Killing burglars in ireland

Conor108

I was just watching that Simpsons where Chief Wiggum tells Homer that anything you do a person while there in your home is "nice and legal" and then homer invites Flanders in and is told it doesn't work if you invite them. Is that the same in Ireland? I vaguely remember some farmer or someone ages ago on the news who killed a tresspasser or something like that but I forget what happened

cornbb

Oh no, here we go.

Pitchforks at the ready :rolleyes:

(helpful answer: no its not, or at least shouldn't be, but sometimes "justice" doesn't do itself justice)

Conor108

Well that can't be good.....strange feeling to delete thread rising

cornbb

Conor108 wrote:

Well that can't be good.....strange feeling to delete thread rising

Don't mean to knock your thread or anything, but previous threads on the Padraig Nally case degenerated into horrible things. Plus the gun ownership thread here today wasn't too impressive either.

Conor108

Yeah the gun thing reminded me of it. Anyway, in order to not get flamed.....Pay no attention to this thread Thats right, move along there

scruff321

Conor108 wrote:

I vaguely remember some farmer or someone ages ago on the news who killed a tresspasser or something like that but I forget what happened

are you taking the piss? how could you only vaguely remember that?!? it was one of the most contraversial trials in irish history

Conor108

scruff321 wrote:

are you taking the piss? how could you only vaguely remember that?!? it was one of the most contraversial trials in irish history

Yeah Im 15 though so I don't imagine I was a loyal follower of current events back then

Dave!

BURN EM, BURN EM ALL!!!!!q

biko

You can use reasonable force to protect yourself and your property but then it's up to the courts (after the fact mind) what reasonable force is...

The Bollox

I'm sure you could get away with it. all you have to do is plead insanity and in the court room shout hysterically "I'LL KILL YA! I'LL KILL ALL OF YA! ESPECIALLY THOSE OF YOU IN THE JURY"

tallus

You could also do a Homer Simpson and address them as "Drunken Hicks of the Jury"

I'll get me coat

floyd333

biko wrote:

You can use reasonable force to protect yourself and your property but then it's up to the courts (after the fact mind) what reasonable force is...

reasonable force? If someone breaks into my house, they won't be walking out simple as that.

neon_glows

what if you invite them in and they dont leave, can you use reasonable force then.

The Real B-man

If ya even scratch a burgular nowadays you would prob endup in prison :rolleyes:

DarkJager

Is there not something about being able to use lethal force if the intruder is on the 2nd floor of the house? I think its viewed as a direct threat to the lives of everyone in the house and as such, whatever force needed to subdue or terminate the intruder is allowed.

Don't know how you'd keep your cool confronting a burglar to be honest. I'd probably end up killing the bastard either way just for having the cheek to break into my house.

Boston

The Real B-man wrote:

If ya even scratch a burgular nowadays you would prob endup in prison :rolleyes:

Yea thats accurate :rolleyes::rolleyes:

princess-lala

id kill anyone that stepped foot near my gate!!!
out with rifel!!:D



i live in a bungalow in the middle of nowhere !!! any intruders gettin up to my attic il have the guns/battons everythin possible to kick the **** outa them!!!

The Bollox

DarkJager wrote:

Is there not something about being able to use lethal force if the intruder is on the 2nd floor of the house?

AFAIK this is true. what happens if you live in a bungalow? do you just have to call the police and wait a good half hour for them to arrive. also what happens if you live in an apartment block? can you do whatever you like if you are above the ground floor?

Boston

The Bollox wrote:

AFAIK this is true. what happens if you live in a bungalow? do you just have to call the police and wait a good half hour for them to arrive. also what happens if you live in an apartment block? can you do whatever you like if you are above the ground floor?

When has the law every been that specific? I've heard to second floor thing numerous times, I've no idea if its true, but I'd imagine its worded along the lines of "close to where you sleep".

