Bitcoin Forum
June 20, 2018, 07:57:15 PM *
News: Latest stable version of Bitcoin Core: 0.16.1  [Torrent]. (New!)
 
   Home   Help Search Donate Login Register  
Pages: [1] 2 3 »  All
  Print  
Author Topic: Is it right to kill a violent burglar?  (Read 332 times)
Jet Cash
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 924
Merit: 924


Lets Talk Merit


View Profile WWW
April 06, 2018, 09:10:53 AM
Merited by suchmoon (2), paxmao (1)
 #1

An intruder killed during a raid on a pensioner's home was a career criminal who worked in a family gang and had spent time in jail.
Henry Vincent, 37, from Kent, was stabbed during a break-in at the home of pensioner, Richard Osborn-Brooks, 78, in Hither Green on Wednesday.

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2018/04/05/burglar-killed-pensioners-home-wanted-previous-robbery/

What do you think? I think that a 37 year old career burglar who attacked a 78 year old pensioner in his own home, deserved what he got, and I hope they catch his accomplice. It seems the police don't agree, and they have arrested the pensioner for defending himself and his family.
1529524635
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1529524635

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1529524635
Reply with quote  #2

1529524635
Report to moderator
Advertised sites are not endorsed by the Bitcoin Forum. They may be unsafe, untrustworthy, or illegal in your jurisdiction. Advertise here.
aleksej996
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 350
Merit: 261


★777Coin.com★ Fun BTC Casino!


View Profile WWW
April 06, 2018, 11:03:29 AM
Merited by paxmao (1)
 #2

I don't think it is right to kill anyone, but I don't think you can blame someone for defending themselves either.

In my opinion, if a person violently entered your home, it shouldn't be punished with jail time if you kill them.
You can't be at fault for not willing to risk your's and your families lives.

Old dude shouldn't go to jail for this. Give him some fine, sure.
Just so he knows you can't just kill someone and have no cost or consequences for it.
But he isn't really at fault here. This should be a legal decision someone can make.
aplistir
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 246
Merit: 107



View Profile
April 06, 2018, 11:52:22 AM
 #3

In my country you will get in trouble with the police if you kill or injure a burglar.

It is crazy. You can't legally defend yourself. And if you do, maybe it is best NOT to call a police  Roll Eyes

I recently read about a case, where a burglar had come to a house, and slipped on the slippery pathway and injured himself. In that case the owner of the house had to pay the burglar for his injuries.
(There is a law, that requires house owners to keep roads non-slippery)
ETFbitcoin
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1358
Merit: 1047

★Adconity.com★


View Profile
April 06, 2018, 05:49:52 PM
 #4

While it's not right from law and morality views, it should be done rather than let you/your family killed and your property got stolen.
The only problem is harsh punishment for self-defense action. I think spend time on prison might be too much, but pay some fine and do community service is better alternative.

Maybe the defender should accuse police/government that they don't protect their citizens properly Tongue
jackg
Copper Member
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1050
Merit: 1071


View Profile
April 06, 2018, 06:26:19 PM
 #5

What do you think? I think that a 37 year old career burglar who attacked a 78 year old pensioner in his own home, deserved what he got, and I hope they catch his accomplice. It seems the police don't agree, and they have arrested the pensioner for defending himself and his family.

I think the police are probably afraid of telling people it's alright to kill someone if they break into your house. Honestly, I'd rather kill them then have them get away with it and go onto reoffending and I have a payment for what they have done - especially if you got attacked.

I can see that the police are probably saying you shouldn't actively attempt to injure any intrudor and are supposed to use "reasonable force" - I mean a 78 year old can't exactly hold back a young burglar until the police get there anyway... Although, this probably would open up a lot of other cases (there was an isolated farmer who got prosecuted and found guilty a few years ago for "accidentally" shooting someone - he shot down his staircase as a warning to the burglars and accidentally fatally hit one of them.
jumbo
Member
**
Offline Offline

Activity: 82
Merit: 26


Analyst - Visionary - Economist - Humanitarian


View Profile
April 06, 2018, 06:35:44 PM
Merited by Vod (2)
 #6

From a legal standpoint, it actually depends only on the laws or the place, where such action would be committed.

