Pensioner arrested on suspicion of murder after a suspected burglar was stabbed to death.

[Red Sky]

I literally don’t know what you’re asking here.

Where is the lefty outcry that you're taking a bold stand against?

 

[Red Sky]

Not quite.

The law was changed, quite correctly. It used to be that the onus was on the defender of the property to use "the minimum amount of force" required which left a huge grey area. The test is now 'reasonable force as far as the householder believed it to be' which is important. If you had broken into my house before the change and I killed you, there was a strong chance that I'd be done for murder. However, now, if you break into my house and I kill you, I can argue that I thought my life or family was in danger and if accepted that would succeed.

A change or a clarification of precedent ?

 

[Smokeandsteam]

Yes, the Mail the voice of the working class.

The DM are not the voice of anyone on this. They are merely relfecting back widespread an angry popular expression about criminality that has bubbled over since the arrest of the pensioner.

 

[Spymaster]

A change or a clarification of precedent ?

Amendments, changes, refinements, call them what you will. See CS's post 289.

 

[bimble]

This bloke always good at explaining what the actual legal situation is behind the 'outrage as' headlines. He does it again here:
Bashing burglars and the law of self-defence

 

[cupid_stunt]

Not quite.

The law was changed, quite correctly. It used to be that the onus was on the defender of the property to use "the minimum amount of force" required which left a huge grey area. The test is now 'reasonable force as far as the householder believed it to be' which is important. If you had broken into my house before the change and I killed you, there was a strong chance that I'd be done for murder. However, now, if you break into my house and I kill you, I can argue that I thought my life or family was in danger and if accepted that would succeed.

Actually, according to the link I posted above, #281, which was before the change in law, it wouldn't have actually been very likely at all.

Only eleven householders have been prosecuted for attacking intruders in the past 15 years, Ken Macdonald, the Director of Public Prosecutions, said last night. Mr Macdonald said the low total - which included only seven domestic burglaries - proved existing laws give the public adequate protection to defend their property.

But Mr Macdonald said an informal trawl of Crown Prosecution Service files had shown prosecutions for attacks on burglars were extremely rare. He said: "The law is on the side of householders. Those who attack intruders will only be prosecuted if they use very excessive force."

Householders rarely taken to court for burglar attacks

Also see post #289 & the High Court ruling - the change in the law amounted to "a refinement of the common law of self defence as opposed to a major change: contrary to the headlines used by mainstream news outlets".

 

[Magnus McGinty]

Where is the lefty outcry that you're taking a bold stand against?

I said the right understand the WC better than the left does. You won’t find Tommy Robinson finger wagging and talking of mob rule etc although he’s juxtaposing the quick arrest of the pensioner against the decades of inaction against Muslim grooming gangs.

 

[Smokeandsteam]

Where is the lefty outcry that you're taking a bold stand against?

No need for an outcry, just a sense that the left was on the same side of those it professes to lead on this issue and understood the anger.

Instead, silence.

 

[Red Sky]

The DM are not the voice of anyone on this. They are merely relfecting back widespread an angry popular expression about criminality that has bubbled over since the arrest of the pensioner.

Do you think he shouldn't have been arrested ?

 

[not-bono-ever]

I grew up with families like this . The kids I knew in school are still thieving and doing time decades later. One recently got a handful of years after doing a house and trying to hock a stolen Nobel peace prize at a second hand shop. Yes, a gold nobel fucking prize & a lock of Lord Collingwoods hair, fucking hell. Their dads and their granddads considered thieving a career. I cannot get my head around it personally.

 

[Spymaster]

Their dads and their granddads considered thieving a career.

It's the system that's fucked them though. They'd all be saints if it weren't for capitalism/tories/zionists etc ...

 

[tonysingh]

I grew up with families like this . The kids I knew in school are still thieving and doing time decades later. One recently got a handful of years after doing a house and trying to hock a stolen Nobel peace prize at a second hand shop. Yes, a gold nobel fucking prize & a lock of Lord Collingwoods hair, fucking hell. Their dads and their granddads considered thieving a career. I cannot get my head around it personally.

I'm from one of those families, one of the ones like the scrote that got killed. It's hard as fuck to escape that life. Not to excuse them burgling or thieving.

It's just that if you grow up surrounded by people that think it perfectly normal to cut up drugs on the kitchen twble in front of kids (me) or defraud vulnerable people (the dead scrote) then it's easy to slip into that life, it's normalised for you. Obviously the bloke chose to go on the rob and that's on him BUT his morality filter was skewed and that's the fault of his family. They have a portion of blame here too. If they had been proper family then this bloke wouldn't have done what he did etc.

