Is your home really your castle?

Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you:

No adverts like this in the forums anymore.
Times and dates in your local timezone.
Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance.
Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely.
Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net.

If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

**mattyrm**

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/beds/bucks/herts/8413787.stm

Possibly the most disgusting thing i have ever seen.

I am centre right, i am of the opinion that you should be allowed to defend your home aggresively. I dont think you should be able to murder burglars cold blooded with no warnings such as Glen Beck and his cronies seem to think is acceptable, and at the same time, i agree with an aggresive use of force against criminals.

This man did take things a tad too far with a revenge attack after the fact using a cricket bat, but prison?! No no no.

Maybe a suspended sentance, and certainly no compo or any of that gak for the slimeball burglar.

Thoughts gentlemen? I am almost ashamed to be British....

What 19 million people watched X-Factor?

Ok.. i AM ashamed to be British.

**filbert**

Hmmm, this is one of those cases where a knee jerk 'Daily Mail' reaction would be to decry all that is bad about the world today and it's a 'slippery slope' and so on but I think this case raises a couple of interesting questions. The judge acknowledged the right to self defence but he did mention that the attack went beyond self defence and judging by the guy's injuries, they went over the top IMO. I am all for defending my property and family but where does defending stop and attacking start? After all, two men chased this one guy? How far did they chase him? And did he offer any form of attack to warrant the reprisal?

**mattyrm**

Yeah as i said mate, no knee jerk reactions from me, im very centrist politically, my point is, they didnt kill the guy, and you have to allow for some leeway when you are super pissed off as some scum bags tried to hold your family hostage.

As you said, its not an easy decision to make, but im definately not up for jailing the guy.

**Frazzled**

mattyrm wrote:http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/beds/bucks/herts/8413787.stm

Possibly the most disgusting thing i have ever seen.

I am centre right, i am of the opinion that you should be allowed to defend your home aggresively. I dont think you should be able to murder burglars cold blooded with no warnings such as Glen Beck and his cronies seem to think is acceptable, and at the same time, i agree with an aggresive use of force against criminals.

This man did take things a tad too far with a revenge attack after the fact using a cricket bat, but prison?! No no no.

Maybe a suspended sentance, and certainly no compo or any of that gak for the slimeball burglar.

Thoughts gentlemen? I am almost ashamed to be British....

What 19 million people watched X-Factor?

Ok.. i AM ashamed to be British.

In certain civilized states in the US, there is the "Castle Doctrine." If the the Bad Guy enters the residence it is presumed that the BG has bad intent and that the criteria for lethal level self defense are statutorily met.

Translation. BG enters. BG dies. No warnings, no retreat, no warning shots, none of that BS.
One day your nation you will be civilized enough to follow this doctrine...

**Mannahnin**

Article has too few details.

The judge said: "If persons were permitted to take the law into their own hands and inflict their own instant and violent punishment on an apprehended offender rather than letting justice take its course, then the rule of law and our system of criminal justice, which are the hallmarks of a civilised society, would collapse."

"apprehended offender" is the phrase that catches my eye. If the criminal had been CAUGHT and his threat neutralized, bashing him in the head with a cricket bat and causing brain injury is not justified. If, OTOH, the bad guy was still loose and a potential threat, it's absolutely fair game.

**Kilkrazy**

No doubt.

However, as the law stands, it is quite clear that the defendants went beyond the call of duty.

They pursued the victim down the road, got him on the ground and held him there until the police arrived. That was all good.

In the meantime they beat him on the head with a cricket bat, a hockey stick and another weapon I can't remember and caused permanent brain damage.

**Frazzled**

I don't think he was apprehended until his head got broke. Works for me.

**reds8n**

filbert wrote: After all, two men chased this one guy? How far did they chase him? And did he offer any form of attack to warrant the reprisal?

article says...

Hilary Neville, prosecuting, said: "What started as reasonable self defence by Munir Hussain then turned into excessive force by virtue of a sustained attack by Munir, Tokeer and at least two others."

Now..if this had happened in the house or during well... tough luck, don't burgle people's homes. But when 4 ( at least) people are beating one man so much that a wooden bat breaks and the guy is left with brain damage then you've gone too far.

**Kilkrazy**

We've had this argument before.

There needs to be a cut-off point between immediate defence of the home and the scenario in which you trail a burglar for six months and shoot him on holiday in Puerto Rico.

**Wrexasaur**

The guy seriously got his come-uppins.... and frankly, I can't even tell what he actually did in the first place. Not to say that he didn't do anything to 'deserve' getting bashed over the head; but this article is ridiculously short.

BBCnews wrote:The court heard Hussain and his brother Tokeer, who both live in Desborough Road, chased intruder Walid Salem, leaving him with a permanent brain injury after he was hit with a cricket bat so hard that it broke into three pieces.

That is freaking crazy. Breaking a cricket bat over someones head? INTO. THREE. PIECES... The guy who got hit had to have done something pretty bad. Either that, or this cricket bat breaker has some serious anger issues.