From a moral standpoint, it is also unclear.

What is certainly not right, is to attack anyone with an intention to kill, if there is any other realistic way to protect your and your family members' lives. It is not right to kill a human over any property, but it may be OK to kill the offender to prevent a murder. It is unclear from the Telegraph's article (which is common for that source, since Telegraph is the tabloid), if there was a clear life threat or not, so the police has to take action and investigate that matter.
Vod
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2422
Merit: 1490


Licking my boob since 1970


View Profile WWW
April 06, 2018, 07:13:17 PM
Merited by jumbo (1)
 #7

From a legal standpoint, it actually depends only on the laws or the place, where such action would be committed.

From a moral standpoint, it is also unclear.

What is certainly not right, is to attack anyone with an intention to kill, if there is any other realistic way to protect your and your family members' lives. It is not right to kill a human over any property, but it may be OK to kill the offender to prevent a murder. It is unclear from the Telegraph's article (which is common for that source, since Telegraph is the tabloid), if there was a clear life threat or not, so the police has to take action and investigate that matter.

Good post.  In Canada, you can use as much force as necessary to defend yourself.  That includes killing the attacker if you believe you will be killed if you don't act.

That being said, if you kill the intruder when it wasn't necessary (which is most cases), you will be charged with manslaughter.

It is also morally wrong to attack with the intent to kill.
cryptothief
Member
**
Offline Offline

Activity: 154
Merit: 31


View Profile
April 07, 2018, 01:29:19 AM
Merited by Vod (1)
 #8

An interesting point, and in the particular case you are talking about, the police have decided that no further action will be taken.

http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-england-london-43676359

I think views on this vary wildly, both geographically and politically (and a whole load more factors depending on the situation). Personally I think that every case should be dealt with on an independent basis, there are so many different scenarios which could sway opinion (and legal decisions) either way. I don't think any law abiding citizen wants to commit murder, even when their life is possibly in danger, it is just not part of the majority's moral code, but if put in a situation where myself or my family's life is being threatened, I don't think I would have any other option. I would imagine most people just hope they are never put in that situation. As the saying goes, if you play with fire...
BenOnceAgain
Member
**
Offline Offline

Activity: 209
Merit: 72

🌐 www.btric.org 🌐


View Profile WWW
April 07, 2018, 01:48:44 AM
 #9

An intruder killed during a raid on a pensioner's home was a career criminal who worked in a family gang and had spent time in jail.
Henry Vincent, 37, from Kent, was stabbed during a break-in at the home of pensioner, Richard Osborn-Brooks, 78, in Hither Green on Wednesday.

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2018/04/05/burglar-killed-pensioners-home-wanted-previous-robbery/

What do you think? I think that a 37 year old career burglar who attacked a 78 year old pensioner in his own home, deserved what he got, and I hope they catch his accomplice. It seems the police don't agree, and they have arrested the pensioner for defending himself and his family.

I am not a legal expert in U.K. law (or any other for that matter), but based on what I do know, the police have legitimate grounds to treat an incident as suspicious and to initially view the pensioner as a suspect.  In some cases, if he was being uncooperative or if they had reason to believe he was hiding something, they could arrest him to question him formally.

However, the use of force to defend your life is generally permitted from a legal perspective, provided that the force was "reasonable".  Of course, that's open to interpretation and there is no clear-cut way to determine what is inside or outside of these bounds.  Hopefully, the police will agree and the death will be viewed as self-defense.  If they do not, and in fact charge him with manslaughter or murder (or their U.K. equivalent), then through Court proceedings this pensioner could assert the defense that he was acting in fear of his life or safety.  Then the Court (Judge or jury, however it is done in the U.K.) would decide the matter.

