StarGateWars Forums

Kit-Fox wrote:Point is you've only got one choice if you dont want to run foul of reasonable force, which is to do exactly as i've said.

Otherwise you run into reasonable force, which for the example i've given is fine but if both parties are similar its totally different and much easier for you to use more than reasonable force and run foul of the law.

Striking first in a manner i've mentioned erarses that problem as you are still in immediate fear of your life.

I should point out you can find all this argued in many court cases where judges, lawyers etc have said the same damn thing. A case happened in the 80s once where a 50 year old came home to find a burglar ransaking his house, he grabbed a samurai sword off his wall & chopped the guys head off. Although he was artested, he was never charged as it was deemed that the mans fear of his life was genuine & his actions were appropiate but had he stopped to assess the situation he would have got done for manslaughter (IE he wasnt prosecuted/convicted because it was an instant reaction)

~Thamuz~ wrote:

Kit-Fox wrote:Point is you've only got one choice if you dont want to run foul of reasonable force, which is to do exactly as i've said.

Otherwise you run into reasonable force, which for the example i've given is fine but if both parties are similar its totally different and much easier for you to use more than reasonable force and run foul of the law.

Striking first in a manner i've mentioned erarses that problem as you are still in immediate fear of your life.

I should point out you can find all this argued in many court cases where judges, lawyers etc have said the same damn thing. A case happened in the 80s once where a 50 year old came home to find a burglar ransaking his house, he grabbed a samurai sword off his wall & chopped the guys head off. Although he was artested, he was never charged as it was deemed that the mans fear of his life was genuine & his actions were appropiate but had he stopped to assess the situation he would have got done for manslaughter (IE he wasnt prosecuted/convicted because it was an instant reaction)

I'd rather not confront the person who may or may not have other people with them and go back to where my family is make sure there safe, call the police turn alot of lights on so the burgalar knows your up, and wait till the police arrive or the burgalar/s leave rather than putting myself at risk and the family over some silly possesions.

[KMA]Avenger wrote:

~Thamuz~ wrote:

Kit-Fox wrote:Point is you've only got one choice if you dont want to run foul of reasonable force, which is to do exactly as i've said.

Otherwise you run into reasonable force, which for the example i've given is fine but if both parties are similar its totally different and much easier for you to use more than reasonable force and run foul of the law.

Striking first in a manner i've mentioned erarses that problem as you are still in immediate fear of your life.

I should point out you can find all this argued in many court cases where judges, lawyers etc have said the same damn thing. A case happened in the 80s once where a 50 year old came home to find a burglar ransaking his house, he grabbed a samurai sword off his wall & chopped the guys head off. Although he was artested, he was never charged as it was deemed that the mans fear of his life was genuine & his actions were appropiate but had he stopped to assess the situation he would have got done for manslaughter (IE he wasnt prosecuted/convicted because it was an instant reaction)

I'd rather not confront the person who may or may not have other people with them and go back to where my family is make sure there safe, call the police turn alot of lights on so the burgalar knows your up, and wait till the police arrive or the burgalar/s leave rather than putting myself at risk and the family over some silly possesions.

its not about some "silly possessions", its about i have a wife and 3 young kids and i am not going to wait for the police who may or may not come all the while i'm running round the house turning on lights to advertise to what maybe a paedophile/rapist in my home.
i find someone in my home i am not going to sit by and hope and pray he only wants my stuff, if he's in my home i will assume the worst and he will be fair game.

MEZZANINE wrote:
One thing I know is true is that my Gramps cemented broken glass into the top of his back garden wall due to scum constantly climbing over from the back lane and braking into his garden shed. Someone made an anonymous tip off to the police and after not even attending the scene of the break ins they sent 2 officers out to tell him to remove the glass, thats how messed up the law is in the UK.

[KMA]Avenger wrote:

MEZZANINE wrote:
One thing I know is true is that my Gramps cemented broken glass into the top of his back garden wall due to scum constantly climbing over from the back lane and braking into his garden shed. Someone made an anonymous tip off to the police and after not even attending the scene of the break ins they sent 2 officers out to tell him to remove the glass, thats how messed up the law is in the UK.

that's not the first time i have heard that. i would fight that decision and if they want the glass removed then they can take me to court....they wont like the repercussions though, my farther in-law is well connected and works at a VERY large newspaper

Kit-Fox wrote:
EDIT: again of course, you shuoldnt have to look for or know loopholes in the laws to be able to protect yourself or your property, you should have the right to do so enshrined in law.