This discussion is now closed.
Check out other Related discussions
Scroll to see replies
I've not studied law, but self defence laws come to mind 
- the fact that you can't fight back the people that are trying to physically harm you and steal your possessions.
How can it be improved? Allow people to fend them off and to fight for their right to not be harmed and to not be mugged.
- the fact that you can't fight back the people that are trying to physically harm you and steal your possessions. How can it be improved? Allow people to fend them off and to fight for their right to not be harmed and to not be mugged.
Original post by ash92:)
the fact that you can't fight back the people that are trying to physically harm you and steal your possessions.
Don't worry. Self defence is applicable to cases where your defensive action was proportionate to the situation as you saw it to be. The proportionality is judged objectively by a jury who in most cases will side with the self-defender if, again, they acted proportionally. It is a full defence to defend yourself from attack.
Cases where intruders are killed are sometimes legally taboo because it is ambiguous as to whether the home-owner defended himself or actively attacked the intruder.
A lot of sentences you see nowadays are an absolute joke. People are getting ridiculously light sentences for fairly serious crimes. For example a guy in Edinburgh who tortured another person for 14 hours was given 18 months in prison. I hope the judge will be glad to know the victim took his own life when he learned the torturer was getting released so soon.
I'm not saying prisons should purely be punishment, but the UK is hardly Norway and they don't put as much emphasis on rehabilitation. So either they do that or the give far tougher sentences for serious crimes
I'm not saying prisons should purely be punishment, but the UK is hardly Norway and they don't put as much emphasis on rehabilitation. So either they do that or the give far tougher sentences for serious crimes
Original post by Zander01
For example a guy in Edinburgh who tortured another person for 14 hours was given 18 months in prison.
Are you sure it was 18 months and that it was a proven torture. Moreover are you sure the defendant had no defence. I am unsure of the disparities between Scottish and English law however in Britain there is a statutory requirement that a judge sentence a convicted torturer to life imprisonment and I am sure it is similar in Scotland.
Despite this case I concur with your criticism, specifically in relation to petty crimes or 'misdemeanours', where criminals can be let of with a slap on the wrist, and courts in different parts of the country will sentence differently for the exact same crime.
Original post by ash92:)
I've not studied law, but self defence laws come to mind - the fact that you can't fight back the people that are trying to physically harm you and steal your possessions.
How can it be improved? Allow people to fend them off and to fight for their right to not be harmed and to not be mugged.
- the fact that you can't fight back the people that are trying to physically harm you and steal your possessions. How can it be improved? Allow people to fend them off and to fight for their right to not be harmed and to not be mugged.
Self defense is definitely something that is available to crimes such as assault, murder, etc. There are parameters under which it is reasonable (and therefore applicable) but it is an available defense.
Original post by TheMagicalConch
Are you sure it was 18 months and that it was a proven torture. Moreover are you sure the defendant had no defence. I am unsure of the disparities between Scottish and English law however in Britain there is a statutory requirement that a judge sentence a convicted torturer to life imprisonment and I am sure it is similar in Scotland.
Despite this case I concur with your criticism, specifically in relation to petty crimes or 'misdemeanours', where criminals can be let of with a slap on the wrist, and courts in different parts of the country will sentence differently for the exact same crime.
Despite this case I concur with your criticism, specifically in relation to petty crimes or 'misdemeanours', where criminals can be let of with a slap on the wrist, and courts in different parts of the country will sentence differently for the exact same crime.
Yeah it was torture.
Read about it here:
http://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/news/scottish-news/tragic-young-actor-takes-life-4750760
Original post by robhughes
Law students/law applicants/anyone with an interest in the law:
In your opinion what are the problems with the British legal system and what do you think are the best solutions for these problems?
(Discuss)
In your opinion what are the problems with the British legal system and what do you think are the best solutions for these problems?
(Discuss)
Remove all the reforms undertaken by the Blarite and Brown governments. Simple as that. Also remove sentencing guidelines and allow the death penalty.
Not sure about the wider system.
In the courtroom defendants are intimidated by the formality of the system and could otherwise speak up and sway a jury in their favour where circumstances could aggravate or mitigate. Instead they seem to take a passive role under the assumption that the system will sort things out either way. I've been on a jury and I'm convinced the process could sway towards defendants under certain circumstances if the defendant was encouraged to prepare an independent statement for themselves (they only seem to get Q'd by the defence/prosecution).
In the courtroom defendants are intimidated by the formality of the system and could otherwise speak up and sway a jury in their favour where circumstances could aggravate or mitigate. Instead they seem to take a passive role under the assumption that the system will sort things out either way. I've been on a jury and I'm convinced the process could sway towards defendants under certain circumstances if the defendant was encouraged to prepare an independent statement for themselves (they only seem to get Q'd by the defence/prosecution).