DarkJager

That place where the matresses are

The Bollox

put a matress in every room of the house (I'm sure the size of the matress won't matter) so you can kick the carp out of them anywhere

Alanthroneus

i was listening to the news or the radio or something and they were talking about this. dont know what the law says exactly but apparently the burgler is supported more by the law than you are yourself. afaik mc dowell was planning to change the law or something so that you would have more rights to defend yourself in that situation but Brian Lenihan in all his wisdom has shelved it...

Yakuza

We've two sofa beds downstairs, on one of which I have been known to fall asleep on, ergo I sleep on both floors of the house. Sorted!

Hagar

My Da always said "I'd rather be tried by twelve men rather than carried by six".

gamblor101

I remember hearing on the radio a few weeks back that one of the states in the US legalised the "shoot first, ask questions later" principle when it comes to burgulary.

Rhonda9000

Force may be used to evict a trespasser in appropriate circumstances - s.18 Non Fatal Offences Against the Person Act 1997.

To the "it's a disgrace" heads: the idea is pretty simple - if there was carte blanche to do as you wished to trespassers on your property, all you would have to do to someone you wish to assault or kill is lure them there and claim later they were trespassing on your property.

Edit: I might also add - if the trespasser attacks you and you believe at the time that they are going to kill you and you kill them in self defence etc. the defence of self-defence is pleaded...

MooseJam

didn't a burglar fall from the first floor of an apartment building and kill himself recently, everybody was saying it was a tragic accident, tragic accident me arse good enough for him, any burglar is fair game in my book

Agamemnon

IMO, if a burglar breaks into a house, they should have no legal comeback if something happens to them. If they get their heads blown off, get mauled by dogs or fall down the stairs and break their legs - tough shit. They had no right to be there in the first place so whatever happens, they brought on themselves.

Manic Moran

gamblor101 wrote:

I remember hearing on the radio a few weeks back that one of the states in the US legalised the "shoot first, ask questions later" principle when it comes to burgulary.

Although somewhat sensasionalist radio reporting, it's roughly referring to the Castle Doctrine. (i.e. A Man's Home is his Castle, from the UK Common Law of the 1700s). It's not actually a new concept, for example California has had it on the books for decades (and I quoted it on the gun thread). Exactly half the States have such a law on the books.

Italy recently enacted a similar law.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/4645228.stm

The Italian parliament has passed legislation allowing people to shoot robbers in self-defence.
The law permits the use of guns and knives by people in homes or workplaces to protect lives or belongings

Some States have expanded the presumption of correctness to encompass not only your home, but also any place where you have every legal right to be. These are commonly known as "Stand your ground" laws, or "Shoot First" laws by the critics. In actuality, they don't relax the conditions required for lethal force: There must still be a grave threat, but they do reduce the uncertainty produced by the Duty to Retreat concept, and Monday-morning quarterbacking which often follows such an incident.

NTM

Reku

Alanthroneus wrote:

i was listening to the news or the radio or something and they were talking about this. dont know what the law says exactly but apparently the burgler is supported more by the law than you are yourself. afaik mc dowell was planning to change the law or something so that you would have more rights to defend yourself in that situation but Brian Lenihan in all his wisdom has shelved it...

Alas this is undoubtedly the case, the law doing more to protect the criminals than the victims.
IMO if someone breaks into your house you should be allowed use any force YOU deem necessary. You have no idea what their intent is, no idea if they're alone, if they're armed, etc... Add to that the fact that they clearly consider themselves outside the law and don't give a toss about your human rights, as such I don't see why they should be given any protection by the law or human rights either. Run things like this and I think there would be a steady decrease in the amount of burglaries.
This is a large part of what's wrong with the world IMO, thanks to the idiocy of the law it's easier and more benefitial to lead an illegal & immoral existance than to live straight and narrow.

Spyral

I think that lethal force is 'immediatly ok' that is you wake up with some bloke in your room and you blow his head off its ok as if he's in your bedroom its assumed that he's there to cause you injury.

otherwise reasonable force to eject is allowed

Mr Magnolia

Think it's all about 'being in fear for your life'.

Hagar wrote:

My Da always said "I'd rather be tried by twelve men rather than carried by six".

I like that.