The homeowner. The outrage at him being arrested is from people that have fuck all clue how old bill handle this. They have to arrest him in order to investigate then clear. I gave up trying to explain this on Facebook after my background was thrown back at me!

 

[not-bono-ever]

One of them did my GF's house not knowing I was involved when I was early 20s.it got messy at the trial when it was clear junior was getting a 9 bar. His father threatened to make us pay and called my GF a dog. a month later, shouty dad was run over. twice. and had his legs smashed to matchsticks. Dad was still thieving and fencing as soon as he was able to walk again. So it goes.

 

[William of Walworth]

We've endured no burglaries fortunately, which is astonishing really, given the area we live in.

All I know is that I'd be shit scared of any burglar (who for the avoidance of any 'doubt' would be a scumbag, no argument).

I doubt I'd be able to do any more than try to scare him off, if that.

All this talk along the lines of 'I'd do whatever I had to' is all very well, but how much are a lot of people even capable of doing? Really?

All this 'If I had to I'd beat him up I would, and if he ended up dead that's his own fault' just sounds like talk to me.

There are surely many more than let on who are simply incapable of beating anyone up, or of threatening them with a household weapon. I doubt I'm alone in this.

I'm a rubbish householder then. Feel free to show your contempt

 

[Red Sky]

No need for an outcry, just a sense that the left was on the same side of those it professes to lead on this issue and understood the anger.

Instead, silence.

The only debate on this issue that I can see is whether or not there should be an investigation i.e whether or not we should wait for the facts before having an opinion.

 

[Red Sky]

We've endured no burglaries fortunately, which is astonishing really, given the area we live in.

All I know is that I'd be shit scared of any burglar (who for the avoidance of any 'doubt' would be a scumbag, no argument).

I doubt I'd be able to do any more than try to scare him off, if that.

All this talk along the lines of 'I'd do whatever I had to' is all very well, but how much are a lot of people even capable of doing? Really?

All this 'If I had to I'd beat him up I would, and if he ended up dead that's his own fault' just sounds like talk to me.

There are surely many more than let on who are simply incapable of beating anyone up, or of threatening them with a household weapon. I doubt I'm alone in this.

I'm a rubbish householder then. Feel free to show your contempt

There's a lot of people waiting for their Travis Bickle moment.

 

[not-bono-ever]

I'm from one of those families, one of the ones like the scrote that got killed. It's hard as fuck to escape that life. Not to excuse them burgling or thieving.

It's just that if you grow up surrounded by people that think it perfectly normal to cut up drugs on the kitchen twble in front of kids (me) or defraud vulnerable people (the dead scrote) then it's easy to slip into that life, it's normalised for you. Obviously the bloke chose to go on the rob and that's on him BUT his morality filter was skewed and that's the fault of his family. They have a portion of blame here too. If they had been proper family then this bloke wouldn't have done what he did etc.

The homeowner. The outrage at him being arrested is from people that have fuck all clue how old bill handle this. They have to arrest him in order to investigate then clear. I gave up trying to explain this on Facebook after my background was thrown back at me!

Yep, I know exactly where you are coming from.I could never get my head around how short term their focused activities were- it was effectively subsistence burglary and dealing - no plans for next week or next year.

 

[Smokeandsteam]

Do you think he shouldn't have been arrested ?

1. There is a mass popular anger about crime/anti social behaviour;
2. Within that expression there are a range of views;
3. The left is not part of the debate generally as it's either not interested or secretly is queasy about popular opinion. This matters when it seeks a hearing on the things it is interested in;
4. I do think he should have been arrested- but see no point holding a pensioner in a cell, he could have been bailed much more quickly - but if the people I work with and know and the social media I read (bar this board obviously) is accurate I am in a minority. Most people I know think 'they should give the bloke a medal';
5. Most people believe the police and the state are not on their side on this issue.

 

[Red Sky]

1. There is a mass popular anger about crime/anti social behaviour;
2. Within that expression there are a range of views;
3. The left is not part of the debate generally as it's either not interested or secretly is queasy about popular opinion. This matters when it seeks a hearing on the things it is interested in;
4. I do think he should have been arrested- but see no point holding a pensioner in a cell, he could have been bailed much more quickly - but if the people I work with and know and the social media I read (bar this board obviously) is accurate I am in a minority. Most people I know think 'they should give the bloke a medal';
5. Most people believe the police and the state are not on their side on this issue.

