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

Arrested for murder after killing burglar.. England.

1235»

Comments

  • Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 17,923 Mod ✭✭✭✭Manic Moran


    Second the person entering your home may have no intention of hurting or threatening you. It could be some kid/teenager after cash for example.

    Not my problem. I am not responsible for the unknown intent of others, neither am I capable of knowing it unless I have some latent telepathic gift that I've not discovered yet. They want cash, they can rob a bank. No nervous homeowners to worry about.

    NTM


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


    Firstly to make it clear, I am all for being able to defend your home and your loved ones.

    However I don't like this idea that you should be able to shoot/stab/beat to death anyone and everyone who enters your house illegally.

    For one, why on earth would you want to stoop to the level of a criminal?

    Second the person entering your home may have no intention of hurting or threatening you. It could be some kid/teenager after cash for example. Should we really have the right to kill/seriously injure in such circumstances?

    Maybe I am too soft but I don't want to live in a vigilante society. We have laws in place for a reason.

    We have laws, and that "teenager looking for cash" knows about them.

    Let them go do odd jobs if they're "looking for money".

    I hate when people minimise crimes like this....."looking for money" sounds like they're begging on the street or wandering around a beach with a metal detector.

    Let them choose not to be thieving scum and then we'll all be better off - it'd save a fortune on locks and alarms and insurance - and maybe then we could afford to give them a euro when they are "looking for money" - once they ask nicely!


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 17 avanche


    I'd just like to leave some food for thought:

    Proportionality or equality of violence is completely irrelevant in a break in situation. First off, 90% of the time, people will be so nervous it would be impossible to stop and consider "hmm, he only has a knife, that means I can only use a knife and not my baseball bat".

    Secondly, there is no such thing as proportionality. There's an old saying "There's always someone stronger".

    I'm 5'5", pretty much anyone who breaks into my house will be bigger and stronger than me. Even if they are completely unarmed, they still have the advantage, so you can bet I'd be using any weapon I can get my hands on, be it a knife, baseball bat or bazooka. Dead is dead, makes absolutely no difference if they died from my wife's knitting needles or from a tv on their head.

    PS. just so there's no misunderstandings, I fully advocate self-defense without limitations.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 2,520 ✭✭✭allibastor


    RMD wrote: »
    The story doesn't provide enough information on the death to confirm whether murder is justified or not. If he acted in self-defense which ultimately lead to the burglars death then manslaughter, but if he chased the burglar while he was trying to flee and ended up killing him that equates to murder.

    The arrest on suspicion of murder does not mean he'll definitely be charged with murder, the article provides no information on the death and that's the essential part to determine what charge he'll receive.


    didnt that happen with the paudrig nally guy, the lad who shot the traveller who kept returning to break into the house? surley murder would be where you set out and plan to kill someone. even chasing a lad who broke into your house down and killing them is hardly planned. how did the householder know he was going to be broken into to.

    the law needs to fall more on the side of those who the crime is commited against. how many time must people who break the law get away with slaps on the wrist, while mr. lawabiding gets punished for looking after himself?


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 19,967 ✭✭✭✭mikemac


    Biggins wrote: »

    He might be charged with second degree murder if he had the killing weapon(s?) in his home

    Someone has been watching American TV :)

    Doesn't exist here


  • Advertisement
  • Closed Accounts Posts: 2,520 ✭✭✭allibastor


    Also, what kind of scum bag would leave flowers at the house??? would they be there leaving flowers for the homeowner if it was he who was killed??? seriuosly, this is whats wrong with both the U.K and Ireland, people who are scum die in a scumbag related way then the family and all those other scummy pals go and have a rant about the poor guy. then the do-gooders who live in D4 mansions and only see real scum when the maid is cleaning the bathtub start about the poor guy and how desperate he was. it was the same with the London riots, a known scumbag was shot in what police belived was him having a gun, and with his previous history not a mile off and then look at all the little scumbags that come out of the woodwork.

    makes you sick to be human.


Advertisement
Advertisement