BBCnews wrote:Munir Hussain was given a 30-month sentence while his brother was jailed for 39 months.

That really isn't bad, but it is still quite a long time. If someone could cite more information about what actually led up to the attack, I would be interested to know.

**Frazzled**

Kilkrazy wrote:We've had this argument before.

There needs to be a cut-off point between immediate defence of the home and the scenario in which you trail a burglar for six months and shoot him on holiday in Puerto Rico.

You already established the cutoff point. The door of the house. Now it gets more grey when you as a citizen are pursuing someone incident to what we would call a felony here, but generally at that point the burdens of proof kick back in. In the US and the UK (I believe) at that point its going to be a burden of proof on you (GG) that the BG was a threat and further, a lethal threat if you're smacking him with a bat.

Unless, of course, he isulted the Queen, then its go to town time.

**Kilkrazy**

The victim was a very naughty boy indeed, certainly not someone to shed tears over.

I paraphrase from the Radio 4 account:

The family arrived home from the mosque to find the victim and two others having broken into their home. They were tied up and made to lie on the floor and put in fear of their safety by threats. The defendant's teenage son managed to escape through a window and alerted his uncle a few doors down the street.

The robbers ran off when it became clear that help was on its way. The uncle and the boy's father, assisted by one or two other friends/neighbours/relative ran after the robbers.

They caught one of them, who is the victim in the case, and beat him with various weapons including a cricket bat and a hockey stick.

**Frazzled**

Again, the prosecutor should have dropped the case.

**Mannahnin**

Disagree. They caught and held him for the police. A bit of beating incident to that would have been totally understandable and acceptable. I would even be okay with the injury if it happened in the process of catching the guy.

But if they smashed his head in with a bat after getting him immobilized on the ground, that's basically attempted murder.

**Empchild**

See im training my dobby to attack intruders, and im armed.. please.. invade

**Bookwrack**

Frazzled wrote:Again, the prosecutor should have dropped the case.

Under what reasoning? Even in the U.S. the castle doctrine has limits. Just because you caught the guy in your house doesn't mean you can tie him to a chair and run the house current through alligator clips on his testicles.

**Envy89**

ill tell you this much... you break into MY house, and TIE MY FAMILY UP... then you had better hope that i dont get free.

cus if i do, i aint using a cricket bat, or a hockey stick...

**reds8n**

Empchild wrote:See im training my dobby to attack intruders, and im armed.. please.. invade

or

if it's the latter we'll be round soon.

**Kilkrazy**

I think he meant doobie.

**Empchild**

correct ma bad. Boss came round the corner so wasnt thinking when typeing.. Big dog cute as hell, and was origonally bred by germans. Either or please invade.. you won't last the night I promise. Also the town I live in several of the cops are good friends so I worry little about things like that.

**Mannahnin**

Probably meant Dobie.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Doberman_Pinscher

**Kilkrazy**

Who is this then?

http://www.streathamguardian.co.uk/resources/images/810442/?type=display

**Frazzled**

Bookwrack wrote:
Frazzled wrote:Again, the prosecutor should have dropped the case.

Under what reasoning? Even in the U.S. the castle doctrine has limits. Just because you caught the guy in your house doesn't mean you can tie him to a chair and run the house current through alligator clips on his testicles.

Oh its worse than that. They chased him down and beat the

out of him.

Again you can't do that, so you're guilty of a crime there.
However, the amount of penalty is mitigated by the circumstances. hence drop the case or bargain it down to some minor with time served or assess a fine under US$500.

Insert notation here-if the circumstances occured in the Frazzled household, and you somehow made it past moat, claymore mines, killer attack wiener dogs, and the fact every member of the family has the practical ability to blow you completely and utterly away, I wouldn't be chasing you down with a bat and you would never see the inside of a hospital.

**reds8n**

..I'm disappointed Mr. KK...

..

..that is Dobby, as played by the very funny Isy Suttie from Peep Show. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VVzXMpo3vAI&feature=related

**Empchild**

reds8n wrote:..I'm disappointed Mr. KK... ..

..that is Dobby, as played by the very funny Isy Suttie from Peep Show. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VVzXMpo3vAI&feature=related

damn Gov't Filters can't see that.

**Frazzled**

Minitaure pinscers are made of pure awesome. Their terrifying powers are second only to killer attack wienie dogs.

**Empchild**

Frazzled wrote:Minitaure pinscers are made of pure awesome. Their terrifying powers are second only to killer attack wienie dogs.

I have one of those too, as well as a Chihuahuah... Im a dog lover what can I say.

**avantgarde**

Miniature Pinscer owner too *fist bump. I also had a Doberman (for comedic effect). Somehow the Mini was the power in the relationship.

The important thing we're missing here is that he used a cricket bat. That's like beating someone with a wiffle bat.

**Frazzled**

Is it? My kricket bat experience revolves around Shaun of the Dead.

**Empchild**

fast side note avante LOVE your avatar...BEST SHOW EVER!!!!!!! even if that charaters dead!!