Original post by TheMagicalConch
Don't worry. Self defence is applicable to cases where your defensive action was proportionate to the situation as you saw it to be. The proportionality is judged objectively by a jury who in most cases will side with the self-defender if, again, they acted proportionally. It is a full defence to defend yourself from attack.
Cases where intruders are killed are sometimes legally taboo because it is ambiguous as to whether the home-owner defended himself or actively attacked the intruder.
Cases where intruders are killed are sometimes legally taboo because it is ambiguous as to whether the home-owner defended himself or actively attacked the intruder.
Original post by RandZul'Zorander
Self defense is definitely something that is available to crimes such as assault, murder, etc. There are parameters under which it is reasonable (and therefore applicable) but it is an available defense.
Could you tell me more about the legal parameters thereof? The police officers that I have conversed with seem to suggest that the legal parameters are very restricted, if not completely denying the permissibility of self-defence.
In regards to sentencing; you have to remember - a judge can not randomly dream up the sentence of an offender. Most cases must go on what and how a previous case, that was similar, concluded.
There are other areas to note which makes a sentencing outcome, however that is the jist of it.
There are other areas to note which makes a sentencing outcome, however that is the jist of it.
Original post by robhughes
Law students/law applicants/anyone with an interest in the law:
In your opinion what are the problems with the British legal system and what do you think are the best solutions for these problems?
(Discuss)
In your opinion what are the problems with the British legal system and what do you think are the best solutions for these problems?
(Discuss)
The courts system (both) are so confusing and hard to remember for exams.
Original post by Enoxial
The courts system (both) are so confusing and hard to remember for exams.
And I completely understand you.
But its very interesting. Criminal law is just ♡, although Criminal Justice System can be tedious at times.Original post by Graceful_Lawyer
And I completely understand you. But its very interesting. Criminal law is just ♡, although Criminal Justice System can be tedious at times.
But its very interesting. Criminal law is just ♡, although Criminal Justice System can be tedious at times.Finally some one understands!
I haven't interacted with Criminal Law (studied Tort etc) but the case laws are so hard to keep in mind
Original post by Enoxial
Finally some one understands!
I haven't interacted with Criminal Law (studied Tort etc) but the case laws are so hard to keep in mind
I haven't interacted with Criminal Law (studied Tort etc) but the case laws are so hard to keep in mind
Tort! please no, not Tort!!
Duress not a defence for murder, scares me man
Posted from TSR Mobile
Posted from TSR Mobile
What isnt wrong with it. The british legal system, as with most legal systems worldwide, defends injustice. Big organizations always win in court as they are the same self imposed high society as the judges and influential figures. Its collusion
Original post by william walker
Remove all the reforms undertaken by the Blarite and Brown governments. Simple as that. Also remove sentencing guidelines and allow the death penalty.
Clearly you don't study law or politics as you'd realise that's not realistic at all thankfully
Original post by swagyolo420
It is a defence for murder, courts just aren't keen on allowing it
Posted from TSR Mobile
Original post by Wade-
Clearly you don't study law or politics as you'd realise that's not realistic at all thankfully
It is a defence for murder, courts just aren't keen on allowing it
Posted from TSR Mobile
It is a defence for murder, courts just aren't keen on allowing it
Posted from TSR Mobile
Just because the government doesn't seek to do it and other tyrants don't want it to be done, doesn't mean it shouldn't be done.
Latest
Trending
Last reply 1 day ago
Why is the political left now censorious and authoritarian??Last reply 1 day ago
Is it true that British unis are prejudiced towards degrees from Scottish unis?Last reply 1 day ago
If the Russell Group was now a fair representation of what it still claims to beLast reply 2 weeks ago
TSR Goes Green: How important will the environment be in this year's election?Last reply 2 weeks ago
Research Rankings of universities if you add Research Quality & Intensity percentagesLast reply 1 month ago
Is University of Birmingham prestigious and respected well enough in UK ?Trending
Last reply 1 day ago
Why is the political left now censorious and authoritarian??Last reply 1 day ago
Is it true that British unis are prejudiced towards degrees from Scottish unis?Last reply 1 day ago
If the Russell Group was now a fair representation of what it still claims to beLast reply 2 weeks ago
TSR Goes Green: How important will the environment be in this year's election?Last reply 2 weeks ago
Research Rankings of universities if you add Research Quality & Intensity percentagesLast reply 1 month ago
Is University of Birmingham prestigious and respected well enough in UK ?