"Tough on crime, tough on the causes of crime"

 

[8ball]

One of them did my GF's house not knowing I was involved when I was early 20s.it got messy at the trial when it was clear junior was getting a 9 bar. His father threatened to make us pay and called my GF a dog. a month later, shouty dad was run over. twice. and had his legs smashed to matchsticks. Dad was still thieving and fencing as soon as he was able to walk again. So it goes.

Try going faster next time.

 

[not-bono-ever]

wasn't me

 

[Spymaster]

All this talk along the lines of 'I'd do whatever I had to' is all very well, but how much are a lot of people even capable of doing? Really?

All this 'If I had to I'd beat him up I would, and if he ended up dead that's his own fault' just sounds like talk to me.

That's why I started the other thread. I think we'd all like to think that we'd heroically see off any intruder but the reality is far different. When I thought there was a burglar in our kitchen I was fucking terrified. Absolutely shitting it. I could hear and feel the blood pumping around my head and neck. You have no idea what you'll be confronting; is he armed/big/desperate?

 

[Smokeandsteam]

"Tough on crime, tough on the causes of crime"

Is that it? Seriously?

 

[existentialist]

It’s unclear whether editor agrees with it or not.

I think the mistake here is in seeing it in binary terms. What I took from editor's remark was that he's challenging the idea of "fair game" - that, if you're committing burglary, it's OK for someone to kill you. I wouldn't agree with that concept, either. But if you are committing burglary and, in doing so, you put someone in fear of their life, and in that fear they then defend themselves to the point that you die, that's just too bad.

 

[cupid_stunt]

We've endured no burglaries fortunately, which is astonishing really, given the area we live in.

All I know is that I'd be shit scared of any burglar (who for the avoidance of any 'doubt' would be a scumbag, no argument).

I doubt I'd be able to do any more than try to scare him off, if that.

All this talk along the lines of 'I'd do whatever I had to' is all very well, but how much are a lot of people even capable of doing? Really?

All this 'If I had to I'd beat him up I would, and if he ended up dead that's his own fault' just sounds like talk to me.

There are surely many more than let on who are simply incapable of beating anyone up, or of threatening them with a household weapon. I doubt I'm alone in this.

I'm a rubbish householder then. Feel free to show your contempt

I would be shit scared too, but I would grab the fire extinguisher in the hope they backed off & fucked off, if they didn't I would most likely set it off first, in the unlikely circumstances that didn't work, I would be left with no choice at that point, but to lump them with it.

 

[Magnus McGinty]

whether or not we should wait for the facts before having an opinion.

That isn’t the urban way!

 

[Teaboy]

That's why I started the other thread. I think we'd all like to think that we'd heroically see off any intruder but the reality is far different. When I thought there was a burglar in our kitchen I was fucking terrified. Absolutely shitting it. I could hear and feel the blood pumping around my head and neck. You have no idea what you'll be confronting; is he armed/big/desperate?

Yup. You've got to figure that the burglar probably doesn't want a confrontation either. If they were that sort of person they'd just ring the doorbell and barge through when you answered. I've always thought the best outcome all round would be to get them outside the property as quick as possible. As stated above though it does seem some people have some fairly violent fantasies about this.

 

[Teaboy]

I think the mistake here is in seeing it in binary terms. What I took from editor's remark was that he's challenging the idea of "fair game" - that, if you're committing burglary, it's OK for someone to kill you. I wouldn't agree with that concept, either. But if you are committing burglary and, in doing so, you put someone in fear of their life, and in that fear they then defend themselves to the point that you die, that's just too bad.

Of course that was what editor was saying. It was obvious unless you wanted to deliberately misunderstand for some tiresome reason.

 

[cupid_stunt]

Yup. You've got to figure that the burglar probably doesn't want a confrontation either. If they were that sort of person they'd just ring the doorbell and barge through when you answered. I've always thought the best outcome all round would be to get them outside the property as quick as possible. As stated above though it does seem some people have some fairly violent fantasies about this.

Yeah, getting out the house would be ideal, if an option & there's time before you're in arm's reach - at which point they are likely to back off or grab you.

 

[Magnus McGinty]

Of course that was what editor was saying. It was obvious unless you wanted to deliberately misunderstand for some tiresome reason.

Oh do fuck off. If it was seen in binary terms that was because that’s how it had been framed.