Topic: Defending your home from burglars

[BIGdavalad]

Well I can't find anything which says burglars are more likely to be armed, it seems generally accepted that burglars more often than not don't carry weapons.

If someone's in my house I'm not going to stop to worry about whether they're armed or not. I don't care. I'm going to hit them with anything I can find and I'm not going to stop until they've stopped breathing.

[Slave]

If someone's in my house I'm not going to stop to worry about whether they're armed or not. I don't care. I'm going to hit them with anything I can find and I'm not going to stop until they've stopped breathing.

That wasn't my point Dava, in fact I can understand that sentiment. It's just if everybody felt like that IMO burglars would more than likely start arming themselves.

[BIGdavalad]

Just start executing burglars then. Solve the problem and the shortage of organ donors in one go.

[surfer. Fuck you generator.]

Pretty clear what to do isn't it. It's a situation where they won't be holding back when cornered, so you can't go out with the intention of disabling, as in the off-chance you fail, the people in your family are the ones that might suffer for it. Far easier to go for killing / maiming strikes, especially if you have a weapon handy.

Once subdued / they're on the ground I wouldn't keep going. Elbow and knee joint breaks are straightforward enough to execute and that'll do the job of keeping them under control without the need to kill.

If you can manoeuvre it such though. If the situation is such that the effective strike requires their death, so be it. But I wouldn't relish it.

[rednich85]

If someone's in my house I'm not going to stop to worry about whether they're armed or not. I don't care. I'm going to hit them with anything I can find and I'm not going to stop until they've stopped breathing.

I just got a chill reading that.

[Alan_X]

Nothing is changing. This is the tories trying to score some easy points in the eyes of your average daily mail reader.

[marko35s]

If someone's in my house I'm not going to stop to worry about whether they're armed or not. I don't care. I'm going to hit them with anything I can find and I'm not going to stop until they've stopped breathing.

That all depends on how much noise they make and how quickly your neighbours call the cops because of the screaming.

[holland75]

Uploaded with ImageShack.us

This is my protection!!!

[marko35s]

Uploaded with ImageShack.us

This is my protection!!!

Is it legal to own something that ugly?

[Smashedin]

Noye is doing life for the M25 'road rage' murder back in 2000/1 - he was also sent down for the Brinks Mat bullion robbery which John was working on.

Noye has a vast amount of money and is spending it on the best lawyers who are trying to find a way of getting him out....in fact, I have an intense dislike of criminal defence barristers. To them, it's all a game, an intellectual dual with their mate on the otherside of the Court....all whislt they're making vast amount of money....bastards...

Anyway, that is another topic, so I'll stop there.....

I feel this is a little harsh. Although what you say is true, these barristers understand the impact of their work, but someone has to do the job. A barrister who weakens his argument, is not only breaking a number of codes of practice, but he is putting the case at risk of having to be re-heard. Also, it is not always the case that a perceived guilty criminal is actually guilty, and you can't pick and choose those who have the right to representation.

[Smashedin]

The anti-tory stuff gets old pretty quickly. If the law is clarified by a statute, the judges will have to adhere to it; as it stands there are a number of factors that affect the outcome of self-defence, which gives a barristers a lot of space to work with when trying to assign liability.

[Lord Roger Hunt]

I feel this is a little harsh. Although what you say is true, these barristers understand the impact of their work, but someone has to do the job. A barrister who weakens his argument, is not only breaking a number of codes of practice, but he is putting the case at risk of having to be re-heard. Also, it is not always the case that a perceived guilty criminal is actually guilty, and you can't pick and choose those who have the right to representation.

Yes, M'lud...   

However, in the case of Milly Dowler, despite Bellfield already serving life for a similar murder, his QC's tactic was to target the family, particularly the father.  Despicable, no other word for it, regardless of their supposed 'duty' which is just an excuse they've created themselves to hide behind. 

And we only know about this despicable behaviour by the legal profession because it was a high profile case, it happens daily in Courts throughout the land.

If anyone want to rant about the Establishment,  they should start with the legal profession..(the proving ground for a number of politicians) ... you'll have my whole-hearted support....

anyway, that's another topic...

[Ambrosia]

And we only know about this despicable behaviour by the legal profession because it was a high profile case, it happens daily in Courts throughout the land.

If anyone want to rant about the Establishment,  they should start with the legal profession..(the proving ground for a number of politicians) ... you'll have my whole-hearted support....

The British Legal System is the best in the world.

Let's not forget when the biggest football disaster occurred it was the "legal profession" through Lord Taylor's report that ultimately cleared the reputation of the Liverpool fans and the Police who carried out the cover up.

[Lord Roger Hunt]

The British Legal System is the best in the world.