All of this is very messy and time-consuming, but unfortunately, that's the way it goes sometimes when there is an incident in which the police/authorities believe it happened differently than the suspect claims.

The reality of the situation is that, while the police are there to protect us, in those crucial first minutes when your life could truly be in danger, the police haven't yet had time to be notified and/or arrive.  People must be prepared to defend themselves if it becomes necessary in order to preserve your life.  The use of force in doing this is sometimes required.  The use of lethal force, to me, should be considered as an absolute last resort.  I hope I never have to make such a choice in my own life.  Circumstances like that can weigh on your conscience for life.

Best regards,
Ben
Mc_Moneysack
Jr. Member
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 140
Merit: 5


View Profile
April 07, 2018, 02:06:34 PM
 #10

In my country you can use proportionate force against someone in order to defend yourself. However, if this force is excessive you will get into trouble.
Killing a burglar is a difficult case and will alawys depend on the specific circumstances of the case. If the burglar physically attacks you, it could be proportionate. The situation would very be different if you for example shoot the burglar in the back while he is running away with your property. This would be an illegal use of self defence.

From a moral perpsective I must say that I believe that killing someone is even in cases where it may be legal very difficult to justify. One should always use the smallest amount of force to save ones own life.
Jet Cash
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 924
Merit: 924


Lets Talk Merit


View Profile WWW
April 07, 2018, 03:07:59 PM
 #11

The good news is that the prosecution service has decided that there is no case to answer.
MissionPhailed
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 587
Merit: 502


View Profile
April 07, 2018, 03:10:25 PM
 #12

In my country you will get in trouble with the police if you kill or injure a burglar.

It is crazy. You can't legally defend yourself. And if you do, maybe it is best NOT to call a police  Roll Eyes

I recently read about a case, where a burglar had come to a house, and slipped on the slippery pathway and injured himself. In that case the owner of the house had to pay the burglar for his injuries.
(There is a law, that requires house owners to keep roads non-slippery)


A country in Western Europe?

Here in the Netherlands one has the right to defend him or herself against intruders, albeit proportionally. Proportionally in this case means that you basically aren't allowed to kick an enemy when he or she is down and the use of firearms isn't allowed (possession of firearms are illegal for normal citizens as a whole btw). Deaths of burglars go unpunished in rare cases if it is proven that it happened in self-defence.

Personally I think it is right to fend off a violent intruder, even if it results in the death of said person. But as mentioned above, killing shouldn't be the main priority.
jackg
Copper Member
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1050
Merit: 1071


View Profile
April 07, 2018, 03:27:43 PM
 #13

http://www.itv.com/news/2018-04-06/pensioner-richard-osborn-brooks-to-face-no-legal-action-over-burglar-henry-vincents-death/

The CPS have dropped the case.

In my country you will get in trouble with the police if you kill or injure a burglar.

It is crazy. You can't legally defend yourself. And if you do, maybe it is best NOT to call a police  Roll Eyes

I recently read about a case, where a burglar had come to a house, and slipped on the slippery pathway and injured himself. In that case the owner of the house had to pay the burglar for his injuries.
(There is a law, that requires house owners to keep roads non-slippery)

I remember that case. It spread quite widely with outrage just because they had to pay compensation to a burglar who was at least trespassing on their property.
Ginzink
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 336
Merit: 118


Forex and Crypto Direct-Hedge Fund


View Profile
April 07, 2018, 08:35:46 PM
 #14

It will depends form case to case. If someone enters your home and is defensive or trying to flee if you see them and you shoot it should be charged with manslaughter.
But if they attack you, you should not have to think about the government taking action against you. The only priority needs to be to stay safe! And if you need to use deadly force for that then so be it.
The burglar have then not only choosen to invade your home, but also assault you. Imagine having children asleep, the burglar may be affected by drugs or psycotic, you would and should only think about the safety of your family!
neliawesome
Jr. Member
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 126
Merit: 0


View Profile
April 07, 2018, 09:40:12 PM
 #15

Criminals for me had no right to live because they are no more human but still we had no right to take life to a criminal or not.Theres a legal process for those situation but in that case were his family is at risk I barely understand why he do that and killed that criminal because he is just protecting his love ones.It is better to take life to a criminal than taking life to an innocent one.Sometimes we can do mistake in order to protect the lifes of our love ones.Nobody will let his/her family get hurt by someone so his action was just normal.
digaran
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 840
Merit: 582

Internal investigator!


