Advertisement
Help Keep Boards Alive. Support us by going ad free today. See here: https://subscriptions.boards.ie/.
https://www.boards.ie/group/1878-subscribers-forum

Private Group for paid up members of Boards.ie. Join the club.
Hi all, please see this major site announcement: https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2058427594/boards-ie-2026

Murder set to be legalised by xmas

12346»

Comments

  • #152
    easyeason3
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,102 ✭✭✭easyeason3


    Padraig Nally is looking for his gun back! Front page of the Daily Star.

    He's a tonic.


  • #153
    Poor Uncle Tom
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 14,547 ✭✭✭✭Poor Uncle Tom


    I'm sure this legislation is comforting to some, but it changes nothing for me. I spent years travelling, learning, enjoying life until I met my partner. We set up a home together and now have a family and all that goes with that. As head (responsible adult and general provider) of that family I have a responsibility to nurture, teach and protect my children and to provide for and protect my wife.

    If any person out there decides to burgle our home, I see that as a direct assault on my family. If the house alarm or the dogs don't stop that person then I will or I will die trying. I will unleash my fury on any such person and their wellbeing will not register on my list of needs.

    None of this is new, no piece of freshly inked paper in some government building changes how I will protect my family.


  • #154
    syklops
    Closed Accounts Posts: 18,966 ✭✭✭✭syklops


    Yeah, all those hardened criminals will detest this news that someone has a right to clunk 'em over the head with a hurley stick.. or maybe they'll just arm themselves instead

    You make it sound like they are going to arm themselves upon news of this. Look around, they are already armed.

    http://www.rte.ie/news/2010/0203/templeogue.html

    http://www.breakingnews.ie/archives/2003/1030/ireland/athy-bank-robbed-by-armed-gang-119484.html

    http://www.irishexaminer.com/breakingnews/ireland/armed-gang-botch-robbery-of-mcdonalds-437996.html

    http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/ireland/2010/0505/1224269732821.html

    http://www.rte.ie/news/2009/0803/arklow.html

    http://www.corkman.ie/breaking-news/national-news/armed-gang-targets-cavan-bookie-1699456.html

    http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/ireland/2009/1104/1224258028148.html
    And I doubt the law needed to be clarified for those who would be so inclined to attack an intruder.. what has the case been up until now? Someone breaks into your gaf and you sit upstairs muttering a rant about how the law forbids you from doing anything about a situation which may endanger your life? I doubt it.. anyone that would instinctively protect themselves by using force in a scenario like this would do so regardless of any law being clarified for them.

    Well yes the law did need to be at the very least clarified for those of us who would be inclined to attack an intruder. I know a man who was terrorized for years by a family of scum bags who lived near us/him. They broke in and stole from his house, let his cows loose, and even burnt down a caravan he had on one of his fields. I think he needs the law clarified for him.

    Another neighbour of ours had 2 guys break into his house and demand money. He escorted them off his land with his shotgun and a week later had the gun confiscated by the police. I think he(and the local Garda Sergeant) need the law clarified.

    My house was burgled a number of years ago, despite the burglar knowing I had a gun and I knew how to use it. He also knew if I as much as picked it up I would be in big trouble where as he would only get an additional conviction or two to go along with the 84-odd he already had. He now needs the law clarified.

    Chuck Norris types who defend themselves from a gang of armed invaders will continue to defend themselves, but this new legislation will mean they don't risk jail time for doing it.


  • #155
    Liam Byrne
    Closed Accounts Posts: 18,152 ✭✭✭✭Liam Byrne


    Einhard wrote: »
    Minsiter Ahern was insistent in pointing that out today. You have a responsibility to use reasonable force at all times. This can include lethal force when necessary, and I have no problem with this clarification. But, using reasonable force to protect yourself and your own is entirely different to taking the law into your own hands and executing someone. Nobody has the right to do that. That's what I'm against.

    Apart from me having no respect for when an FF member spouts about responsibility, there is an important precedent here.

    I have no problem, as I said, with simply telling someone to get the f**k out.

    They can then choose to do so.

