If you caught a burglar....

[powerdesal]

[quote user="Clarkkent"]>

Defend your property, defend your loved ones by all means, but don't set yourselves up as judge, jury and executioner. You'd be no better than Gaddafi or Bashar al-Assad.

[/quote]

There is a contradiction in your argument.

You say 'Defend etc etc', how many people are so cool and calm under the stress of confronting a scumbag, at night, in the dark, in their own home that they can assess the amount of force necessary to qualify as 'minimum force'?

I do not believe that, under such circumstances, anyone deliberately sets out to be 'judge, jury and executioner'. The defensive force applied in the high adrenaline / high stress / high fear situation can obviously lead to the demise of such scumbag but that is the unfortunate result of their own actions and not the deliberate fault of the householder.

[mint]

As you say, Steve, I don't think you'd be in a position to think clearly.  You'd likely as not grab the first object to hand (perhaps nothing more substantial than an umbrella, say, and start laying about with it.

If the object you pick up is a knife (and I did think from an earlier article that the knife was the burglar's own) then that is what you would use.

I don't think I could deliberately set out to kill someone but I do believe that my instincts would be that I'd strike first before I  could be struck.

Thankfully, I have never had any experience remotely like this one so I can't say for sure what I'd do.  I'm only trying to work out in my head what would feel "natural" to me.

[DerekJ]

[quote user="Clarkkent"]Where does this savagery come from?

[/quote]

Where?  Did you bother to read the link I posted earlier?

I quote......

Yesterday it was disclosed that Jacob was a career criminal with a history of

violence.

The 37-year-old had dozens of convictions for burglary, robbery and theft, and

once served an 18-month prison sentence for beating a man unconscious and

leaving him looking “like a piece of meat”.

Police believe Jacob may have been responsible for a number of unsolved

burglaries in recent months which are currently under investigation.

Ch Supt Rebekah Sutcliffe, of Greater Manchester Police, said the force was

“considering any similar incidents in recent weeks or months”.

He had a long criminal record dating back to the 1990s, and was imprisoned in

1999 for a vicious street attack following a row in a pub.

His victim, David Marshall, was said by a judge at Mold Crown Court to have

been “used as a human punch bag or football” after being kicked and punched

while lying on the ground unconscious.

Jacob and a co-defendant were both jailed for 18 months after admitting

causing grievous bodily harm.

These incidents are rarely one off. These people are a drain and a menace to society throughout their lives. Is it any wonder that people have strong feelings and want to be rid of them.

[idun]

[quote user="Clarkkent"][quote user="Chrissie"]

Agree with you totally, idun! (Good heavens.) 

Something I feel is terribly lacking in today's society is the idea of accountability and consequences.  [/quote]

It isn't any lack of "accountability and consequence" that I am arguing about, it is the idea that the first and only consequence of breaking into someone's home should be DEATH. Is your flat screen tv, or the key of your Skoda really worth killing someone for? Do you really want to feel that you should have the unfettered right to kill intruders? Where does this savagery come from?

Defend your property, defend your loved ones by all means, but don't set yourselves up as judge, jury and executioner. You'd be no better than Gaddafi or Bashar al-Assad.

[/quote]

 

I'm afraid I would judge that these people were up to no good, and I would be the jury too, facts being presented as they are. Don't see how I could make a mistake, unless I attacked for an example an old lady in a nightie who's saying 'where's me tea' and was obviously confused, that would be different.

Isn't that where justice goes wrong, that the reality of a given situation is clouded by people saying, well they were on a night out and it was high jinx and they didn't mean it and you the householder should have understood that you were not at risk. Why should we and how can we know. Maybe men feel differently about this, but I do understand that most men are stronger than me.

In this case, this man had form. In prisons we should be spending a lot on first timers education, getting them clean if necessary and making prisoners work too. If they go in a second time, hard labour, there are enough skanky places needing tidying up. I don't see how society can afford to not do it's best to reform prisoners, and then if they persist, punish so that they don't want to commit crime again.

[Clarkkent]

Well, this has got people steamed up!

