The Student Room Group

Someone breaks into your house - what does the law say?

I was just wondering, if someone breaks into your house while you are in it, what does the law say you are allowed to do to stop them?

Are you allowed to beat them senseless? Break their legs so they cant get away?
Say you have a registered weapon in your house, such as a pistol. If you catch the person in the act, what are you allowed to do? Can you shoot them in the leg?
What if they come at you with a weapon e.g. a baseball bat or a crowbar, are you allowed to kill them?

This has always worried me, because if the situation did arise in my house, I'd like to know what I can and cant do, so that I'm not worrying about that while trying to defend my family and my possessions.

Scroll to see replies

You're only allowed to use 'reasonable force' I think. It's totally ridiculous, they're breaking the law by breaking and entering into someone else's property to steal their belongings, but they're still protected under the law. Pathetic. You should be allowed to shoot them or do whatever you want to them if they're on your property.

There was a case not so long ago where two teenagers broke into a factory, but one hurt their ankle when climing over the wall, they then sued the factory owner and ended up actually winning the case. There was also the case with the farmer who shot an intruder and was taken to court. It's so stupid that homeowners are not allowed to defend their homes or themselves - are we just supposed to hand over our belongings?

We're not at all helped by the iffy guidelines of 'reasonable force'.. no one knows what it means!
vote me for government. i will change the law so you can protect your own properly, legally! and that means you can shoot them in the leg, put a bear trap down etc etc... thatll stop burglaries
spangletastic
You're only allowed to use 'reasonable force' I think.


Yes.

spangletastic
It's totally ridiculous, they're breaking the law by breaking and entering into someone else's property to steal their belongings, but they're still protected under the law. Pathetic. You should be allowed to shoot them or do whatever you want to them if they're on your property.


But if you allow people to go beyond what is reasonable then you have vigilantes. Indeed, applying your view I would have shot next door's child for going into my garden to retrieve a ball.

spangletastic
There was a case not so long ago where two teenagers broke into a factory, but one hurt their ankle when climing over the wall, they then sued the factory owner and ended up actually winning the case. There was also the case with the farmer who shot an intruder and was taken to court. It's so stupid that homeowners are not allowed to defend their homes or themselves - are we just supposed to hand over our belongings?


It's called suing in negligence on the basis that a duty of care is owed. There have been cases where farmers have used guns and successfully pleaded self-defence. Indeed, if we took people's views of houses and defending property, I can safely say that I would have killed about 10 chavs now in the street.

spangletastic
We're not at all helped by the iffy guidelines of 'reasonable force'.. no one knows what it means!


Equal force?
Reply 4
You are allowed to beat seven shades of crap out them as long as it's in self defence. You can't chase them and shoot them in the back as they run away, Tony Martin style.

Although you are legally safe if the violence is of reasonable proportion, and in self defence, they can always bring a civil case and sue you.
Zurich
You are allowed to beat seven shades of crap out them as long as it's in self defence. You can't chase them and shoot them in the back as they run away, Tony Martin style.

Although you are legally safe if the violence is of reasonable proportion, and in self defence, they can always bring a civil case and sue you.

i wont need to shoot them in the back to stop them runnin away. if someone breaks into my house, theyll be in not condition to try and run away
Reply 6
i think we should be able to beat the **** out of them- if the break in - its their risk- id ****in pulperise anyone who tries to steal my dragons! well...im just fed up of people walking over me...im sure youd do the same....
Reply 7
RiOt GiRl
i think we should be able to beat the **** out of them


We can.
NDGAARONDI
But if you allow people to go beyond what is reasonable then you have vigilantes. Indeed, applying your view I would have shot next door's child for going into my garden to retrieve a ball.


I'm not encouraging vigilantes. If is on YOUR property, YOU should have a right to defend it. I'm not saying that all of the neighbours should come round with pitchforks and kitchen knives. And the child.. he/she would be retrieving his/her ball.. and would probably look quite cute, and can therefore be spared.

