Hey there! Sign in to join this conversationNew here? Join for free

What is acceptable in self-defence? Watch

    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    I was watching 'Real Crime' yesterday on ITV1, with it being about the case of farmer Tony Martin, who killed a burgler who was in his house. Initially, Tony Martin was charged with murder, but later on appeal, this was reduced to manslaughter.

    More about the Tony Martin case.

    So, what do you think is acceptable when it comes to defending yourself of property?

    EDIT: Mods, please move to Debate & Discussion.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    Just enough but not too much.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    Pretty much anything, i'd say
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    anythings acceptable as long as you dont kill them
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by TheToaster)
    anythings acceptable as long as you dont kill them
    Even if you have a real fear that they might kill you?
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Dodo XD)
    Pretty much anything, i'd say
    Really? I don't think intentional murder can ever be justified, unless the guy murders someone himself. Having said that, if he is trespassing, he should accept that it was his actions that brought about the consequence.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by A Fair Britain?)
    Really? I don't think intentional murder can ever be justified, unless the guy murders someone himself. Having said that, if he is trespassing, he should accept that it was his actions that brought about the consequence.
    Well, what if he was going to kill you? "Be the hunter not the hunted"
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    Mr Martin found out that it's not self defence to shoot somebody who's running away from him!
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    "Reasonable force".

    If someone comes at me with a knife, it's totally justified for me to kill that person, because they are potentially aiming to take my life.

    However if someone punches me in the face, that's totally unjustified for me to kill them, because they're probably just trying to give you a hiding.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    Anything upto murder I'd say. If a someone breaks into my house, he should accept the consequences of what will happen to him.

    Its when these people start sueing the homeowner/landowner, I think it was a year or so ago now, where a burgular broke into a house, and broke his leg, sued the person who owned the house and won. How much ******** is that!
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    As already mentioned, you can only use 'reasonable force'. So if you're attacked with a knife, you can attack them with a knife. If they punch you, you can't attack them with a knife as it's unreasonable.

    With Martin, the fact that he shot them whilst they were running away from the property meant that he was guilty. Shooting them in the back as opposed to shooting them on the way onto his property makes a huge difference.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    I think a reasonable amount of force is all one can say. For example if a theif was in my house and a crept up behind him and stabbed him in the back (he was unarmed) that would not be reasonable. however, if a thief was creeping up the stairs in a household with young children and the thief was armed, if the wife or husband pushed a wardrobe down the stairs onto their head and they died, that would be reasonable.

    I think that thiefs in ones home have to have some rights, purely because if a thief knew that if he went into someones house and was caught by them he'd be ******, he'd probably carry a weapon and behave very aggressively (like in America, where most burglers carry guns and will shoot you if you get up/wake up)

    Also, I'm against people 'trapping' out there homes, and do not see that as reasonable force. Mainly because, if a fire broke out, one wasn't at home, the firemen went into your home, they could get hurt very badly through no fault of their own.
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by smellslikemarmite)
    "Reasonable force".

    If someone comes at me with a knife, it's totally justified for me to kill that person, because they are potentially aiming to take my life.

    However if someone punches me in the face, that's totally unjustified for me to kill them, because they're probably just trying to give you a hiding.
    Reasonable force isn't the same as 'the amount of force they are willing to use'. You can use the same amount of force to restrain somebody, regardless of their intentions.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Tyraell)
    Reasonable force isn't the same as 'the amount of force they are willing to use'. You can use the same amount of force to restrain somebody, regardless of their intentions.
    Edit: No, I did mean reasonable force. I think.

    Edit again: Taken from http://www.bsdgb.co.uk/index.php?Inf...o_Self_Defence

    "A person may use such force as is reasonable in the circumstances in the prevention of crime, or in effecting or assisting in the lawful arrest of offenders or suspected offenders or of persons unlawfully at large."

    That's what I meant.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    If you think they are going to kill you, you should be able to do anything to stop them. I think if they're carrying a weapon, it shows intent to kill.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by A Fair Britain?)
    Really? I don't think intentional murder can ever be justified, unless the guy murders someone himself. Having said that, if he is trespassing, he should accept that it was his actions that brought about the consequence.
    isn't murder allowed if you're under extreme emotional duress. (such as seeing your son being raped, or gross violation of human rights on a loved one, e.g. torture etc etc.

    Otherwise i agree with the law for the most part on this one.

    TBF, if they're on the floor and not getting up, thats enough. (not dead, more like incapacitated, or knocked out.)

    other than that, with a knife/weapon, broken arms?
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    If he was willing to break into your house unlawfully, I don't think it requires a great leap to assume that he would also be willing to inflict harm on those inside the property in order to carry out a theft. Why give him the opportunity?
    Offline

    1
    Imo he did the right thing, he didn't mean to kill him but **** happens. If you break into someone’s house in the middle night while there asleep with someone else you should have to take the chance you could be accidently killed. Only good about the US is if you break into someone’s house they are allowed to shoot your face off.

    This country’s ridiculous, you catch someone breaking into your car, give them a hiding and you get done for assault lol.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    kick in balls
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    Depends on how much of a threat he is. If he was armed and going to kill me, then I'd see no problem in killing him.

    However if he just planned on giving me a beating, then only enough force to restrain him should be used IMO.
 
 
 
  • See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  • Poll
    Brussels sprouts
    Useful resources

    Groups associated with this forum:

    View associated groups
  • See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  • The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

    Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

    Quick reply
    Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.