Let's not forget when the biggest football disaster occurred it was the "legal profession" through Lord Taylor's report that ultimately cleared the reputation of the Liverpool fans and the Police who carried out the cover up.

I was talking of specifically the criminal courts, and its more of a private rant against a section of the legal profession - have seen too many slick lawyers use 'tricks' to help criminals escape justice (how can that be right? Oh wait, it's only a game, isn't it?!) - not the legal system as a whole, so will wind my neck in acccordingly.

Whether its the best in the World, I can't comment as I don't have sufficient knowledge of the Courts to make a judgement...

[Smashedin]

Yes, M'lud...   

However, in the case of Milly Dowler, despite Bellfield already serving life for a similar murder, his QC's tactic was to target the family, particularly the father.  Despicable, no other word for it, regardless of their supposed 'duty' which is just an excuse they've created themselves to hide behind. 

And we only know about this despicable behaviour by the legal profession because it was a high profile case, it happens daily in Courts throughout the land.

If anyone want to rant about the Establishment,  they should start with the legal profession..(the proving ground for a number of politicians) ... you'll have my whole-hearted support....

anyway, that's another topic...

There are a number of duties:

The duty to protect the integrity of the legal system itself. You can bet that the opposing barrister will do whatever it takes to put away your client, you can't play soft or you'll be torn apart, competelying negating the idea of a trial - a system to establish innocence or guilt.

The duty to ensure that all parties have a a fair trial. How would you feel if you were sitting in a cell and when proposing the barrister with your case he responds "Sorry, i can't say that, it might upset someone". You'd feel cheated.

The duty to protect the presumption of innocent till proven guilty. This needs no explanation, but it is a dangerous line for society to cross where we proscute people based on preconceptions. Yes, a criminal's track record should be used against him, but his guilt must be re-established through the appropriate systems.

[Maggie May]

I have an extremely sharp knife tucked under the mattress.  And I would have no problems whatsoever in using it to cause maximum damage.

[Ambrosia]

I was talking of specifically the criminal courts, and its more of a private rant against a section of the legal profession - have seen too many slick lawyers use 'tricks' to help criminals escape justice (how can that be right? Oh wait, it's only a game, isn't it?!) - not the legal system as a whole, so will wind my neck in acccordingly.

Whether its the best in the World, I can't comment as I don't have sufficient knowledge of the Courts to make a judgement...

Fair enough.

Much like how Smashedin says, a barrister has a duty to advocate to the best of his abilities. If that means using every sneaky trick in the book, then so be it (provided it is lawful). Rather a guilty man go free than an innocent man imprisoned.

[TepidT2O]

Noye is doing life for the M25 'road rage' murder back in 2000/1 - he was also sent down for the Brinks Mat bullion robbery which John was working on.

Noye has a vast amount of money and is spending it on the best lawyers who are trying to find a way of getting him out....in fact, I have an intense dislike of criminal defence barristers. To them, it's all a game, an intellectual dual with their mate on the otherside of the Court....all whislt they're making vast amount of money....bastards...

Anyway, that is another topic, so I'll stop there.....

Did you know that Noye was aquitted of murdering an undercover police officer?

Iirc the officer was in the grounds of Noyes house staking him out and was killed.

Noye claimed self defence and that the officer had attacked him.

Lovely chap all round, lousy murdering psychopath.

[Lord Roger Hunt]

Did you know that Noye was aquitted of murdering an undercover police officer?

Iirc the officer was in the grounds of Noyes house staking him out and was killed.

Noye claimed self defence and that the officer had attacked him.

Lovely chap all round, lousy murdering psychopath.

Yes, it was Noye who killed my mate John.   And, yes, I agree with your description of him...

[Lord Roger Hunt]

Fair enough.

Much like how Smashedin says, a barrister has a duty to advocate to the best of his abilities. If that means using every sneaky trick in the book, then so be it (provided it is lawful). Rather a guilty man go free than an innocent man imprisoned.

Ah, the barristers' mantra. But I'm not sure if I - or most of the public - would agree though, particularly if the guilty man goes on to kill again....it's happened, hasn't it?   

But this is how Barristers justify it to themselves - they were 'only doing their duty' or 'it's a game and may the best advocate win' - an extension on the school debating society, the only difference now being that all meet afterwards to have a nice glass of chablis.

These mantra's help barristers sleep at night I guess,  that, and the silk sheets they sleep between.... I believe most lawyers are decent people but there are those who work on the dark side and they're a blight on society.

But that is just my opinion based on what I've witnessed first hand...

...and me with a daughter, two sons-in-law and a best mate who are...lawyers.   Strange world, isn't it...?   

