Here's to another one being released without charge, hopefully...

[Vonhelmet]

But like you said, if you go get a knife out of the kitchen, it becomes pre-meditated and then things get serious.

Well, even going to fetch a knife might not be seen as pre-meditated. It's not unreasonable to fetch or pick up something if you perceive yourself as being in danger, and it's not unreasonable to use a weapon if you actually are in danger. The pre-meditation thing is more around things like keeping a baseball bat by the bed "just in case", hitting (or shooting, Mr Martin) people without warning without any obvious threat of danger, that kind of thing.

 

[Vonhelmet]

Until we know exactly what has happened I wont make any judgements but personally I think that if someone breaks in to your home you have the right to project your stuff and family. I hate the term "reasonable" force its a retarded statement it should be geared towards the home owner more giving them more protect while not taking the mick and putting the robbers head on a spike out side his house as a warming. Just reasonable force to me sounds like "well if he pushes you, you are allowed to push him back or if he stabs you, your more then welcome to stab him back same goes for if he pulls a knife you can do the same" lol. I know thats not completely the way it works but thats sort of the way I have seen it suggest hence why my view is well out of wack.

So because you don't understand it, the law should change?

Excellent.

 

[Castiel]

It wouldn't really change anything if home-owners were legally allowed to defend themselves, all it would mean is that the burglars would go better equipped.

Home owners are legally allowed to defend themselves now. It is whether the level of force used is reasonable or not, so if burglars came better equipped all it would mean is the level of reasonable force would be greater and you would have more dead burglars.

In the UK you can legally defend yourself from attack regardless of where you are, this includes using a pre-emptive strike if you reasonably think you are being threatened with or in danger of physical violence.

The Police are obliged to investigate all claims of self defence which may in certain circumstances require the arrest of the defender, especially in cases where the assailant is badly injured or killed. This doesn't mean they will be charged or if they are, convicted, only that the facts have to be established.

 

[mmj_uk]

should be like america give us guns to defend out homes, lets see how many burglars still dare..

you can argue the burglars would have guns but reality shows most burglars wouldnt risk it if they had to put their life on the line for a few hundred quid, and the ones that do want to risk it wont be robbing joes house on the corner for a few hundred quids worth of tat

Given US crime rates it would not help and I wouldn't like a large proportion of the population to own/carry guns anyway, there are too many idiots about.

 

[Dugganator]

So because you don't understand it, the law should change?

Excellent.

never said that did I. I was explaining why my view wasnt correct to the letter. Hence giving reason to why I could be completely wrong.

 

[Castiel]

"A post-mortem examination has confirmed that Mr Jacob died from stab wounds. "

So stab wounds suggesting more then one stab wound.

That doesn't mean the force used was not reasonable, being stabbed doesn't necessarily incapacitate you.

 

[Vulcan]

"A post-mortem examination has confirmed that Mr Jacob died from stab wounds. "

So stab wounds suggesting more then one stab wound.

Indeed, but that doesn't prove or suggest anything.

The pre-meditation thing is more around things like keeping a baseball bat by the bed "just in case", hitting (or shooting, Mr Martin) people without warning without any obvious threat of danger, that kind of thing.

Which is ridiculous. I'd rather be caught with a weapon for my defence, than be caught without one and be attacked or even killed in my own home.

 

[Dugganator]

That doesn't mean the force used was not reasonable, being stabbed doesn't necessarily incapacitate you.

Jesus whats wrong with people today. I didnt say that either I just stated what was said on the link. Like I said earlier Im not saying anything until we know all the facts. Of course it could have been reasonable where did I say anything other then what was stated in the link.

 

[Robbo]

I see you pointing out people's attire as if it's important; stay classy.

Perhaps I should have been more clear.

They look like chav types. The guy that died was a criminal. They're harassing the family of the guy that was in custody by hanging around outside his house.

If it was my, for arguments sake, brother that was stabbed to death robbing someones house, I wouldn't throw on a tracksuit and rush over there and start piling up flowers outside the house. It's bizarre. I just felt the tracksuit was rather fitting due to the stereotype of people that wear them (taking the other factors into account), not that all people that wear them are not classy, though you could probably put that argument forward.

 

[Castiel]

Jesus whats wrong with people today. I didnt say that either I just stated what was said on the link. Like I said earlier Im not saying anything until we know all the facts. Of course it could have been reasonable where did I say anything other then what was stated in the link.

You seem to be making implications that when clarified you can deny. Why else would you emphasise the fact that there was more than a single stab wound? If, as you state, you were only stating what was in the link, why reiterate and emphasise only that part?

 

[Vulcan]

Jesus whats wrong with people today. I didnt say that either I just stated what was said on the link.

We never said you did. But no doubt someone will misinterpret multiple stab wounds as the act of a murderer rather than a man using self defence, so relax.

