, even if in restricted circumstances, but even that makes little real world difference as prosecution of householders is very rare, not least because of the difficulty of getting such prosecutions past a jury.
I'm curious about how it's clear now?
Well the obvious answer to that is theres a 99.9% that would never happen. And if the remote chance in a deluded world it ever did you'd run. Keyboard or headlock aint going to help you there.
Appears to be the standard select few waiting for a chance to batter someone to death with a keyboard
It's not a situation anyone would like to find themselves in I think, but it's not exactly your choice so if you did find yourself in that situation, homeowners (and tenants) do need to feel that the law 100% will be on their side. What we've seen in the last few years has been a number of malicious prosecutions by the Police and CPS (under publicity hungry now Labour MP Sir Kier Starmer) against homeowners who fought back - hopefully now that number should fall.
I'd suggest ducking.
But if you tackle them, in the garden, the force you use must be reasonable and not disproportionate. So, maybe a bazooka is not disproptionate but a tactical nuke is?
And if you do tackle some nut with an AK, let us know where to send the floral tribute?
Find a battery powered pressure cooker, throw a full can of deodorant in and throw it at them, problem solved.
. I had better buy a pressure cooker.(Can't help but feel that comment has cemented my place on a watchlist somewhere)
It's not 100% though, now or before the changes. It's maybe 99%, but if you use violence against someone else, even in your own home against intruders, the law will make a judgement on whether, in the circumstances, you went too far, or not. It's not the "anything goes" someone called for earlier.
It's all about circumstances, too. In some circumstances, killing them would be legal, while in others, much lesser levels of force might be grossly disproportionate. And no advance definitions of what you can and cannot do exist, because it depends on individual circumstances.
Man of Honour
- Joined
- 29 Mar 2003
- Posts
- 57,676
- Location
- Stoke on Trent
- Joined
- 9 Apr 2012
- Posts
- 13,166
I wonder what Jeremy Corbyn has to say about this.
Give them a biscuit and invite them to Rodger your wife.
