Posted on 12/03/2004 10:02:52 PM PST by 1066AD
Time to let people kill burglars in their homes, says Met chief By John Steele, Home Affairs Correspondent (Filed: 04/12/2004)
Householders should be able to use whatever force is necessary to defend their homes against criminals, even if it involves killing the intruder, the country's most senior police officer said yesterday.
Sir John Stevens, the Metropolitan Police Commissioner, said those who defended their families and property should only face prosecution over injuries to intruders in "extreme circumstances", where they could be shown to have used gratuitous violence.
Sir John: 'People should be allowed to use what force is necessary' Speaking exclusively to the Telegraph, days after John Monckton, a financier, was stabbed to death in an attempted robbery at his home in Chelsea, Sir John said: "My own view is that people should be allowed to use what force is necessary and that they should be allowed to do so without any risk of prosecution.
"There's a definite feeling around when I go out on the beat with officers and talk to members of the public that we need clarity in the law."
He said the current legal test of "reasonable force", which has evolved in common law, seemed to be weighted against householders and left the public confused about their rights.
Sir John suggested replacing it with legislation that put a statutory duty on police, prosecutors and the courts to presume that the force someone used in their home against a violent intruder was within the law, unless the facts clearly disproved this.
Other police chiefs shared his view - the strongest assertion of a home owner's right to self-defence issued by a senior officer in recent times - that there was too much doubt about what people could do, he said. The issue should be resolved by Parliament as "a matter of urgency."
Sir John, who will step down in January after five years as commissioner, said: "There is a real difficulty in people understanding what force they can use to defend themselves, their loved ones, their families and their homes. In years gone by I think there was a broad understanding of what it meant.
"The test at the moment is that you use reasonable force in the circumstances. You do not use excessiveness. I think the test of reasonableness needs to be looked at and clarified within statute.
"The thing is too imprecise at the moment for people when they are in extremis. You should be absolutely clear about what your legal rights are to defend yourself."
He suggested that the case of Tony Martin, the Norfolk farmer jailed for shooting dead a 16-year-old burglar, Fred Barras, in August 1999, was exceptional one which had distorted the issue of self-defence.
Martin, he pointed out, "did shoot the burglar as he was running away. He did use a gun that was illegal. The Martin case skewed everything and it was the wrong case to concentrate on".
Speaking at Scotland Yard, Sir John said: "Now is the time, specifically with these two cases we have had recently - in Chiswick and Chelsea - for the law to be clarified." The Chiswick case involved a teacher stabbed to death in his home in west London. A man has been charged with his murder.
"It's all very well for the lawyers to say the law is clear, but I'm afraid people on the street don't feel that, and on occasions neither do the police," said Sir John.
"Of course you don't want to have gratuitous or excessive violence… but you have to be given the power to use what is necessary.
"I'm not talking about guns but people being allowed to defend themselves and use whatever is necessary to defend themselves against someone who may well be armed with a knife."
There should be a presumption in law "that the person using the force to defend themselves is acting within the law, rather than the other way round".
Even if a struggle led to the death of an intruder, Sir John added, the law would presume that the person in that house had acted lawfully "and let the law change that presumption because of fact in evidence".
He said: "The message it sends to the would-be attacker is, `Do not think you can come into people's homes and people will not defend themselves with the right type of force that's necessary.' At the moment it seems it's the other way round."
7 November 2004: How the 'Make My Day' law cut epidemic of violent burglary 31 October 2004: How the 'Make My Day' law cut epidemic of violent burglary
make-my-bloody-day ping
It's easy to forget that everyone does not have the same right to protect their castle...God Bless America!
God forbid that you should use a 'gun' to defend your home
and family!
That just wouldn't do....
Perhaps UK citizens could be encouraged to keep clubs?
Or take Karate classes ? All well and good , unless
the intruder happens to have a gun , as many seem to have
these days in Jolly Old England.
They could bite them with their YELLOW TEETH!!
well knock me over with a biscuit.
Down here in Texas we already do allow people to kill burglars in their homes... it's considered justifiable homicide and an affirmative defense to murder.
BTTT
Shhhh. They might hear you and ban biscuits as a dangerous weapon.
Glad to see some sense seeping back into the british society. Too bad people had to die to shake them up.
I agree completely.
Find out where they live. Go to their homes. Kill the SOBs.
Up here in Virginia we are not free to kill burglars.
How stupid is that?
I can only say two things. 1) If you kill them outside your home, drag their worthless bodies back indoors and hope no blood dripped on the sidewalk and 2) If you do shoot 'em, don't shoot them in the back. Their relatives will get John Edwards to sue you.
You can't drag anyone.. Forensics will easily convict you if you move someone.
The issue is to get realistic defense laws of your property with deadly force.
"Got lead?"
Texas is a civilized country. You Texans are very fortunate.
Crime Control
The Difference Between The Liberal and The Conservative
"Debate" Over The War On Crime:
Question:
You're walking down a deserted street with your
wife and two small children. Suddenly, a dangerous looking
man with a huge knife comes around the corner and is
running at you while screaming obscenities. In
your hand is a Glock .40 and you are an expert shot.
You have mere seconds before he reaches you and your
family. What do you do?
__________________________________________________________________
Liberal Answer:
Well, that's not enough information to answer the question!
Does the man look poor or oppressed? Have I ever done
anything to him that is inspiring him to attack? Could we
run away? What does my wife think? What about
the kids? Could I possibly swing the gun like a club
and knock the knife out of his hand? What does the
law say about this situation? Is it possible
he'd be happy with just killing me? Does he definitely
want to kill me or would he just be content to wound me?
If I were to grab his knees and hold on, could my family get away while he was stabbing me? This is all so confusing!
I need to debate this with some friends for a few days to try to come to a conclusion.
____________________________________________________________
Conservative Answer:
BANG!
BANG! BANG! BANG! BANG! BANG! BANG! BANG! BANG! BANG! snick..click...
(sounds of clip being ejected and fresh clip installed)
Wife: "Sweetheart, he looks like he's still moving, what do you kids think?"
Son: "Mom's right Dad, I saw it too..."
BANG! BANG! BANG! BANG! BANG! BANG! BANG! BANG! BANG!
Daughter: "Nice group Daddy!
============================================
The liberal always also thinks:
Is it FAIR that I have a better weapon than does this man of equal (or likely better) worth?
Also: it's our collective fault that this man is in this position, and therefore I and my family owe him bigtime. He undoubtedly (because everyone is) has been a victim of emotional scarring as a result of some family dysfunction which proves that it "takes a village", and all I have to do is show this poor man how sympathetic and caring I and my family are, and he will immediately cease his hostility and come to happiness at our side, and we will all live together in harmony and, more importantly, cultural equality.
Besides, If I fail in this mission, I can always call Jimmy Carter into it. Everyone will FEEL good about it.
The conservative also thinks:
Damn this f*cking Glock! Why didn't I bring my Colt? Hell, I don't even have time to get my S & W out of my sock, so this is going to have to do.
Don't kill burglars in their homes. Wait for them to come to your home.
Spoilsport.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.