    I also have no problem in then just trying to disable them so that they can't illegally rob something, say knocking them out until the Gardai arrive......that's your "non lethal force".

    However that introduces a new problem; if there's a concern that said-same scumbag will come back later to extract revenge, either when I am there or when I'm not.

    That shouldn't be a concern at the time if the law operated correctly; however given the posts here it obviously is, with ridiculous suspended sentences and opinions about kids "only" climbing in your windows and the bleeding heart brigade.

    As I said, 99.9% of the responsibility to avoid this entire scenario is with the intruder / criminal.

    THAT is what needs to be enshrined and protected in law.


  • #156
    My name is URL
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 25,626 ✭✭✭✭My name is URL


    syklops wrote: »
    You make it sound like they are going to arm themselves upon news of this. Look around, they are already armed.

    http://www.rte.ie/news/2010/0203/templeogue.html

    http://www.breakingnews.ie/archives/2003/1030/ireland/athy-bank-robbed-by-armed-gang-119484.html

    http://www.irishexaminer.com/breakingnews/ireland/armed-gang-botch-robbery-of-mcdonalds-437996.html

    http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/ireland/2010/0505/1224269732821.html

    http://www.rte.ie/news/2009/0803/arklow.html

    http://www.corkman.ie/breaking-news/national-news/armed-gang-targets-cavan-bookie-1699456.html

    http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/ireland/2009/1104/1224258028148.html



    Well yes the law did need to be at the very least clarified for those of us who would be inclined to attack an intruder. I know a man who was terrorized for years by a family of scum bags who lived near us/him. They broke in and stole from his house, let his cows loose, and even burnt down a caravan he had on one of his fields. I think he needs the law clarified for him.

    Another neighbour of ours had 2 guys break into his house and demand money. He escorted them off his land with his shotgun and a week later had the gun confiscated by the police. I think he(and the local Garda Sergeant) need the law clarified.

    My house was burgled a number of years ago, despite the burglar knowing I had a gun and I knew how to use it. He also knew if I as much as picked it up I would be in big trouble where as he would only get an additional conviction or two to go along with the 84-odd he already had. He now needs the law clarified.

    Chuck Norris types who defend themselves from a gang of armed invaders will continue to defend themselves, but this new legislation will mean they don't risk jail time for doing it.

    Most of the links you posted there are about cases of robbery, not burglary. There's a distinct difference between the two.. people who set out to rob people do so mostly while armed. Burglars will be likely arm themselves now as a precaution against being attacked.. they won't stop doing what they do to feed their drug habits or whatever, they'll escalate the situation quicker than they would avoid it

    And there is no new legislation on the matter, it's just an old law being made clearer, nothing has changed.. it's an attempt to make you feel safer while the courts sit idly by and ignore the crux of the issue, and refuse to improve how they deal with it

    Why not introduce harsh mandatory sentencing for home invasions? That would have been a much better deterrent than reiterating an already existing outline of a legislation


  • Advertisement
  • #157
    L.Jenkins
    Moderators, Computer Games Moderators, Technology & Internet Moderators Posts: 19,242 Mod ✭✭✭✭L.Jenkins


    So all you have to do is invite the rowdy neighbours in over xmas and shoot them. Interesting!


  • #158
    Morlar
    Closed Accounts Posts: 9,273 ✭✭✭Morlar


    I think it is likely that burglars are going to arm themselves anyway as they know there is a real chance of a conflict with a person in a primal rage looking to protect their loved ones.

    Even if they don't carry a weapon into your home from theirs there are plenty already there whether it turns out to be kitchen knives or the screwdriver in their back pocket is irrelevant. I think in the interests of safety it is reasonable to treat every burglar as if they are armed.


  • #159
    Rhyme
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 8,561 ✭✭✭Rhyme


    Wossack wrote: »
    thread fails to deliver

    Wait until Christmas like the rest of us.


  • #160
    mikom
    Closed Accounts Posts: 16,391 ✭✭✭✭mikom


    Christmas in the Mikom household........