Duggy747

It is really stupid that someone who technically forfeits their rights when they break into your house still has more rights than you. Come on, in a real case if you woke up hearing something one night and you find someone nicking your stuff in the living room your hardly going to politely say: "hurry up and leave cuz I got work in the morning." In reality, if you heard someone in your house one night you'd grab the first thing you can find as a weapon, ring the Gardaí, and then proceed to beat the living fúck out of them.

Hagar wrote:

My Da always said "I'd rather be tried by twelve men rather than carried by six".

Nice one.

WellyJ

If you bury him deep enough in your garden you will probably be fine.

Lowest scum of all tbh,

Up there with child rapists.

Anyone who can break into someone else's hard earned house doesn't deserve to live

Mortmain

I think you should be allowed kill anyone - especially Dwarves, fat people, anybody different and people with freckles & purple hands who drink "backardee breezer - dortange one" - they're freaky - murder death kill all the way, think of how interesting the daily grind would become! BUSH FOR PRESIDENT OF THE WORLD!!!!

big b

Personally, I'd deal out enough blows with my trusty 9 iron to ensure Mr Scummy Thief wasn't getting up to hit me back for a good while. Then call the Guards to clear up the mess. I'm happy to take my chances whether he survives or not, but I wouldn't deliberately kill him.

But I think it should be said that if you're not well able to look after yourself & you're reading threads like these & thinking "ok, I'm going to defend my property" - being burgled & also beaten senseless, stabbed, shot, killed...is far worse than just being burgled.

Sad fact of life, but if you don't normally reckon you'll win a fight, don't get into one. Claim the insurance & use some of it to improve your security as you see fit.

ScumLord

I don't think anyone should be allowed to blow anybody's head off for entering your house illegally. I can accept that a burglar may not necessarily be the worst person and circumstance/desperation may have lead him to that way of life but the law should be on the side of the home owner. Unless there's strong evidence that the home owner beat the living **** out of the burglar held him in the house rather than let them escape and murdered him then the law should forgive the home owner for just about anything that happens.

I don't agree with allowing a nation of drunks to own any gun they like but there could be a home defence gun just strong enough to cause allot of pain and break the skin but anyone that wants one should be trained to use it to cause harm without killing the target.

What would be even better though is if they stopped Ireland's head long run into metropolis environments where this kind of stuff happens, if there where proper community's where people respected each other these crimes wouldn't be as widespread.

DarkJager

It doesn't matter about the community respecting each other, there will always be some gutter level scumbag who has zero respect for anybody.

Duggy747

Plus we got scum being relocated to towns all over the country (mine included). Dirty fúckers specialise in burgling, nicking cars, èt all. Prison teaches them nothing except make them think they're "harder" for being on the inside!

Spyral

Anyone who can break into someone else's hard earned house doesn't deserve to live

it's not that hard to break into somones house...


additonally they may think they're hard but a shotgun stops them all the same 8D

Collie D

The usual nutjobs out again I see...why do you need to kill the person? Surely a good few slaps would be in order, if you happen to use a closy-by instrument, fair enough. If the burglar dies, tough sh1t. But people on here are actually talking about murder...big difference between defeding yourself and your home and killing somebody in cold blood.

DarkJager

So Collie, what would you do if the burglar turned vicious and attacked you? Would try to hit him a "few slaps" hoping he'd go away? What if he didn't feel like running? In this case I'd personally aim to kill the bastard or severely wound him enough to cripple him. There's no nice way of saying it, but force ferom an intruder needs to be met with extreme force from the homeowner.

Tha Gopher

Duggy747 wrote:

Plus we got scum being relocated to towns all over the country (mine included). Dirty fúckers specialise in burgling, nicking cars, èt all. Prison teaches them nothing except make them think they're "harder" for being on the inside!

Relocated? As in the councils are moving the skangers out of Dublin deliberately?

Id gladly shoot a stranger for breaking in to my house as long as I got away with it. Its their own fault and they really should have known better.

Collie D

Well DarkJager. Nowhere in my post does it say let the guy terrorise you and your family and take your stuff. I completely condone the use of force in self defence if threatened or intiimidated. What I do not agree with is the shoot first ask questions later policy which is being put forward on this thread. Should this apply to all trespassers?

