Government & Politics

Protecting your home from burglars

Government & Politics

Posted by: Nefertari

23rd Sep 2011 02:36pm

I heard on the news the other day that a man who wounded a burglar (who eventually died from his wounds) could be facing charges for his act of trying to protect himself from burglary!! Did the powers-that-be really expect him to turn the other cheek while his belongings were being ransacked! I think it's a pretty sad state of affairs when we can't even protect our own homes against vandals. What do others think?


Comments 9

chenxi8
  • 28th Jul 2012 09:40pm

I think that the laws are against criminals, not victims. But in some reasons laws can be changed, not the whole law system. But sometimes the law will stand on the evil side. There isn't much we can do.
The burglar only steals stuff, they don't harm or murder people if they don't have to. The criminal didn't harm the victim but the victim kills the criminal. It is a bit unfair for the man who tries to protect his home from the burglar but on the opposite site, the burglar was kill by the man who tries to protect his hime from the burglar that he kills later.
On the final thoughts, I think if the man has been released, he will probably think about that next time he won't stop the burglars by killing him except at the situations he has been wounded. It's the same for him if he goes to prison.

maccaa
  • 16th Mar 2012 11:17pm

i agree with you everone should have the right to protect them selves and there belongings, i know i would

ozziedigger
  • 31st Oct 2011 12:42pm

Not living in the best of neighborhoods,i`ve often thought about this problem,even before writing this, i just sat for a while thinking of some kind of solution.
I then realised ,if anyone was to invade my house,they would not give me any time to think at all.
I would then have to rely on my instinct and react accordingly and immediately.
That is not pre-meditated, or is it? Anyway it would be done and over with very quickly.He,she or me would be out of action.The survivor heading for hospital/jail.

keith
  • 20th Oct 2011 12:12pm

I think the rule behind this situation is that two wrongs do not make a right. The burglar should not have entered the property and the householder should not have exercised deadly force on the burglar. wherethere is a burglary, the householder isentitled to use reasonable force to protect himself and/or detain the intruder. The reasonable force does not extend to using a gun or belting theintruder with a heavy piece of lumber, unless the actions of the intruder cause the householder to fear for his/her life.

Raksha
  • 20th Oct 2011 08:53am

I saw that story on the news also and the police spokesperson said that the homeowner has the right to use the same force that the intruder has used. So if the intruder has a knife, the the homeowner has the right to use a knife also.

This seemed logical until I thought of a situation where a lawyer would be able to prove that the intruder had no intention of using the knife to hurt the homeowner, just to scare them. The way our courts are at the present, if this was proven then the intruder would be the injured party and would be only charged with break and entering and the home owner would be charged with assault with a deadly weapon. Doesn't seem right, does it?



mermaid
  • 5th Oct 2011 01:49pm

Can relate to this story on many levels, the difference in my case was the perpetrator didn't die, although the police didn't arrive until the day after he was in hospital. Not knocking our police force the circumstances could very much have differed.

The offender represented himself and lost the case regardless of how a situation occurs, everyone has a legal right to protect themselves, as a juror I see no reason for anyone to do so. There have been many cases where hung juries have occurred due to technicalities of this nature and some instances where offenders have won due to technicalities unfortunately the only offering I am able to share is should anyone be known in your neighbourhood to reside alone, get to know them and keep an eye out as though they were your best friend!

Steve49
  • 27th Sep 2011 01:45am

If someone is committing a crime they shouldn't have any rights whatsoever, the rights of the victim should come first always. If they get killed or injured while committing a crime then bad luck for them. If I was ever on a jury where a man has been charged while defending his family , home or property there is no way I would convict them. They should be awarded compensation for the trauma that they have been put through by the criminal.

19chris51
  • 25th Sep 2011 01:39pm

This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the house rules.

19chris51
  • 25th Sep 2011 01:43pm
This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the house rules.

Sorry I forgot to add, if people were to stand up for themselves ( as this man did ) I think the people who rob us might be a little worried as to what might happen to them, when breaking into peoples homes, the justice system just smackes their wrists.

Help Caféstudy members by responding to their questions, or ask your own in Café Chat, and you will get the chance of earning extra rewards. Caféstudy will match these and donate equally to our two chosen Australian charities.

AMCS
Australian Marine Conservation Society are an independent charity, staffed by a committed group of scientists, educators and passionate advocates who have defended Australia’s oceans for over 50 years.
Reach Out
ReachOut is the most accessed online mental health service for young people and their parents in Australia. Their trusted self-help information, peer-support program and referral tools save lives by helping young people be well and stay well. The information they offer parents makes it easier for them to help their teenagers, too.