Equal force?


But what if they don't actually use force against you? Am I correct in thinking that you're saying that you can only defend your property if the burglar actually attacks you? If they don't lay a finger on the person whose property they're trying to steal then the property owner can't lay a finger on the burglar. Ridiculous.
or if they break in let their guilt cripple them :smile:

Come on Gandhi!
Reply 10
i live in halls at uni and i know quite a few rooms that have been broken into. I have a hockey stick in my room (to play hockey with!!) but if someone tried to break into my room at night or even my floor I wouldn't hesitate to use that stick for other purposes. Especially as against a bloke I probably wouldn't be able to hold my own without it.
Reply 11
'Reasonable force' is permitted; another one of those b*stard "grey areas", I'm afraid.
spangletastic
I'm not encouraging vigilantes. If is on YOUR property, YOU should have a right to defend it. I'm not saying that all of the neighbours should come round with pitchforks and kitchen knives. And the child.. he/she would be retrieving his/her ball.. and would probably look quite cute, and can therefore be spared.


Not if he's a right menace and turn out to be a hooligan when he's older. So you keep them on the straight and narrow strict style in early years. In fact, I know a fair few, including people I know, who would have put people in hospital for trying to steal property in back packs at school. I think I had an opportunity and if it was the law, I would have used a ball bearing gun like the IRA have used in the past. And no this child looks like Damien. :eek:

spangletastic
But what if they don't actually use force against you? Am I correct in thinking that you're saying that you can only defend your property if the burglar actually attacks you? If they don't lay a finger on the person whose property they're trying to steal then the property owner can't lay a finger on the burglar. Ridiculous.


You can protect your property in self defence.
Reply 13
NDGAARONDI
Not if he's a right menace and turn out to be a hooligan when he's older. So you keep them on the straight and narrow strict style in early years.


Ahh; the "pre-emptive self-defence" principle. Where's a Conservative when you need one? :rolleyes:
a man notices people are breaking into his shed so he phones the police. they say theres noone available at the minute, well send someone round later'. so he hangs up. a minute later he phones back and says 'i just phoned about my shed being broke into. it doesnt matter now. ive shot them.' within minutes armed police are t the house and arrest the burglars.

one policeman says to the owner 'i thought you said you had shot them'? he says, i did, and you said there was no-one available
Reply 15
Just be reasonable. You can whack them over the head with a frying pan/cricket bat/law textbook, but if they're knocked out and you start stabbing them in the back with a large knife or something then that's gone too far. You wouldn't be protecting yourself because you're no longer in danger. The CPS are usually quite good about not prosecuting people for defending themselves unless they've done something totally stupid.
Reply 16
The problem is, I would be very scared and quite frankly adrenaline would keep me going. Maybe that's too honest, but trying to assume people can be calm when a stranger breaks into your house, where possibly your family are. Honestly what would u do?
There was recently a large ish debate started by a member of the police force who thought that the law should be changed to allow people extra rights in defense of there home and property, However it was dropped before it got anywhere. I am very strongly for the government/police force estabishing proper "reasonable force" guidelines rather than just saying "Oh you can use reasonable force, but we won't tell you want Reasonable force is"

I heard a case a few years ago where a guy broke into an old lady's house via the window. He cut his hands on the glass on the way in, and then fell on a knife the lady had left in front the window. The guy was able to sue the women for damages(Not sure of the outcome tho)

Personally if anyone came into my house and threatened the safety of myself and my family in anyway, I would not hesitate to use force against them, even if they do end up dead as a result. The law be damned when ones life is at stake
There was a case, in America I think where someone caught a burglar in thier house knocked him out, tied him up, dragged him outside and set fire to him. That's probably going too far. I think UK law says you can defend yourself if you 'feel threatened' with anything that comes to hand.
Reply 19
NDGAARONDI
And no this child looks like Damien.


even still...i think you could spot the difference between an adolescent or adult burgler breaking into your house and a child running after a ball in your garden