The Student Room Group

What is deemed reasonable force?

Hi all, not sure if this is the correct area to post this but here we are.

One thing that has always seemed a little vague to me in law is reasonable force if this be in a home robbery or a mugging etc. My question is what would be deemed reasonable force. For example, If I am mugged at knife point or threatened with some kind of weapon and I do not have the ability to run and my only option is to fight what can I legally do? Can I use a weapon of my own etc.

Thanks, little random I know but just trying to gauge what is possible
Reasonable force as rightly vague and gives the courts the opportunity to be equally flexible.

On the one hand, stabbing to death an armed robber with his knife after a bloody struggle is deemed reasonable
https://www.manchestereveningnews.co.uk/news/greater-manchester-news/in-the-clear-bramhall-homeowner-who-stabbed-872616

However, it was originally deemed that hitting a burglar to death with a cricket bat after chasing them down the road was not reasonable force
https://www.theguardian.com/uk/2009/dec/14/jail-brothers-burglar-cricket-bat

As a caveat, the later was released after a public outcry at the jailing.
Reply 2
Avatar for Joleee
Joleee
19
it’s based on proportionality; you can use as much force that is necessary to remove the threat and the jury asks what would a reasonable person (meaning average person) do in that situation. if you’re in a deadly situation you can use deadly force. if someone is shooting a water gun at you from meters away and you take out a real gun and shoot them probably not reasonable.

you can read more about it here :smile:

https://www.cps.gov.uk/legal-guidance/self-defence-and-prevention-crime
(edited 3 years ago)
Reply 3
Avatar for GodLilJohn
GodLilJohn
OP
4
Original post by ByEeek
Reasonable force as rightly vague and gives the courts the opportunity to be equally flexible.

On the one hand, stabbing to death an armed robber with his knife after a bloody struggle is deemed reasonable
https://www.manchestereveningnews.co.uk/news/greater-manchester-news/in-the-clear-bramhall-homeowner-who-stabbed-872616

However, it was originally deemed that hitting a burglar to death with a cricket bat after chasing them down the road was not reasonable force
https://www.theguardian.com/uk/2009/dec/14/jail-brothers-burglar-cricket-bat

As a caveat, the later was released after a public outcry at the jailing.

Yeah I suppose that makes more sense, thank you :smile:
Reply 4
Avatar for GodLilJohn
GodLilJohn
OP
4
Original post by Joleee
it’s based on proportionality; you can use as much force that is necessary to remove the threat and the jury asks what would a reasonable person (meaning average person) do in that situation. if you’re in a deadly situation you can use deadly force. if someone is shooting a water gun at you from meters away and you take out a real gun and shoot them probably not reasonable.

you can read more about it here :smile:

https://www.cps.gov.uk/legal-guidance/self-defence-and-prevention-crime

Yeah I suppose so thanks for the link too
Reply 5
Avatar for GodLilJohn
GodLilJohn
OP
4
Is it then safe to safe if a group of people were to attack you the use of a weapon would be reasonable?

Quick Reply

Related discussions

Latest

Trending

Trending

Articles for you