It's never likely to happen where i live now, but at my old address (nasty council estate filled with scum) I used to keep a claw hammer (Matilda) hanging on my door frame ready for grabbing if anything ever happened. (nothing ever happened) Thieving sods decided to drill my car door lock the 1 time i left the CD player fascia on the blasted thing!
Self defence - what rights do you have if .....
- Thread starter Tony Williams
- Start date
You should be legally allowed to keep as your property anyone or anything ill-advised enough as to enter on to your land with out prior written permission. As long as your land is clearly posted with 'no trespassing' signs.
Obviously there would be a 500 foot vertical limit or something like that to allow commercial aircraft and satellites to pass over it.
For example if a cat wondered on to your property you could trap it and sell it back to the owner for a profit.
Obviously there would be a 500 foot vertical limit or something like that to allow commercial aircraft and satellites to pass over it.
For example if a cat wondered on to your property you could trap it and sell it back to the owner for a profit.
Soldato
Bury under patio and no one will ever know.
As for the subject of potentially shooting a fellow, if you feel in danger of your life or bodily harm then you can shoot an attacker, with no legal obligation to retreat (run away or hide). It should be the last layer of defense while at home though. You should probably have:
With regards to possessions I'm of the opinion that if you have something stolen it's your own fault for not securing it properly.
- good lighting with motion sensors
- a dog
- cctv
- Alarm system with window/door sensors, motion sensors, indoor & outdoor sirens, battery backup, panic buttons, and a police dialer.
- Hardened door frames and good locks and deadbolts.
With regards to possessions I'm of the opinion that if you have something stolen it's your own fault for not securing it properly.
Soldato
Without trying to sound "ard", if the oppertunity arised i would hit/stab the intruder as hard as i could with whatever i could find, to where ever it would lay him out quickest without the chance of him getting back up.
If that means a knife to the throat, bat to the head, i dont really care.
Of coarse that is only if there a intruder in my house, i would treat them all like they wanted to murder/rape/torture me and my family.
If someones nicking a DVD player and getting the hell out, of coarse not.
If that means a knife to the throat, bat to the head, i dont really care.
Of coarse that is only if there a intruder in my house, i would treat them all like they wanted to murder/rape/torture me and my family.
If someones nicking a DVD player and getting the hell out, of coarse not.
Soldato
i feel you missed the point........tennis rackets are a bit fragile, they would probably break on the first strike.
Soldato
You're allowed to defend yourself and/or apprehend to intruder using proportional/reasonable force. You cannot defend your property simply by seriously injuring an intruder.
Last edited:
Associate
i live with my mum and my sister as their carer, mum is disabled and sister has agoraphobia/ocd so im the man of the house, i personally will use any force necessary if someone breaks into my house, the idea if they are leaving is then to beat seven shades of poop out of them and then drag them back in the house 
I wont go into detail but awhile back I had 3 lads enter my car (they had the key and ran) and at the time I was not in the mood. So I did something stupid and "took them on" the first lad laughed - came at me, I just whacked him, then booted him simple fist fight. After that one got out and pulled a blade at this point I wanted to run and leave the whole situation. I ran around the car and tried to get in and drive off as I was at the passenget side I noticed what I should have used - a steering lock.
I managed to get it after starting the car a second time he moved off reving and whellspining (New clutch - he stalled the first and then I was there with someone trying to stab me. The other guy was getting up and standing back. So I threw a swing at the knife guy and hit him square on and I continued to ........... play gta 3 (well it felt like that). His mate shouted sorry and leave him alone so I went for him, booting the blade across the road, he ran so I left him and asked the guy to gimmie his phone and get his idoit mate back in the car, NOW or I will "finsh" you! at that moment going through my head I relally wanted to, I wanted really to rob his phone or some form of ID then sirens are heard and his mate was with them. I was aressted. the guy on floor was taken to hospital and the little no-mark was held.