DarkJager

I think it should Collie. Being realistic, the scenario would be an unauthorised and unwanted person illegally in your home with the intention of stealing the contents and possibly even harming the occupants. I don't think there's any need to ask questions in this case. The burglar shouldn't be there and as such, should be subjected to the consequences for doing so.

Collie D

So what other minor offences should we start shooting people for? People who don't indicate do my head in. What would you define as a trespasser by the way? Ever walked through a farmer's field as a shortcut? I just reckon there's a lot of "hard nuts" on here trying to sound tough.

arybvtcw0eolkf

I'm in the defence forces, and so as such I spend alot of time away from home either on duty here or oversea's.

I also keep two shotgun's and one .22 rifle at home, and since he's been a youngster my son has been taught to use them all and told its his duty that in my absence he's to shoot any intruder in the house or on our property.

Of course if I'm at home I'll galdly do it myself and take my chances in court.

impr0v

DarkJager wrote:

I think it should Collie. Being realistic, the scenario would be an unauthorised and unwanted person illegally in your home with the intention of stealing the contents and possibly even harming the occupants. I don't think there's any need to ask questions in this case. The burglar shouldn't be there and as such, should be subjected to the consequences for doing so.

I really don't want to get into this thread, it seems to be hang 'em and flog 'em territory, but...

How do you discern his or her intention if you've shot them to pieces, danced in their viscera and rubbed their blood on your face before you've challenged them or asked any questions?

Say your hypothetical twin brother stumbles home drunk one night to his fictional apartment block. He has just moved in a few days before, he's not familiar with the layout and is disorientated due to the alcohol, so he gets off the lift on the wrong floor. He stumbles up to the door that would be his on the floor above, can't get his key into the lock, but finds it's open and staggers in. He's making his way to the en-suite to take a piss when he's instantly killed with a shotgun blast to the head. Fair enough, right?

layke

To ask, does anyone actually care what laws they put in place? I mean supposing they brought in a law that says if I attack a burgler and broke his legs i'm doing a mandatory 1 year in prison.

In my eyes, breaking his legs = i've saved my families life and it's well worth that 1 year in prison.

Also trying to find a jury to convict you is near impossible.

Edit ::

impr0v wrote:

I really don't want to get into this thread, it seems to be hang 'em and flog 'em territory, but...

How do you discern his or her intention if you've shot them to pieces, danced in their viscera and rubbed their blood on your face before you've challenged them or asked any questions?

That's the problem, you don't know their intentions.

Say your hypothetical twin brother stumbles home drunk one night to his fictional apartment block. He has just moved in a few days before, he's not familiar with the layout and is disorientated due to the alcohol, so he gets off the lift on the wrong floor. He stumbles up to the door that would be his on the floor above, can't get his key into the lock, but finds it's open and staggers in. He's making his way to the en-suite to take a piss when he's instantly killed with a shotgun blast to the head. Fair enough, right?

Exactly the reason why guns should remain illegal.

Robbo

Collie D wrote:

The usual nutjobs out again I see...why do you need to kill the person? Surely a good few slaps would be in order, if you happen to use a closy-by instrument, fair enough. If the burglar dies, tough sh1t. But people on here are actually talking about murder...big difference between defeding yourself and your home and killing somebody in cold blood.

If they don't tell all and sundry on the internet how they'd kill a burglar and defile his corpse, how else would they vent their Charles Bronson revenge fantasies?

_blank_

Collie D wrote:

So what other minor offences should we start shooting people for? People who don't indicate do my head in. What would you define as a trespasser by the way? Ever walked through a farmer's field as a shortcut? I just reckon there's a lot of "hard nuts" on here trying to sound tough.

Have you EVER been the victim of a robbery in your home?

It is a very traumatising experience, I can tell you, and if I caught the bastard who did it, on my premises, I wouldn't be long about trying to kill them.

Your comparison of a burglar with a non-idicator is idiocy in the extreme tbh.