[TepidT2O]

Yes, it was Noye who killed my mate John.   And, yes, I agree with your description of him...

Blimey that's awful.
I couldn't believe he got off, horrific act.

[marko35s]

Yes, it was Noye who killed my mate John.   And, yes, I agree with your description of him...

Saw a guy being interviewed about that on Discovery channel (iirc), not you was it?
Anyhow Noye needs to be put to sleep.

[Mouth]

I dont think it will change much, it wont stop or decrease the amount of burglaries and it wont mean there is a sudden jump in people maiming or killing intruders, just means in the rare cases when it happens that someone tackles an intruder and maybe injures them they arent going to go to prison for it.

Burglars shouldnt have any rights, they forfiet them the second they decide to break the law, they cant ask for protection of the law while breaking it.

[theCanadian]

what if they were running backwards at me.

[Lord Roger Hunt]

Saw a guy being interviewed about that on Discovery channel (iirc), not you was it?
Anyhow Noye needs to be put to sleep.

No, it wasn't me, John was with the Met and I was with something else but we roomed together for six weeks when we were on a residential training course.  But we stayed in touch and were going to meet up with the families but we never got around to it. 

A good man. A nice chap.  Nothing flash, nothing spectacular, just steady, perfect for the job his was in.

[RedinExile]

There are a number of duties:

The duty to protect the integrity of the legal system itself. You can bet that the opposing barrister will do whatever it takes to put away your client, you can't play soft or you'll be torn apart, competelying negating the idea of a trial - a system to establish innocence or guilt.

The duty to ensure that all parties have a a fair trial. How would you feel if you were sitting in a cell and when proposing the barrister with your case he responds "Sorry, i can't say that, it might upset someone". You'd feel cheated.

The duty to protect the presumption of innocent till proven guilty. This needs no explanation, but it is a dangerous line for society to cross where we proscute people based on preconceptions. Yes, a criminal's track record should be used against him, but his guilt must be re-established through the appropriate systems.

Thank god for watson and crick, rather than relying on this waffly bollocks. Not infallible by any means, but by lord what a welcome revolution. And how anyone can defend someone they *know* to be a violent offender is beyond me.

[Smashedin]

Thank god for watson and crick, rather than relying on this waffly bollocks. Not infallible by any means, but by lord what a welcome revolution. And how anyone can defend someone they *know* to be a violent offender is beyond me.

Go take a look at at Syria, Iraq and Zimbabwe for examples and results of your 'welcome revolution'.

How many people in those countries can sit at their computer and write against their legal system/regime on a public platform, knowing that they are free to do so without fear of unjust persecution.

[Lord Roger Hunt]

How many people in those countries can sit at their computer and write against their legal system/regime on a public platform, knowing that they are free to do so without fear of unjust persecution.

For the sake of clarity, I am not knocking democracy or even the legal system, just some (a lot actually) of legal practioners who see it all as a 'big game'.  But, there again, it is the only way they can retain their sanity, I suppose....

[Anywhichwayicant]

Would anyone here try and reason with the burglar or would you just go straight into attack mode?

[RedinExile]

Go take a look at at Syria, Iraq and Zimbabwe for examples and results of your 'welcome revolution'.

How many people in those countries can sit at their computer and write against their legal system/regime on a public platform, knowing that they are free to do so without fear of unjust persecution.

I didn't follow that I'm afraid (genuinely), I'm saying DNA technology has cut through a lot of what must have previously boiled down to waffly lawyer bollocks. It's great that science (in the right hands of course) can bring things into such sharp focus in terms of evidence. I've no idea what you're on about citing them places.

People used to rub two sticks together to make fire; I'm glad times moved on. Maybe the legal system can catch up one day too?

[Smashedin]

I didn't follow that I'm afraid (genuinely), I'm saying DNA technology has cut through a lot of what must have previously boiled down to waffly lawyer bollocks. It's great that science (in the right hands of course) can bring things into such sharp focus in terms of evidence. I've no idea what you're on about citing them places.

People used to rub two sticks together to make fire; I'm glad times moved on. Maybe the legal system can catch up one day too?

I'm trying to demonstrate just how modern and efficient our legal system is in comparison to places where people are given no opportunity to fight their case, it leads to an imbalance of power.

The common law system is widely recognised as one of the most adaptive legal systems known to man, and on top of that we have a legislative system that demonstrates constitutional characteristics.

The citizens of the places i mentioned can only dream of the securities legal systems such as our provide.

In other words, "That waffy lawyer bollocks" is the arbiter of your civil rights.

[Ambrosia]

For the sake of clarity, I am not knocking democracy or even the legal system, just some (a lot actually) of legal practioners who see it all as a 'big game'.  But, there again, it is the only way they can retain their sanity, I suppose....