View Profile
April 08, 2018, 05:18:59 AM
 #16

In my country you will get in trouble with the police if you kill or injure a burglar.

It is crazy. You can't legally defend yourself. And if you do, maybe it is best NOT to call a police  Roll Eyes

I recently read about a case, where a burglar had come to a house, and slipped on the slippery pathway and injured himself. In that case the owner of the house had to pay the burglar for his injuries.
(There is a law, that requires house owners to keep roads non-slippery)


I'm a lawmaker here. you should tell the lawmakers in your country to add a new law. any woman or girl above the age of 18, should have no pants on at home. it would make it harder for the intruder to jump them if they have pants.

It is also morally wrong to attack with the intent to kill.

Would it be morally right, if you attack with the intent to injure just to give the intruder enough excuse to kill you? when you have a young wife and young girls in your house, forget about morality, save their pussies from getting jumped hard.
AlistairJ
Jr. Member
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 65
Merit: 1


View Profile
April 08, 2018, 07:38:14 AM
 #17

"Let three people judge better, than four carry" (carried in the cemetery Smiley)
But seriously, the crime can have different circumstances. And police, investigators and judges will rather objectively sort out. You can not make a conclusion about a crime by newspaper articles.
jackg
Copper Member
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1050
Merit: 1071


View Profile
April 08, 2018, 07:56:12 PM
 #18

It is also morally wrong to attack with the intent to kill.

Would it be morally right, if you attack with the intent to injure just to give the intruder enough excuse to kill you? when you have a young wife and young girls in your house, forget about morality, save their pussies from getting jumped hard.

I mean that means there's at least four of you in the house, so you could be able to intimidate them enough.
Although, I would side with attacking with intent to kill if you feel that you're going to be killed and your family attacked/killed also.




a 70+ year old would probably be quite fragile at that age and so should've probably used all the force he could on a young(er) intrudor.
Monyero
Jr. Member
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 112
Merit: 0


View Profile
April 09, 2018, 02:52:06 AM
 #19

in my country killing thieves should not be. But for me, if the lives are threatened, defending yourself and protecting my family from the cruel thieves, killing thieves can be done. the cruel robber is a useless person. the police can not protect my life from brutal criminals. If there were only two options to kill the thief or be killed, I chose to kill him to save myself
paxmao
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 280
Merit: 272


The revolutionary trading ecosystem


View Profile WWW
April 09, 2018, 08:32:04 AM
 #20

In my country you will get in trouble with the police if you kill or injure a burglar.

It is crazy. You can't legally defend yourself. And if you do, maybe it is best NOT to call a police  Roll Eyes

I recently read about a case, where a burglar had come to a house, and slipped on the slippery pathway and injured himself. In that case the owner of the house had to pay the burglar for his injuries.
(There is a law, that requires house owners to keep roads non-slippery)


LOL where do you live? In the UK, where this happened, you have the right to defend yourself from an aggression, but furthermore, you DO have the right to strike preventively if you have a well founded suspicion of someone going to harm you. You cannot however go after someone who hits or harms you if the individual is running away or not going to harm you further.

In most European countries you get the right to self-defense with proportional means (don't use a gun if the other guy has only a stick). However, once things go to trial, it is very difficult to prove anything.
Pages: [1] 2 3 »  All
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Sponsored by , a Bitcoin-accepting VPN.
Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.19 | SMF © 2006-2009, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!