The car was found distroyed but that guy he got off with it well untill 1 month back forensics confirmed a finger print on the outside and from that I got a name and age from the poliec (seperate police)
Both thier stories were mismated. I told the truth - 1 came at me so I hit him, the second used a knife. I told them they tried to steal a car (which never kids mentioned) so I used whatever I could to escape that being a steering lock - had I of not had that lock, I can't say what would have happened as I hit and booted his friend. It was investergaetd 2 witnesses contacted the police one over danerious driving then the fight.
It's hard to explain how I felt but if someone puts a gun agaist you they are worthless to you. LIkewise a blade pulled.
This was awhile ago I am very sensible with securitty but that don't matter they'll wreck it.
I managed to get it after starting the car a second time he moved off reving and whellspining (New clutch - he stalled the first and then I was there with someone trying to stab me. The other guy was getting up and standing back. So I threw a swing at the knife guy and hit him square on and I continued to ........... play gta 3 (well it felt like that). His mate shouted sorry and leave him alone so I went for him, booting the blade across the road, he ran so I left him and asked the guy to gimmie his phone and get his idoit mate back in the car, NOW or I will "finsh" you! at that moment going through my head I relally wanted to, I wanted really to rob his phone or some form of ID then sirens are heard and his mate was with them. I was aressted. the guy on floor was taken to hospital and the little no-mark was held.
The car was found distroyed but that guy he got off with it well untill 1 month back forensics confirmed a finger print on the outside and from that I got a name and age from the poliec (seperate police)
Both thier stories were mismated. I told the truth - 1 came at me so I hit him, the second used a knife. I told them they tried to steal a car (which never kids mentioned) so I used whatever I could to escape that being a steering lock - had I of not had that lock, I can't say what would have happened as I hit and booted his friend. It was investergaetd 2 witnesses contacted the police one over danerious driving then the fight.
It's hard to explain how I felt but if someone puts a gun agaist you they are worthless to you. LIkewise a blade pulled.
This was awhile ago I am very sensible with securitty but that don't matter they'll wreck it.
Next story is about having good security yet people here will rob your wheels if they can and had they of been locked too, probs punture them.
I want to ask a question at the end.....
My race bike which was stolen 1-2 week ago has been stolen before and befoer that I went to a postoffice where there are a lot of scally wags and liocked it to a proper £70 KYROTONITE bike lock was ok - second day I did the same only this time from there being >3-4 scals when I left (and it's a 2-3min job) I leave and there's about 20-30 all laughing n hanging about My bike, still there, missing a wheel.the wheel I saw across the road. I took the bike, unlocked and had to carry it that was when I saw the wheel.
Thing was by the time I RAN there (dropping thre bike I would have made it) a girl picked the wheel and for a laugh tossed it onto of the shops and ran - had I of got there and sau hit her, then I'd probably of of been jumped by too many and had the bike taken too. I called that a loss and got home.
This was when I reported it to the police they were useless (sometimes they aint) but they did nothing the guy told me it was "just a prank" - no it flaming isn't!!!! I WAS OUTNUMBED, attempted thieft, intimerdated and possibly had my full bike stolen it was NOT a prank. So in the end they said they'll get someone over to sort it. Did they? ages later they said they could not due to health and safety reasons however I can pay £15 for a fireman to do it? I called and called and the morning after I take a set of ladders with my dad and clinbed up (swearwordhere the law) I looked on the rroof and there wasn't any sort of wheel but at least I never gave firemen money to find that out. Me and my dad asked in the few shops if they had CCTV and non did.
Now had you be in these shoes and some girl and a couple of other girls (egged on by the lads) picked up your wheel £40 it was to replace used "reasonable force"? getting it from them and if her mate attacked would you punch them?? Being a female that is, should she not get treated equal?
Had I of done that, as I said about all them jumping me etc - all the lads and girls would stick together and act as witnesses and said "bang out of hitting a girl that laa"
I want to ask a question at the end.....
