Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

Mangle the attacker?

Options
  • 29-12-2014 1:44pm
    #1
    paulol
    Registered Users Posts: 32 ✭


    As this is also a "Self Defence" forum. I thought I'd ask this question?

    When you are in a real self defence situation is it ok to just go in like a tasmanian devil until there isn't a body left standing? Thumping and stomping until people submit?


Comments

  • Options
    #2
    MartyMcFly84
    Registered Users Posts: 1,326 ✭✭✭MartyMcFly84


    You mean like in the Cartoon?


  • Options
    #3
    paulol
    Registered Users Posts: 32 ✭paulol


    MartyMcFly84 wrote: »
    You mean like in the Cartoon?

    yablabasfpbnaerl -buiasvdtsthsdgthppphhhhhh = Ya :)


  • Options
    #4
    cletus
    Registered Users Posts: 7,918 ✭✭✭cletus


    When you are in an actual altercation, the legal stand point is this.

    You are only allowed to take reasonable steps to defend yourself. If the option is there to run away, that's what the courts say you should do. If you do have to hit some body in self defence, then you can got them to remove the immediate danger, so if they hit the ground, you can now run away.

    If you go Tasmanian devil on them you are now the aggressor.

    Similarly, if you're standing at the bus stop and a guy runs up, grabs your bag and runs off, you can't run after him, give him a dig and take your bag back and still claim self defence as the immediate threat was gone when he ran off with your bag.

    There was a big thread about this before in relation to a krav maga video I think, which showed a guy getting stomped into a puddle (promotional stuff, not f for reals)


  • Options
    #5
    paulol
    Registered Users Posts: 32 ✭paulol


    cletus wrote: »
    There was a big thread about this before in relation to a krav maga video I think, which showed a guy getting stomped into a puddle (promotional stuff, not f for reals)

    I have seen promotional videos like that for self defence programs over the years. They really have not thought about what they are promoting and I wonder are they stuck in a fantasy where "reality" is suspended based on making them feel macho?


  • Options
    #6
    Mellor
    Registered Users Posts: 39,157 ✭✭✭✭Mellor


    cletus wrote: »
    When you are in an actual altercation, the legal stand point is this.

    You are only allowed to take reasonable steps to defend yourself. If the option is there to run away, that's what the courts say you should do. If you do have to hit some body in self defence, then you can got them to remove the immediate danger, so if they hit the ground, you can now run away.

    What law covers that?
    I've heard it mentioned a lot, but I often suspect people are paraphrasing law and order rather than an actual irish law.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #7
    well spoken man
    Registered Users Posts: 351 ✭✭well spoken man


    If rather be judged by 12 than carried by six..... if some scumbag attacked me he would get what he deserved..


  • Options
    #8
    cletus
    Registered Users Posts: 7,918 ✭✭✭cletus


    Mellor wrote: »
    What law covers that?
    I've heard it mentioned a lot, but I often suspect people are paraphrasing law and order rather than an actual irish law.

    Paraphrased from my wife, who has a degree and masters in law. Is the Maryland explanation of the law she gave to me


  • Options
    #9
    Plastikman_eire
    Registered Users Posts: 427 ✭✭Plastikman_eire


    well spoken man wrote: »
    If rather be judged by 12 than carried by six..... if some scumbag attacked me he would get what he deserved..

    The post above still applies, if you KO your attacker, the risk of your needing to be "carried by six" is gone. If you continue to attack after that point, you should, quite rightly, face legal action.


  • Options
    #10
    Mellor
    Registered Users Posts: 39,157 ✭✭✭✭Mellor


    cletus wrote: »
    Paraphrased from my wife, who has a degree and masters in law. Is the Maryland explanation of the law she gave to me
    Do you mean Maryland the farm where a burglar was shot?

    I know there's the home defence law that came in two years ago that allows for reasonable force when defending the home, and removed the requirement to retreat. But I don't know if similar applied to self defence.

    Edit: I think this might be the reason force/retreat law that covers what you said above.


  • Options
    #11
    cletus
    Registered Users Posts: 7,918 ✭✭✭cletus


    Mellor wrote: »
    Do you mean Maryland the farm where a burglar was shot?

    I know there's the home defence law that came in two years ago that allows for reasonable force when defending the home, and removed the requirement to retreat. But I don't know if similar applied to self defence.

    Edit: I think this might be the reason force/retreat law that covers what you said above.

    Sorry Mellor, Maryland had nothing to do with my post. I actually tried to write layperson, but auto correct gonna auto correct


  • Advertisement
Advertisement