To Benjamin's claim of "claptrap" (I assume that that is a shorthand way of saying that he disagrees with me) I would suggest that it is quite possible that people with Jacob's particular ... er ... skills would  have been recruited by despots like Gaddafi to help them in their quest of eliminating their opponents.

To DerekJ's question of whether I bothered to read the article he linked: Yes, I did bother to read it. Jacob's burglary victim did not know of Jacob's previous at the time of the burglary, though. As it happens, the burglary victim appears to have done the world a favour. (Though, who knows, had he survived Jacob may have eventually seen the error of his ways and reformed and opened a donkey sanctuary in the Shetlands. Then again, he might not ...)

Steve's and Sweet's responses raise the problem of "proportionality". This is perhaps the most difficult part of this discussion. It appears to be a principle which the police and the prosecuters consider important. If Sweet hits a burglar three times with her umbrella and disables him sufficiently to allow an effective arrest ... that is one thing. But is she justified in hitting him twenty three times and causing irrepairable brain damage, or killing him, after she has already seen that he has been subdued? (There was a case a few months ago involving two men, after a burglary, who went after the miscreants with a cricket bat, found them and killed one of them. Does anyone know how it has progressed?) Proportionality seems to have developed from the biblical injunction of "an eye for an eye". Often misinterpreted, this is a plea for restraint: you may not do more damage to your assailant than he has done to you - if he has damaged your eye, then the most you may do is damage his eye in return.

I think that what concerns me most about this thread is that it shows how fragile is the Rule of Law in some people's thinking. If we expect the Rule of Law to apply to us, we must allow it to apply to everyone else - scumbag or not. I would like to see prison used more effectively. I think that crimes against the person deserve stronger sentences than crimes against property. And I saw little point in sending the miscreant MPs to prison. They were shamed, their careers destroyed, six months doing community service wearing day-glo jackets in full view of the public would have been more appropriate. (Thought - prison doesn't seem to have done Jeffrey Archer much damage.) I also think that for first/young offenders there should be restorative justice: they should face their victims and make amends by repairing damage and giving over earnings.

The danger with "scumbag" thinking is that it can lead to vigilantism. Or to the sort of behaviour in Brazilian slums where feral youths are regarded as fair game by gun toting adults.

Right. You know where I stand now. If you disagree with me, then so be it.

 

 

[idun]

My problem with the law these days is that the law should give the majority a sense of 'justice' when it is upheld and sadly 'justice' as some of us, may be lots of us see it, seems to be have taken out of the equation. 

And I have to admit that we see films and the attacker is hit, or shot even, and then left, but they may have been hurt but are still capable of doing more damage. It is fear that motivates people to keep on hitting or shooting. I still think that the difference between a woman's view and man's view could be quite different.

[PaulT]

There is certainly something wrong with the justice system. How can some one be a 'career criminal'? Surely, the system is not working.

In California they have a rule - three convictions and your are jailed for 25 years - the first persons third offence was stealing a slice of pizza, he was somewhat surprised to get 25 years.

We see these criminals getting a slap on the wrist - some of them even carry on committing crimes whilst awaiting their court appearances.

What positive benefit are they to society - well, I suppose they create employment for police officers, court personnel, prison officers, probation officers, social workers etc. They could be helping the elderly and vulnerable of society.

I have never been burgled but some people I know who have find it difficult to carry on living in their homes. And what do the burglars do - break in to another home at the earliest opportunity. I also wonder how many of them are also claiming benefits.

Sorry, I am not one of those who sees good in everyone and am fed up paying taxes for the upkeep of these people.

Paul

[Frecossais]

I think that finding someone trespassing in your house especially at night creates a primordial fear that gives rise to a rush of adrenalin. It is not just that you want to protect your property, it is that this trespasser may be after more than just "things". You yourself are being threatened. That is why you might use excessive violence in subduing the intruder.

Of course if you have been burgled several times and you think you know who the burglar is, then I can see that blind rage could take over if it happens yet again. In these cases I believe that people can act ferociously out of the frustration of feeling powerless.If there has been no help from the police or the law, I can imagine a householder taking out their frustration on a potential burglar.

I do not say that this is permissible, only that it can happen.