My race bike which was stolen 1-2 week ago has been stolen before and befoer that I went to a postoffice where there are a lot of scally wags and liocked it to a proper £70 KYROTONITE bike lock was ok - second day I did the same only this time from there being >3-4 scals when I left (and it's a 2-3min job) I leave and there's about 20-30 all laughing n hanging about My bike, still there, missing a wheel.the wheel I saw across the road. I took the bike, unlocked and had to carry it that was when I saw the wheel.
Thing was by the time I RAN there (dropping thre bike I would have made it) a girl picked the wheel and for a laugh tossed it onto of the shops and ran - had I of got there and sau hit her, then I'd probably of of been jumped by too many and had the bike taken too. I called that a loss and got home.
This was when I reported it to the police they were useless (sometimes they aint) but they did nothing the guy told me it was "just a prank" - no it flaming isn't!!!! I WAS OUTNUMBED, attempted thieft, intimerdated and possibly had my full bike stolen it was NOT a prank. So in the end they said they'll get someone over to sort it. Did they? ages later they said they could not due to health and safety reasons however I can pay £15 for a fireman to do it? I called and called and the morning after I take a set of ladders with my dad and clinbed up (swearwordhere the law) I looked on the rroof and there wasn't any sort of wheel but at least I never gave firemen money to find that out. Me and my dad asked in the few shops if they had CCTV and non did.
Now had you be in these shoes and some girl and a couple of other girls (egged on by the lads) picked up your wheel £40 it was to replace used "reasonable force"? getting it from them and if her mate attacked would you punch them?? Being a female that is, should she not get treated equal?
Had I of done that, as I said about all them jumping me etc - all the lads and girls would stick together and act as witnesses and said "bang out of hitting a girl that laa"
You're quite wrong I'm afraid,despite your 'A-level in law'.
You can defend yourself with whatever means you have as long as the threat warrants it. You can even strike pre-emptively if you feel it is necessary.
You're wrong about the punching,too.
There was a case recently where a bodybuilder climbed up the scaffolding of a house and threatened his wife and a man who was with her to 'smash them both to pieces' or words to that effect. The man defending himself and the woman shot the knucklehead straight in the chest with a shotgun as soon as he appeared in the window. The aggressor died,obviously. The shooter was acquitted because he genuinely feared for his and the woman's life.
I think the self-defence law in the UK is just about right. You can go as far as killing someone if you fear for your,your families or someone else's life. How much further do you want to go?
I do believe I read somewhere that the vast,vast majority of cases of self-defence are never charged or end in an acquittal if they do go to court.
Daily Mail and Co. just love to harp on about the cases where people are convicted,but it's so rare.
Commissario
Really, it's down to the Judge?
What country are you living in, because here in the UK in that sort of case it would be held in a court with a Jury hearing the evidence and making the decision on if it was reasonable force.
The Judge is there to preside over the case, make sure the law and formalities of the trial are followed, and if the jury finds the person guilty, and only then does he decide on the punishment.
In short to be successfully prosecuted and found guilty if you claim self defence in your home you have to go so far over the top that 12 normal members of the public, upon hearing the evidence think you've gone beyond what could have been considered reasonable in the circumstances.
The Jury are loathe to do that in the case of people killed/hurt whilst breaking into a residence (as most of them think what there reaction would be).
I can, off the top of my head only think of two cases in about the last 20 years in the UK where someone who was defending their home (or it started out that way) got found guilty.
Those cases are.
Tony Martin - Illegally held firearm, traps set around the property, had told friends/neighbours he would kill any gypsies he found on his property, and basically after shooting one in the back didn't inform police until the next day.
The guy who after the intruders had left his house, called up his family and friends and went hunting for them, and upon finding them in the street beat them so much from memory one had brain damage - all whilst bystanders were telling them to stop.
On the other hand there have been cases where the case hasn't reached court after a death (but the person was arrested largely to ensure that everything was done right in the investigation in case the facts weren't immediately obvious/as they were told).
And of the cases that did go to court, but the person was found not guilty there have been ones where.