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SQh80G5TAek


  • #161
    Morlar
    Closed Accounts Posts: 9,273 ✭✭✭Morlar


    mikom wrote: »
    Christmas in the Mikom household........

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SQh80G5TAek

    Mine will be all Beethovens 9th and some 'ultra violence'.

    http://img.ffffound.com/static-data/assets/6/5f84af58f1e23db0844ad9b8b2acbcf0cfb629f0_m.png



    That reminds me isn't Die Hard on telly every christmas ?


  • Advertisement
  • #162
    TheIrishGrover
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2, Paid Member Posts: 6,778 ✭✭✭TheIrishGrover


    Sweet!


  • #163
    Highly Salami
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 216 ✭✭Highly Salami


    *bump*


  • #164
    Morlar
    Closed Accounts Posts: 9,273 ✭✭✭Morlar


    Highly Salami wrote: »
    *bump*

    The Law's changed pardner. Things that go 'bump' now get shot.


  • #165
    My name is URL
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 25,626 ✭✭✭✭My name is URL


    Highly Salami wrote: »
    *bump*

    lolwut


  • #166
    Black Magician
    Closed Accounts Posts: 200 ✭✭Black Magician


    I think this is a great overdue law as it will deter a lot of the scum who travel the countryside preying on people in more isolated areas. The laws in this country favor the criminal to much, so much that under the current gun laws if you injured a burglar you, yourself, would be the one facing jail. As far as clarification goes on how this law will be implemented, it will surely be dealt on a case by case situation as each will differ, though gun raving loonies who invite their mad neighbors over for a bit of hows your dead father will get whats coming to them


  • #167
    Manic Moran
    Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 17,898 Mod ✭✭✭✭Manic Moran


    The_Minister wrote: »
    AFAIK this doesn't change the law, it just codifies recent decisions such as DPP v Barnes.

    What this man said. Possible exception of the immunity to lawsuit which Barnes does not directly address.
    AFAIK, in any countries that have brought this in, the burglars have merely armed themselves.

    Name them.

    Italy recently brought in a 'lethal force authorised if required' law a couple of years ago, no particular problems there.

    In the US, confrontations between burglar and homeowner are dramatically lower than UK figures, as burglars don't want to run the risk of getting shot just for a TV and make their best effort to ensure nobody's home.
    Possible, if not a gun, a knife etc... taking that into account then, anyone that lives in the house might strike harder first time around than let the culprit be able to get back up and fight back ...its open theory at the mo.

    DPP v Barnes makes that precise point: a homeowner would be well advised to strike hard and without warning in order to maintain his advantage. "When the householder finds himself in the presences of a burglar in the still of the night, his position is exactly the same as it was for his nineteenth eighteenth or even sixteenth century ancestors. The police force is of no service. If he has a telephone, the noise made in operating it will probably alert the burglar, who may well be of a violent disposition. The householder knows that he must make the choice between attempting to arrest or scare off the burglar in which case he may find himself in serious danger, if the burglar turns out to be violent, and attacking the burglar first without a warning and possibly by inflicting death thus ensuring the safety of himself and his family"
    But they're not necessarily targetting an individual or a family when they break into a home. They're targetting the valuables in the house
    They are not!! Seriously. Not legally

    Yes, legally. See, again, DPP v Barnes. Burglary is not merely a public crime against property, it is an act of aggression against the homeowner himself and a violation of his Constitutional rights. Quoting the judge: "a burglary is an act of aggression analogous to an assault or trespass to the person". He makes the 'act of aggression against the homeowner' comment a few times in the decision and also quotes earlier law: "the making of an attack upon the dwelling, and especially at night, the law requires as equivalent to an assault on a man’s person; for a man’s house is his castle, and therefore, in the eye of the law, it is equivalent to an assault…”.

    Maybe you should read the case and then come back to us:
    http://www.courts.ie/Judgments.nsf/09859e7a3f34669680256ef3004a27de/aded5c6b04f391478025725d00516c14?OpenDocument

    Morlar has already made the point that the homeowner is not given the luxury to make the assumption that the burglar only wants to steal property.

    NTM


Advertisement
Advertisement