I recently read Truman Capote's account of the murders of a family by persons wholly unknown to them, (In Cold Blood). It was chiling to think that the burglars became killers when they couldn't find the money they expected. Events like this colour our view of intruders into our homes and castles, the very places where we should feel safe.

We are debating an occurence that seems regular because we read of them regularly in newspapers, though I don't know the percentage of  incidents like this. Maybe we should take up training in a martial art to deal with potential thieves, violent or not.

[Patf]

Listening to LBC 97.3 this morning, James O'Brien, on the same subject. Several callers gave their own experienes of "taking on " intruders in a sort of mad rage and sending them packing.

Not necessarily wounding them.

It was quite an eye-opener. Normally calm and collected folk seeing red when their family is under threat.

[Christine Animal]

Come on ladies, we must show 'em !

http://www.pratiks.com/video/iLyROoafzG_c.html

 

[PaulT]

Just read this on the BBC News website:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-14988762

Presumably, these type of people would also break in to houses - note that what is in the article took place at 11am on a bus in London. Would I lose sleep if they were stabbed and killed - absolutely not, society would be a far better place without them.

If they get caught no doubt they will be given a short jail sentence and out again in no time. No doubt they will look upon the sentence as something to be admired, 'I'm a tough guy'.

Paul

[Benjamin]

clap·trap/ˈklapˌtrap/

Noun: Absurd or nonsensical talk or ideas.  More »

Dictionary.com - Answers.com - Merriam-Webster - The Free Dictionary

Clarkkent

I hope if I disagree with a point of view I have a modicum of intelligence sufficient to express a counter point of view.

The word was used since you had decided to introduce the likes of Gaddafi, et al, into a thread merely to attempt to classify those posters who felt they had every right to defend their property, into a group almost universally despised. I don't belong to that group just because I feel I have a right to defend myself.

[Tancrède]

[quote user="Benjamin"]I don't belong to that group just because I feel I have a right to defend myself.[/quote]

Quite.

[quote user="Benjamin"]…since you had decided to introduce the likes of Gaddafi…[/quote]

Godwin's Law states that the longer any online discussion is continued, regardless of its content or scope, the probability of the introduction of a comparison involving Hitler or the Naz1s will approach 100%.

At least the introduction of Gaddafi as a point of odious comparison

introduces a refreshing change from the tired inevitability of the customary villains.

[ebaynut]

Last night I was awoken by a noise downstairs in my house. I crept down the stairs to investigate and there was this young man searching through all the drawers and cupboards in my living room.

I asked him WTF he was doing and he replied he was looking for cash.

I told him I would give him a hand and if we found any we could split it 50/50 ;-)

[mint]

Ebaynut, I bet you've just made that story up in order to get a laugh!

But, it's a nice story and I did laugh......[:D]

[Clarkkent]

[quote user="Benjamin"]

Clarkkent

I hope if I disagree with a point of view I have a modicum of intelligence sufficient to express a counter point of view.

The word was used since you had decided to introduce the likes of Gaddafi, et al, into a thread merely to attempt to classify those posters who felt they had every right to defend their property, into a group almost universally despised. I don't belong to that group just because I feel I have a right to defend myself.


[/quote]

I have clearly caused you offence, and in that case I apologise. I had not intended that people defending their property should be so classified, but I had perceived a tendency in this discussion towards a view of society in which individuals considered as evil should be destroyed as a generality.

I maintain that we do not have the right to deliberately and calculatedly kill anyone who has caused us harm. That such people may be killed in the heat of the moment, in the act of criminality, is understandable and excusable. As part of the compact that citizens have with a civilised state, retribution is administered by the state not by individuals. That does not take away from individuals the right to defend themselves but it does remove any right for revenge. Vigilantism and summary justice harms us all: it gives others the perceived legitimacy to exact vengeance on us if they believe that we have wronged them.

If the citizens feel that the process of justice is inadequate in the way it deals with miscreants then, in a democracy, we can canvass our representatives to bring about appropriate change. That this process is slow and cumbersome is regrettable.

 

[Rabbie]

[quote user="PaulT"]

There is certainly something wrong with the justice system. How can some one be a 'career criminal'? Surely, the system is not working.