 

[Dugganator]

I must admit I have no idea why the police have allowed flowers to be put outside the house its very odd

 

[Deep]

If anybody broke into my house I'd set the Wife on them.

You monster

 

[Vonhelmet]

Which is ridiculous. I'd rather be caught with a weapon for my defence, than be caught without one and be attacked or even killed in my own home.

Well, hopefully you'll never have to defend that position.

To be honest, I'm a bit torn on the point, as it doesn't seem unreasonable to me that you would keep something reasonably hefty in an accessible place in case the worst happens...

 

[Dugganator]

You seem to be making implications that when clarified you can deny. Why else would you emphasise the fact that there was more than a single stab wound? If, as you state, you were only stating what was in the link, why reiterate and emphasise only that part?

Because not everyone would read the link and some had stated the point of view they could understand if the person was stabbed once etc. Thats not my view point i put it because some people might have missed and found it interesting to their view point(not everyone will read the link full and its towards the end). To be honest I couldnt care how many times the guy was stabbed it would have to be looked from was the robber running away while being stabbed or was the home owner and robber locked in a fight the home owner rightly stabbing the guy mutliable times defending himself. The main point being again is that we dont completely know yet so its really hard to say.

I could have understood you more if i added something to the end of the bit I stated like "omgz the guy was stabbed more then onces britboy style comments" Then your completely right I did it for that reason when clearly I just stated what was in the link nothing more.

 

[Vulcan]

Well, hopefully you'll never have to defend that position.

To be honest, I'm a bit torn on the point, as it doesn't seem unreasonable to me that you would keep something reasonably hefty in an accessible place in case the worst happens...

I've been reading around since the post I made, and can't actually find any law against it. If you kept a bat, and instantly hit someone who broke in to your house could be against the law, but only if the intruder posed no threat. Keeping the bat by your bed seems to be completely irritant in the equation.

 

[Castiel]

Because not everyone would read the link and some had stated the point of view they could understand if the person was stabbed once etc. Thats not my view point i put it because some people might have missed and found it interesting to their view point(not everyone will read the link full and its towards the end). To be honest I couldnt care how many times the guy was stabbed it would be have to be looked from was the robber running away while being stabbed or was the home and robber locked in a fight the home owner rightly stabbing the guy to mutliable times defending himself. The main point being again is that we dont completely know yet so its really hard to say.

I could have understood you more if i added something to the end of the bit I stated like "omgz the guy was stabbed more then onces britboy style comments" Then your completely right I did it for that reason when clearly I just stated what was in the link nothing more.

Only you didn't only quote the link did you.

"A post-mortem examination has confirmed that Mr Jacob died from stab wounds. "

So stab wounds suggesting more then one stab wound.

You quoted and emphasised the multiple nature of the wounds by making a statement and observation of emphasis that was not in the link itself, thus making the implication of the importance of multiple wounds within the context of this debate over the justification and force used.

 

[Vonhelmet]

I've been reading around since the post I made, and can't actually find any law against it. If you kept a bat, and instantly hit someone who broke in to your house could be against the law, but only if the intruder posed no threat. Keeping the bat by your bed seems to be completely irritant in the equation.

My understanding is that it's all about what is reasonable given the level of the threat, and being prepared can get beyond what is reasonable. I don't think it's quite that all self defence has to be "reactive" but there are degrees for how pro-active you can be before it gets suspicious.

I think the trouble with keeping a weapon around and then thumping someone with it is that it can look like - and indeed can be the case that - you are just out to thump someone regardless of whether they pose a serious threat to your or your family's safety.

 

[Dugganator]

Only you didn't only quote the link did you.



You quoted and emphasised the multiple nature of the wounds by making a statement and observation that was not in the link itself, thus making the implication of the importance of multiple wounds within the context of this debate over the justification and force used.

But that still isnt quoting more then what was said in the link. You think I emphasised it which I have pointed out I didnt. You think what ever you like its that simple. If someone explained that they didnt emphasis it the way you thought why would they say otherwise. I have already explained that I couldnt care if he was stabbed more then once. Just continue repeating. Longbow even agree that I wasnt emphasising the point but you seem to carry on just seem silly and troll like to be honest.

Like I said before If I have draw a conclusion pure based on that statement then I would agree with you but clearly I haven't

 

[Castiel]

But that still isnt quoting more then what was said in the link. You think I emphasised it which I have pointed out I didnt. You think what ever you like its that simple. If someone explained that they didnt emphasis it the way you thought why would they say otherwise. I have already explained that I couldnt care if he was stabbed more then once. Just continue repeating. Longbow even agree that wasnt emphasising the point but you seem to carry on just seem silly and troll like to be honest.

Of course you emphasised it, you isolated that specific part of the article and by that very action you placed importance on it.

You're just dishonest in your intent, there is no other reason to disseminate the article in such a way unless you think the fact that there was more than a single stab wound holds some importance as to the case itself.

Why else quote only and remark on that particular sentence?