Manipulating words, fitting puzzles together, stakes are high, it is a game of sorts, even an art.

At the end of the day, the most common sense argument will win out. You can't blame defending barristers for doing their job well. It's irrational.

I'm trying to demonstrate just how modern and efficient our legal system is in comparison to places where people are given no opportunity to fight their case, it leads to an imbalance of power.

The common law system is widely recognised as one of the most adaptive legal systems known to man, and on top of that we have a legislative system that demonstrates constitutional characteristics.

The citizens of the places i mentioned can only dream of the securities legal systems such as our provide.

In other words, "That waffy lawyer bollocks" is the arbiter of your civil rights.

Well said.

[RedinExile]

I'm not saying the current system is rubbish, or that there aren't much worse ones in other parts of the world; however it's not the greatest commendation for a system, to argue that it is better than that in zimbabwe/iraq etc.

Luckily, as scientific advances continue apace, a jury has more impartial evidence to use when coming to a decision rather than overrelying on deciding between two slick operators, who by your own admission are engaged in something of a game. If someone guilty gets off, is the defence lawyer entitled to celebrate?

I also don't know how people can defend those they know are guilty of serial violent crimes; I guess that's why I couldn't do the job.

[WEST HAM PAUL]

No, it wasn't me, John was with the Met and I was with something else but we roomed together for six weeks when we were on a residential training course.  But we stayed in touch and were going to meet up with the families but we never got around to it. 
A good man. A nice chap.  Nothing flash, nothing spectacular, just steady, perfect for the job his was in.

Sorry to hear about that LRH, a book I have read on Kenneth Noye etc is called . Death Warrant: Kenneth Noye the brinks mat robbery & the gold. By Will Pearson. It's a very very interesting book about Noye his murders & brinks mat etc etc. Reccomend Reading to those wishing to find out more.


RIP John Fordham

[marko35s]

Would anyone here try and reason with the burglar or would you just go straight into attack mode?

Sod that.
If you take time to think about it you are giving him/them time to look at their options too, you need every advantage you can get.
My house got hit just under two weeks ago while our oldest (15) was home alone. In the middle of the fucking afternoon.
One guy inside roughing him up another outside keeping watch, when we arrived home from work the youngster was still sitting terrified in his room. Have to compliment the police on their reaction as at one point that evening the house resembled a scene from CSI with detectives, fingerprint specialists, crime scene photographer and a couple of normal cops. Luckily I got on well with the cops as I have quite a bit of Liverpool stuff around the house and quite a few jujitsu trophies which got them chatting to me. The Liverpool fans outnumbered the single Manc supporter 3 to 1 one and we had a quite a bit of Manc baiting going on.
The reason I  say I was lucky was that the next night the dog went nuts at around midnight and I found someone in my back garden. What i did next was in no way well thought out or considered, and I suppose the main point of what I am trying to say - there was no way in hell that reasoning with somebody was ever going to happen.
The result was one badly mauled intruder, the neighbours calling the cops because of all the screaming (not from me...) and then me sitting at the police station in the early hours of the morning explaining why I did what I did and hadnt stopped when it was clear I had the situation under control.
The point being that under stress you are likely to react rather than think your actions through.
Luckily one of the Liverpool supporting cops spotted me and got me out of there, I do keep wondering though what would have happened if it had been the Manc that spotted me...

[bleedsred1978]

Most people who are killed in home robberies are the ones who have the weapon taken from them and get killed with their own glof club/ baseball bat/ shooter.

[xerxes1]

Most people who are killed in home robberies are the ones who have the weapon taken from them and get killed with their own glof club/ baseball bat/ shooter.

Not in the Uk. List UK examples.

[Alan_X]

Most people who are killed in home robberies are the ones who have the weapon taken from them and get killed with their own glof club/ baseball bat/ shooter.

Not in the Uk. List UK examples.

Actually, I'd say that the number of people murdered during burglaries is so minute it would be impossible to draw any useful conclusion either way and besides, most burglars want to get in and out without disturbing the occupants of the house.

We were burgled a few years back - they got in, nicked my laptop and a cheque-book then fucked off.

[CHOPPER]

Actually, I'd say that the number of people murdered during burglaries is so minute it would be impossible to draw any useful conclusion either way and besides, most burglars want to get in and out without disturbing the occupants of the house.

We were burgled a few years back - they got in, nicked my laptop and a cheque-book then fucked off.

What would you of done if you'd collard them?

[Alan_X]

What would you of done if you'd collard them?

Well as I sleep naked, the sight of my enormous manhood would have broken their spirits and they'd have given themselves up.