An under cover police officer was stabbed on a surveillance job of a known criminal suspected of being involved in a big robbery - despite claims he called out he was an officer during the stabbing (Kennith Noye,who later went on to kill someone in a road rage incident).
A harpoon gun used to prevent a violent neighbour gaining entry, leading to the death of the would be intruder - found not guilty, but it basically only made it to court as it was in the public interest for the facts to be disclosed in court.
The guy that shot a couple of people who were trespassing.
There are dozens of other cases where the intruder has been hurt or killed and no prosecution brought up..
Basically you're allowed to use any level of force that could be considered reasonable under the circumstances, it's a fluffy definition as every case is different, but the juries always tend to be very much on the side of the resident.
The fun thing is, that every now and then a politician (quite often one who is supposedly trained as a lawyer) comes up with a suggestion that they will either change the law to allow you to defend yourself/home/family, or will issue new guidance to the police and CPS, at which point pretty much everyone who actually has a basic understanding of the law as it stands at the moment shakes their head and thinks "is it election time already? Surely MR/MRS X must know that is already the cases"
The same sort of thing in theory holds true outside your house, but usually it's much miurkier and harder to find out who might have started it - iirc you'r even allowed to throw the first punch if the person is behaving in such a manner that you think they are about to hit you or whatever, as again it's what might be considered reasonable.
Unfortunately as I say, outside of the house it's often much murkier as it's one persons word against another, and there isn't any obvious "i was surprised/protecting my property" line (unlike someone who is in your house unlawfully already).
is it written out in plain english somewhere though without having to know the case histories?
If you asked 100 people on the street if they understood the law I think maybe 10 would have a "basic understanding of the law as it stands" and 90 would have a daily mail understanding. There's no point in the law existing if nobody knows about it or understands it. If they think they are supposed to call the police, then do everything the burglar says and hope for the best.
If you asked 100 people on the street if they understood the law I think maybe 10 would have a "basic understanding of the law as it stands" and 90 would have a daily mail understanding. There's no point in the law existing if nobody knows about it or understands it. If they think they are supposed to call the police, then do everything the burglar says and hope for the best.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Castle_doctrine
It varies by state in the US but basically all you need to know is if you have a duty to retreat first, although I've never heard of someone getting in trouble for not retreating. In most states you have no duty to retreat and you're immune from civil litigation by the burglar or their family. Then basically if you feel you are in reasonable danger in your abode you can use deadly force against the attacker. And if you go down stairs at 3am and find a stranger in your kitchen you can legally "reasonably" assume they are there to do you harm and kill them. Although most people would be good enough to use proper judgement, but if you did just shoot on sight you'd be let off. Plenty of drunks have been killed after wandering in to the wrong house and it's their own fault.
Here is missouri for example, really simple and common sense.
http://www.moga.mo.gov/statutes/C500-599/5630000031.HTM
Compare it to the waffling wall of text for the UK... get to the point!
http://www.cps.gov.uk/legal/s_to_u/self_defence/
edit: it doesnt even seem to mention deadly force?
It varies by state in the US but basically all you need to know is if you have a duty to retreat first, although I've never heard of someone getting in trouble for not retreating. In most states you have no duty to retreat and you're immune from civil litigation by the burglar or their family. Then basically if you feel you are in reasonable danger in your abode you can use deadly force against the attacker. And if you go down stairs at 3am and find a stranger in your kitchen you can legally "reasonably" assume they are there to do you harm and kill them. Although most people would be good enough to use proper judgement, but if you did just shoot on sight you'd be let off. Plenty of drunks have been killed after wandering in to the wrong house and it's their own fault.
Here is missouri for example, really simple and common sense.
http://www.moga.mo.gov/statutes/C500-599/5630000031.HTM
Compare it to the waffling wall of text for the UK... get to the point!
http://www.cps.gov.uk/legal/s_to_u/self_defence/
edit: it doesnt even seem to mention deadly force?
Last edited: