Taking the Law into your own hands

Riddle101

I'm not sure if i should have put this in Politics but i thought i might get better feedback on AH so here i go.

So your walking in City Centre on a nice Saturday afternoon, the sun is out, your not in work and so far you're having a good day. You decide you want to post a letter so you walk into a shop to buy stamps. You walk up to the counter a see a nice young women smiling at you and asks how may i help. You ask for the stamps and she hands to you. As you hand the money to the women, suddenly a big masked man burst through the door of the shop with a Shotgun, jams the gun in your face roars at the women to hand him all the money in the till or he'll blow your head off.
What do you do?
a)Start weeping and beg the man to let you go
b)Stand perfectly still and calm and try to calm the situtation
c)Go Chuck Norris on this guys ass by knocking the gun out of his hand and beat him up.

As you knocked the guy to the ground two Cop show up and instead of arresting the man who tried to rob the shop, they arrest you instead. They bring you to the garda station were you are interrogated and finally you find out the robber is pressing charges on you, he's suing you for % Million Euro.

Do you think we should be allowed take the law into our own hand without the worry of getting arrested ourselves? It's really unfair how a person who only trying to defend himself can get arrested and charged. I mean what if someone comes up to you with a knife, don't you think it's fair that under the circumstances, you should be allowed to i don't know maybe pick up a bottle lying on the ground and smash it across the guy head. It's a life or death situtation i don't think we should just allow ourselves to get stabbed just because the Gardai and the Justice System won't allow it. What if someone is robbing your house and you wake up aftr hearing him downstairs. Should we not be allowed to defend out houses from these robber by confronting them. I think it's silly how we as normal people seem to have to depend on a Justice System that is slow and rather corrupt, that we can't even protect our families anymore without being arrested. So i ask you, do you think we should be allowed to take the law into our own hands if needs be?

Photi

Carry a sack of doorknobs. We should all carry a sack of doorknobs. You supply your own doorknobs though.

Collie D

I don't think any Garda in the country is going to arrest you for that. If they did, the DPP would never prosecute and again if they did no jury would convict you. That's some imagination..especially the bit about the smiling post office staff

Oh and in answer to your original question there is no way I'm going to get my head blown off to save An Post a few quid. Let him take the money, probably piss myself with fear and then find out who the f*cker was and hurt him. Revenge is best served cold

AlmightyCushion

Riddle101 wrote: »

I'm not sure if i should have put this in Politics but i thought i might get better feedback on AH so here i go.

So your walking in City Centre on a nice Saturday afternoon, the sun is out, your not in work and so far you're having a good day. You decide you want to post a letter so you walk into a shop to buy stamps. You walk up to the counter a see a nice young women smiling at you and asks how may i help. You ask for the stamps and she hands to you. As you hand the money to the women, suddenly a big masked man burst through the door of the shop with a Shotgun, jams the gun in your face roars at the women to hand him all the money in the till or he'll blow your head off.
What do you do?
a)Start weeping and beg the man to let you go
b)Stand perfectly still and calm and try to calm the situtation
c)Go Chuck Norris on this guys ass by knocking the gun out of his hand and beat him up.

When I get into a situation like that I'll let you know. I don't think anyone could judge how they'd react until they were actually in that situation.

Riddle101 wrote: »

As you knocked the guy to the ground two Cop show up and instead of arresting the man who tried to rob the shop, they arrest you instead. They bring you to the garda station were you are interrogated and finally you find out the robber is pressing charges on you, he's suing you for % Million Euro.

I really think the cops would arrest the person with the gun over the person who just punched the buy with the gun. I'd say a judge would laugh at any one who tried to sue someone for punching them when they stuck a gun in their face.

Riddle101 wrote: »

Do you think we should be allowed take the law into our own hand without the worry of getting arrested ourselves? It's really unfair how a person who only trying to defend himself can get arrested and charged. I mean what if someone comes up to you with a knife, don't you think it's fair that under the circumstances, you should be allowed to i don't know maybe pick up a bottle lying on the ground and smash it across the guy head. It's a life or death situtation i don't think we should just allow ourselves to get stabbed just because the Gardai and the Justice System won't allow it. What if someone is robbing your house and you wake up aftr hearing him downstairs. Should we not be allowed to defend out houses from these robber by confronting them. I think it's silly how we as normal people seem to have to depend on a Justice System that is slow and rather corrupt, that we can't even protect our families anymore without being arrested. So i ask you, do you think we should be allowed to take the law into our own hands if needs be?

Wasn't the law changed a while ago to allow you to use reasonable force or something?

Karl Hungus

Hey, it works for Batman.

CantGetNoSleep

Self defence, defence of another person and perhaps even defence of property will get you off here

Imo yes we should be allowed take the law into our own hands if needs be, up to and including lethal force to defend ourselves, our families and our property, as we are allowed to do at present.

If you really want to know more about it read this, starting where it says burglary and permissible responses to it:
http://www.bailii.org/ie/cases/IECCA/2006/C165.html

“That the house of everyone is to him as his castle and fortress, as well for his defence against injury and violence as for his repose…”.

In this instance the c*nt killed the homeowner, who I happened to know, but the judge discussed extensively the right to protect your home

Overheal

Havent seen Boondock Saints, then?

BraziliaNZ

I'm all for vigilante groups beating the living sh*t out of delinquent teens in Dublin, if I go back I'll try and organise one maybe

Collie D

BraziliaNZ wrote: »

I'm all for vigilante groups beating the living sh*t out of delinquent teens in Dublin, if I go back I'll try and organise one maybe

Nah, you're grand. Stay where you are, please

Einstein

thats not really taking the law into your own hands. Its straight up self defense. I aint putting the hands of my life into anybody elses except my own.

Anyway- post a letter? Pfffft...

email FTW

BraziliaNZ

Collie D wrote: »

Nah, you're grand. Stay where you are, please

Now I'm definitely doing it

Steve

So there I was - innocently breaking into a house in D4, just part of the job really. Was coming back down the stairs with a PS3 that I got from a kids bedroom (fecker woke up so I had to knife him) when wham pumma pumma pumma bop bop thud - I fell down the feckin stairs. At the bottom, I then got viciously attacked by a jack russell, nearly got the face bitten off me.

Turns out there was a loose bit of carpet near the top - no signs or nothin. - so I rang the union and asked wtf? They had a quick recci and sure enough if there's loose carpet, they must put a sign up. I managed to get the mangy dog put down as it attacked for no reason - ha! - serves them right.

The Guards came and brought me to the nick - bit of an inconvenience really but I was out an hour later. fecked the night up, could've got two more houses in if it wasn't for that.

Best bit is - the union called me back and it turns out I can sue them over the carpet - wayheyyy... feckers'll know better next time....

Sangre

You've been reading too many tabloids OP, maybe the gardai will arrest you (as they don't have the full story) but you will never be charged as you were fully acting within the law to protect yourself, the shopkeeper and the property of the shop.

People have this misguided notion they can't defend themselves or their property thanks to a few rags and media exaggeration. I've also heard the ridiculous claim robbers can sue the homeowners if they injure themselves. Maybe, if we ignored every legal principle the courts have established over the last 100 years.

Steve

Sangre wrote: »

People have this misguided notion they can't defend themselves or their property thanks to a few rags and media exaggeration.

No -the law expects you to flee before defending yourself. look it up.

Sangre wrote: »

I've also heard the ridiculous claim robbers can sue the homeowners if they injure themselves.

They can and have done sucessfully.

Sangre

The law expects you to flee if another person is being threatened with a gun? I'm sure.

Non-Fatal Offences against the Person Act, 1997

“18.- (1) The use of force by a person for any of the following purposes, if only such as is reasonable in the circumstances as he or she believes them to be, does not constitute an offence -

(a) to protect himself or herself or a member of the family of that person or another from injury, assault or detention caused by a criminal act; or

(b) to protect himself or herself or (with the authority of that other) another from trespass to the person; or

(c) to protect his or her property form appropriation, destruction or damage caused by a criminal act or from trespass or infringement; or

(d) to protect property belonging to another from appropriation, destruction or damage caused by a criminal act or (with the authority of that other) from trespass or infringement; or

(e) to prevent crime or a breach of the peace. (2) ‘use of force’ in subsection (1) is defined and extended by section 20.”

I don't see how you could possibly defend another or their property if the law required you to run away. They can't run away? TOO BAD!

Too quote from the above cited DPP v Anthony Barnes (Ct Criminal Appeal)

'It is of course common experience that there will be occasions when a person might well be advised to flee, but that is a matter for his own discretion and he can never be under a legal obligation to do so. Equally, there will be other occasions when a person might be ill advised to flee, perhaps because of exterior conditions or perhaps because of the fear of meeting an accomplice of the known aggressor, or being pursued by the latter, and attacked when he is outside his dwellinghouse and to that extent in a worse or more dubious position.

It is, in our view, quite inconsistent with the constitutional doctrine of the inviolability of a dwellinghouse that a householder or other lawful occupant could be ever be under a legal obligation to flee the dwellinghouse or, as it might be put in more contemporary language, to retreat from it. It follows from this, in turn, that such a person can never be in a worse position in point of law because he has decided to stand his ground in his house.'

Now that case was dealing with a burglar in a house but the same common sense applies. You can't outrun a gun, you can't run away trying to protect someone, you can't outrun 4 knackers on the street or in an alleyway.

stevec wrote:

They can and have done sucessfully.

By the way, I'd like a list of any of these cases tried in an Irish court. if true they'd ignore the most fundamental principles of tort law, duty of care, foreseeability and reasonableness.

jkell

If some person broke into my house and I got the better of him physically,I would dump him on the main road and go back to sleep. Its very unfair that the law is on the side of the criminal.sure poor fella all he was doing was trying to rob you and possibly injure you.Ya right.why should you have respect for people like that.If it is a youth , the law should hold the parents responsible for an under age person ..???

Sangre

well im glad i went to the trouble of my previous post

Jigsaw

It has to all be about proportionality. The emphasis in law ought to favour the side of those who are being burgled/robbed.

But about proportionality, if you have a garden gnome and you look outside and see someone nick it it is clearly unreasonable to open your front door and empty a rifle into them.

However, if you are hiding behind a door and a burglar has your daughter with a knife to her throat and is saying to your wife, "another step closer and I'll slit her throat" and you emerge from behind the door with a golf club, hit him as hard as you can on the head and he goes down and dies then fine. Every case needs to be examined on its own merits tbh.

Having said that it is easy to feel differently when you are directly affected by something. My car was broken into about a year and a half ago. It cost me roughly £200 to fix and I was pi$$ed off. I'm sure at the time I uttered things about wanting to kill them or make them bite the kerb (American History X) but once cooled down you realise that that would not be proportionate.

Having said that, if a scumbag gets killed, I would not really shed much of a tear because they are simply destined for a life of making other peoples' lives a misery. It is a shame that people develop to be this way but unfortunately it seems unavoidable.

Steve

Sangre wrote: »

The law expects you to flee if another person is being threatened with a gun? I'm sure.

Non-Fatal Offences against the Person Act, 1997

“18.- (1) The use of force by a person for any of the following purposes, if only such as is reasonable in the circumstances as he or she believes them to be, does not constitute an offence -

(a) to protect himself or herself or a member of the family of that person or another from injury, assault or detention caused by a criminal act; or

(b) to protect himself or herself or (with the authority of that other) another from trespass to the person; or

(c) to protect his or her property form appropriation, destruction or damage caused by a criminal act or from trespass or infringement; or

(d) to protect property belonging to another from appropriation, destruction or damage caused by a criminal act or (with the authority of that other) from trespass or infringement; or

(e) to prevent crime or a breach of the peace. (2) ‘use of force’ in subsection (1) is defined and extended by section 20.”

I don't see how you could possibly defend another or their property if the law required you to run away. They can't run away? TOO BAD!

Too quote from the above cited DPP v Anthony Barnes (Ct Criminal Appeal)

'It is of course common experience that there will be occasions when a person might well be advised to flee, but that is a matter for his own discretion and he can never be under a legal obligation to do so. Equally, there will be other occasions when a person might be ill advised to flee, perhaps because of exterior conditions or perhaps because of the fear of meeting an accomplice of the known aggressor, or being pursued by the latter, and attacked when he is outside his dwellinghouse and to that extent in a worse or more dubious position.

It is, in our view, quite inconsistent with the constitutional doctrine of the inviolability of a dwellinghouse that a householder or other lawful occupant could be ever be under a legal obligation to flee the dwellinghouse or, as it might be put in more contemporary language, to retreat from it. It follows from this, in turn, that such a person can never be in a worse position in point of law because he has decided to stand his ground in his house.'

Now that case was dealing with a burglar in a house but the same common sense applies. You can't outrun a gun, you can't run away trying to protect someone, you can't outrun 4 knackers on the street or in an alleyway.



By the way, I'd like a list of any of these cases tried in an Irish court. if true they'd ignore the most fundamental principles of tort law, duty of care, foreseeability and reasonableness.

As I understood it, self defense was only an option when there was no option to retreat ("flee") from the situation.

What I was getting at was that self defense was not a 'right' if you are confronted with a burglar.

I agree with you that no judge and jury will convict a home owner (within reason) for defending their property. I have heard several stories about people with dubious intentions claiming against occupiers under duty of care laws. I'll try to find a documented example - not tonight though:).

Sangre

You are fully entitled to protect your property and yourself, with force if necessary. Its not a right in the sense you can always protect it with force. If you tell him to leave and he does you can't suddenly attacked him. As the court mentioned in Barnes, a duty to flee would ignore the homeowners constitutional right to inviolability of a dwelling. Obviously the force must be reasonable, that is, you can't kill a 14 year old who snuck into the house thinking it was empty for a wallet. You almost certainly can if he is holding a weapon to yourself or a family member.

The law is alot more practical than people think. The common law develops over many cases with many facts and tries to follow a common sense approach. I'd recommend reading the Barnes case (skip all the facts) as it really sets out the position of a homeowner who confronts a burgler. It accepts the fears, worries and panic that may be facing him, he will not be thinking with the same clarity as someone looking back on it.

Regarding a burglar suing a homeowner, I'm of the opinion that its either urban legend or just bad law (meaning it would be overturned in the higer court).

the misinformation posted about self defense and defense of the home in AH is a pet peeve of mine.

nytraveller

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Castle_Doctrine

Dont mess with Texas!! :eek:

AckwelFoley

What would i do in this situation?

Well, on the internet, i would say id kick his ass, rape his mother and save a blind man from getting hit by a bus on my way home.

In a real life situation - and somone pulls a shotgun on me? - i go for option d.

- id sh1t my pants

Manic Moran

He has a shotgun, and I've got, what? A sandwich?

In that case, there might well be something to be said for shutting up, doing what you're told, and hoping for the best. Least worst option of a bad lot.

(Of course, the correct answer is to bring something better than a sandwich to a gunfight)

NTM

Sherifu

I'd hope it's one of those times there are gardai behind the counter waiting for them.(I'd go to the post office for stamps)

meathstevie

If he had a sawn off shotgun and he told me to hit the deck and stay there I'd go down like a bug of spuds and say Yes Sir on the way down. Anyone who thinks differently hasn't got a clue about the destructive capabilities of a shotgun at short range.

JJ6000

Riddle101 wrote: »

I'm not sure if i should have put this in Politics but i thought i might get better feedback on AH so here i go.

So your walking in City Centre on a nice Saturday afternoon, the sun is out, your not in work and so far you're having a good day. You decide you want to post a letter so you walk into a shop to buy stamps. You walk up to the counter a see a nice young women smiling at you and asks how may i help. You ask for the stamps and she hands to you. As you hand the money to the women, suddenly a big masked man burst through the door of the shop with a Shotgun, jams the gun in your face roars at the women to hand him all the money in the till or he'll blow your head off.
What do you do?
a)Start weeping and beg the man to let you go
b)Stand perfectly still and calm and try to calm the situtation
c)Go Chuck Norris on this guys ass by knocking the gun out of his hand and beat him up.

As you knocked the guy to the ground two Cop show up and instead of arresting the man who tried to rob the shop, they arrest you instead. They bring you to the garda station were you are interrogated and finally you find out the robber is pressing charges on you, he's suing you for % Million Euro.

Do you think we should be allowed take the law into our own hand without the worry of getting arrested ourselves? It's really unfair how a person who only trying to defend himself can get arrested and charged. I mean what if someone comes up to you with a knife, don't you think it's fair that under the circumstances, you should be allowed to i don't know maybe pick up a bottle lying on the ground and smash it across the guy head. It's a life or death situtation i don't think we should just allow ourselves to get stabbed just because the Gardai and the Justice System won't allow it. What if someone is robbing your house and you wake up aftr hearing him downstairs. Should we not be allowed to defend out houses from these robber by confronting them. I think it's silly how we as normal people seem to have to depend on a Justice System that is slow and rather corrupt, that we can't even protect our families anymore without being arrested. So i ask you, do you think we should be allowed to take the law into our own hands if needs be?

If the situation played out as described, it is INCREDIBLY unlikely that you would be charged with anything. If you were charged, you would certainly not be convuicted if the force you used to defend yourself was reasonable in the circumstances. This is an express legal right.

People have a tendency, sometimes, to presume that the law is 100% behind criminals and the ordinary common man has no rights.

This isnt true. Everyone (garda & ordinary citizens alike) has the right to use reasonable force to defend themselves, or others. So, in the situation you describe you would definitley be entitled to defend yourself by knocking the thief to the floor.

We ARE entitled to confront thieves who attempt to rob our homes and we are entitled to use REASONABLE force to prevent them from doing so. Likewise, you would be entitled to use the same force to prevent them robbing your neighbours property.

If someone came at you with a knife, you would be entitled to use REASONABLE force to defend yourself. Picking up a broken bottle in defence would be reasonable in the circumstances. You are facing a lethal threat, so it is reasonable to use lethal force to defend yourself.

Of course, "reasonable" will depend on the circumstances and will be judged on a case by case basis. If somebody snatched your handbag, you would not be permitted to grab the nearest knife and stab him in the neck. It is not a reasonable response.

In any case, while you would be legally entitled to protect yourself with lethal force against somebody armed with a shotgun, I wouldnt reccomend that you try. If somebody has a shotgun in your face, your best course of action is to comply. This is reality and these situations dont play out like they do in the movies. If you try a double back flip and roundhouse kick to disarm the thief, you will most likely get yourself shot.

120_Minutes

ya wanna know how to get him?

Here's how you get him

He pulls a knife

You pull a gun

He sends one of yours to the hospital

You send one of his to the morgue

Thats the Chicago way!

Jesus Wept

Riddle101 wrote: »

you find out the robber is pressing charges on you, he's suing you for % Million Euro.

zOMG, % Million Euros's's?! That sounds like a lot!!!1! :eek::pac:

sdanseo

OP, shops have CCTV.

Diairist

on a point of information, they're constantly recruiting in the Garda Reserve. If you're under 60 try: http://www.publicjobs.ie/cand/default.asp?JobID=1811&hdnJobID=1104&hdndest=JOBDETAILS&hdnLang=&hdnSource=HOME&hdnmode=VIEW&hdnauth=admin&hdnGUID=