In California they have a rule - three convictions and your are jailed for 25 years - the first persons third offence was stealing a slice of pizza, he was somewhat surprised to get 25 years.

We see these criminals getting a slap on the wrist - some of them even carry on committing crimes whilst awaiting their court appearances.

What positive benefit are they to society - well, I suppose they create employment for police officers, court personnel, prison officers, probation officers, social workers etc. They could be helping the elderly and vulnerable of society.

I have never been burgled but some people I know who have find it difficult to carry on living in their homes. And what do the burglars do - break in to another home at the earliest opportunity. I also wonder how many of them are also claiming benefits.

Sorry, I am not one of those who sees good in everyone and am fed up paying taxes for the upkeep of these people.

Paul

[/quote]The longer the prison sentence, the more the taxpayer has to pay for the criminal's upkeep. From the example you give that policy does not seem to be working too well. As the US has a higher percentage prison population and crime rate than most Western European countries I am not sure they have the right solution

[Tancrède]

[quote user="Rabbie"]The longer the prison sentence, the more the taxpayer has to pay for the criminal's upkeep.[/quote]

At least, thanks to the robust and courageous actions of Mr Cooke in defending the vulnerable persons for whom he was responsible, I shall not be paying any more for the maintenance of Raymond Jacob.

[ebaynut]

I am glad my situation made you laugh SW17.

But that is nothing to what happened about a year ago.

I was upstairs late one Friday night when I heard a noise from within the garden. I looked out between the curtains and I could see there were two men armed with crowbars about to break in through my door.

I immediately phoned the police station, but when I explained what was happening was told that no one was available at the present time and it could be several hours before someone was free. The station then hung up on me.

I waited a few minutes and phoned the police back, saying that there were two men armed with shotguns in my garden trying to break in.

Within three minutes there were 10 police cars, 30 armed officers and a helicopter overhead. They soon caught the two offenders.

The officer in charge came over to me shouting "I thought you said they were armed". I replied, "and I thought you said you had no one available" :-)

[mint]

Oh, Ebaynut, I'd say you should change your name to just Nut!

That is a story on which you could dine out for months!

When I do eventually have a burglar, I'll try and remember your tips......[:D]

[Pickles]

One night a couple of years ago, I was alone and asleep in the house. I woke hearing a voice elsewhere in the house. I made a lot of noise, thumping around, turning lights on etc and checked the other bedrooms: nothing. I descended the stairs. Couldn't see anyone in the lounge. I walked into the dining room. Just as I was reaching for the light switch, a female voice right beside me said ....

"TURN RIGHT AT THE JUNCTION"

When I managed to crawl down from the ceiling, I realised that my sat-nav had been left in "suspended" mode, not switched off, and had chosen 3 a.m. as being a suitable time to reawaken itself.

Regards

Pickles

[mint]

Nevermind, Turn Right, I bet it gave you quite a turn?  Haha

Perhaps other people will come forward with their burglar stories.  I'm so enjoying all the daft things that have been said.....

[Chrissie]

OH got up one night, not feeling too bright, and sat down at the computer to while away half an hour.  Suddenly a sonorous voice said "You have reached your destination".....................!  Apparently his reaction was "not yet, mate" and he started to feel better straightaway.

My satnav said "Bear Left."  I looked around and there was the zoo.  Brilliant!

Chrissie (81)

[Frederick]

If its OK for the UK government to ship workout to India or Pakistan like the IT work they find much cheaper to have done out there .Why not Prisons ? I think the thought of burglars serving a sentence in a place built for them out there and staffed by low wage cost Asians might make a few slow down . As an act of kindness they could have 15 minutes a week on skype to talk to the folks at home if they had been well behaved .

It has got to a money saver for the tax payer..

[Frecossais]

[quote user="Frederick"]If its OK for the UK government to ship workout to India or Pakistan like the IT work they find much cheaper to have done out there .Why not Prisons ? I think the thought of burglars serving a sentence in a place built for them out there and staffed by low wage cost Asians might make a few slow down . As an act of kindness they could have 15 minutes a week on skype to talk to the folks at home if they had been well behaved .

It has got to a money saver for the tax payer..[/quote]

Radical!