Homeowners allowed to stab intruder. Good or bad?

[gzagee]

In today's Metro Chris Grayling the Tory Justice Secretary is about to unveil plans that will give homeowners the right to use force in an act of self defence when their home is being burgled.
He said:
"Being confronted by an intruder in your own home is terrifying, and the public should be in no doubt the law is on their side. That is why I'm strengthening the current law. Householders who act honestly in self defence are victims of crime and should be treated that way..."
Apparently a Lord Chief Justice recently said a householder has the right to apprehend a burglar and, being shot by homeowners was a chance that burglars took.

So, in light of this impending change in the law do you agree a homeowner can use force which includes stabbing and shooting to get rid of a burglar?
Or, do you think the law could lead to unnecessary fatalities and miscarriages of justice?

[Trina]

I'm all for it. You do anything to protect your family. Its ridiculous that if someone breaks into your house your not allowed to touch them.

Im not so sure about the guns though to defend yourself.

[TheArsenalPost]

Depends on if the home-owner is going to have restrictions placed on WHERE they can shoot or stab. If it is just to apprehend or scare off the intruder cool. But we all know some nut job will shoot to kill. (This should only be even thought of IF the intruder is going to hurt your family.)

Personally, if someone came into my home with the intent of taking my things and hurting me or my loved ones, I wouldn't want to kill them. Just hurt them enough so they couldn't hurt me.

[gzagee]

These plans remind me of the case in America where a father caught a man sexually molesting his daughter in his barn, beat him and I think killed him, then called the police saying thinks he might've killed the fiend.
Someone posted it here a few months ago. Can't recall what the outcome was though :though:

Fact is its a contentious and sensitive subject.

[yosifun]

I'm all for it, through I agree with TheArsenalPost about shooting to neutralize the intruder and not killing him.

[StLGooner]

These plans remind me of the case in America where a father caught a man sexually molesting his daughter in his barn, beat him and I think killed him, then called the police saying thinks he might've killed the fiend.
Someone posted it here a few months ago. Can't recall what the outcome was though :though:

Fact is its a contentious and sensitive subject.

Yep, I think I posted it.

This is allowed over here in the US.

[StLGooner]

Depends on if the home-owner is going to have restrictions placed on WHERE they can shoot or stab. If it is just to apprehend or scare off the intruder cool. But we all know some nut job will shoot to kill. (This should only be even thought of IF the intruder is going to hurt your family.)

Personally, if someone came into my home with the intent of taking my things and hurting me or my loved ones, I wouldn't want to kill them. Just hurt them enough so they couldn't hurt me.

The problem with that though is, how do you know what the persons intent is? It ain't as if you're going to ask them 10 questions before you decide if you need to protect yourself.

[GSK_AFC]

I'm all for it. You do anything to protect your family. Its ridiculous that if someone breaks into your house your not allowed to touch them.

Im not so sure about the guns though to defend yourself.

Totally agree.

[Zedie]

The first thing i thought of was:

If someone was careful enough, wouldnt it mean that they could kill someone, take the body back to their house, smash a window/door and claim self defence?! Difficult to do but still possible.

Personally, if i woke up to a guy in my house tonight, no lack of legal backing would stop me from defending my property and family. I'd rather do bird than stand by and be intimidated in my own home or worse, have something happen to my family because i was too worried to do anything about it. tbf i probably wouldnt even think, id just do.

[StLGooner]

Yea, the average person is going to defend themselves and their family by pure instinct and the will to live, so why not have a law that protects them when they do? Makes sense to me.

It's a dog eat dog world, kill or be killed sometimes, its a harsh reality, but its life.

[TheLittleMozart]

Damm right, if someone broke into my house with the intent of stealing my stuff/posisbly hurting me then I should have the right to kick the living shit out of that idiot becuase chances are if I simply tried to stop or restarain them in a 'lawful' manner, they easily wouldnt think twice about stabbing/seriously injuring me.

People who do these types of things are scum and deserve anything they get.

[TheArsenalPost]

Depends on if the home-owner is going to have restrictions placed on WHERE they can shoot or stab. If it is just to apprehend or scare off the intruder cool. But we all know some nut job will shoot to kill. (This should only be even thought of IF the intruder is going to hurt your family.)

Personally, if someone came into my home with the intent of taking my things and hurting me or my loved ones, I wouldn't want to kill them. Just hurt them enough so they couldn't hurt me.

The problem with that though is, how do you know what the persons intent is? It ain't as if you're going to ask them 10 questions before you decide if you need to protect yourself.

I agree to, but intent will SOMETIMES be clear. If they walk in with a weapon or if they don't. You wouldn't just go charging at them without knowing would you?

One problem I see is if you home owner goes to attack the intruder and gets hurt by their own weapon in the process...

[StLGooner]

Depends on if the home-owner is going to have restrictions placed on WHERE they can shoot or stab. If it is just to apprehend or scare off the intruder cool. But we all know some nut job will shoot to kill. (This should only be even thought of IF the intruder is going to hurt your family.)

Personally, if someone came into my home with the intent of taking my things and hurting me or my loved ones, I wouldn't want to kill them. Just hurt them enough so they couldn't hurt me.

The problem with that though is, how do you know what the persons intent is? It ain't as if you're going to ask them 10 questions before you decide if you need to protect yourself.

I agree to, but intent will SOMETIMES be clear. If they walk in with a weapon or if they don't. You wouldn't just go charging at them without knowing would you?

One problem I see is if you home owner goes to attack the intruder and gets hurt by their own weapon in the process...

Actually yes, I would attack and charge as soon as I had the opportunity. I'm not going to wait for him to make the first move. At that point, you do whatever you can to survive, whether they have a weapon or not, you don't wait for them to take it out and then decide, by that time it could be too late.

[Diaby24AFC]

http://usnews.nbcnews.com/_news/2012/09/28/14134818-police-connecticut-man-kills-suspected-burglar-then-learns-its-his-teenage-son#comments


If it was up to me, I'd do this:

[TheArsenalPost]

Depends on if the home-owner is going to have restrictions placed on WHERE they can shoot or stab. If it is just to apprehend or scare off the intruder cool. But we all know some nut job will shoot to kill. (This should only be even thought of IF the intruder is going to hurt your family.)

Personally, if someone came into my home with the intent of taking my things and hurting me or my loved ones, I wouldn't want to kill them. Just hurt them enough so they couldn't hurt me.

The problem with that though is, how do you know what the persons intent is? It ain't as if you're going to ask them 10 questions before you decide if you need to protect yourself.

I agree to, but intent will SOMETIMES be clear. If they walk in with a weapon or if they don't. You wouldn't just go charging at them without knowing would you?

One problem I see is if you home owner goes to attack the intruder and gets hurt by their own weapon in the process...

Actually yes, I would attack and charge as soon as I had the opportunity. I'm not going to wait for him to make the first move. At that point, you do whatever you can to survive, whether they have a weapon or not, you don't wait for them to take it out and then decide, by that time it could be too late.

I totally understand that. I'm just saying I have heard many cases of gang fights where someone just ran in and they were killed instantly.I agree that you must act, but you must do it so you don't endanger yourself more.