View Poll Results: Do you agree with the Judges sentence in this case?
- Voters
- 41. You may not vote on this poll
-
Yes. The homeowner should not have attacked the burglar.
7 17.07% -
No. Being attacked is an occupational hazard of being a criminal.
34 82.93%
Results 11 to 20 of 54
Thread: Justice?
-
12-16-2009, 02:44 PM #11Be careful how you treat people on your way up, you may meet them again on your way back down.
-
-
12-16-2009, 02:50 PM #12
-
The Following User Says Thank You to Stubear For This Useful Post:
ben.mid (12-16-2009)
-
12-16-2009, 03:17 PM #13
- Join Date
- Apr 2009
- Location
- manchester, tn
- Posts
- 938
Thanked: 259if this "thug" had broken into my home and terrorized my family and think he is going to get away it, think again. if i could have caught him, just a beating would have been the least of his worries. i more than likely would have shot him and i mean shoot to kill. people like him and others that scare people living in their own homes have no rights as far as i am concerned. the sooner they are taken out of the gene pool, the better. a few called "vigilante" killings might stop some of this kind of insanity. (yes i would be willing to spend time in jail for defending my family. i will probably get out of jail sometime. he will not get out of his grave though)
-
-
12-16-2009, 03:20 PM #14
What they did to this guy was completely over the top. Yes, he is total scumbag, but holding him down and beating his head in with a cricket bat (like a baseball bat ) is not justified. Thumping him would have been acceptable but not enough to cause brain-damage. The should have sat on him and handed him over to the cops. If they had done that, he would be in jail instead and probably his accomplices as well.
It would have been different if he had been coming at them with a weapon, even in the UK, deadly force would have been acceptable and defendable in a court of law.'Living the dream, one nightmare at a time'
-
The Following User Says Thank You to welshwizard For This Useful Post:
Stubear (12-16-2009)
-
12-16-2009, 04:20 PM #15
I am on the fence on this one. Part of me understands that holding a man down and beating him senseless long after he passed out is a bad thing to do. On the other hand I can't help but think 'Well, what did you expect?'
In case of a 'harmless' burglar who wanted to take off as soon as he was found out, I'd support a reprimand of the homeowner (because no threat was involved and no property taken).
However, as soon as they raised the stakes by physically threatening his family, they had it coming. It would still be against the law, but a classification as a provoked assault / assault induced temporary insanity would be in order for the homeowner. And he would have likely gotten that in Belgium (with a decent lawyer).
They were the ones physically threatening his family.
They were the ones taking serious action to bring the homeowner in a red rage.
They should be the ones taking the blame. Whenever in doubt, blame should go to the known criminal with a rep sheet of 50 offenses who had it coming.
Live by the sword; Die by the sword.
Personally, I would think congratulations were in order.Last edited by Bruno; 12-16-2009 at 04:25 PM.
Til shade is gone, til water is gone, Into the shadow with teeth bared, screaming defiance with the last breath.
To spit in Sightblinder’s eye on the Last Day
-
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Bruno For This Useful Post:
Stubear (12-16-2009), treydampier (12-16-2009)
-
12-16-2009, 04:44 PM #16
- Join Date
- Apr 2008
- Location
- Newtown, CT
- Posts
- 2,153
Thanked: 586I've been there, a few times. My wife, two step daughters and I were asleep in our second floor apartment when the guy living on the third floor set the house on fire. Hours after the fire was out, while we were moving our furniture into a rented truck with no place to bring it, The guy who lived on the first floor and I threw the guy who set the fire off the third floor porch. He lived and I have no idea if he ever set another fire but I didn't have to look at him anymore.
On one of the ships I served on one guy was stealing pictures of other guy's wives. He was in very rough shape by the time he was delivered to the Control Room. He wasn't going to do any more stealing on that ship.
There have been a couple home invasions in Connecticut over the past few years. One man lost his wife and daughter to some thugs who broke into his home. I doubt there would be a jury in all New England that would convict someone for slowly killing the guy(s) who did that.
-
The Following User Says Thank You to icedog For This Useful Post:
Stubear (12-16-2009)
-
12-16-2009, 04:45 PM #17
- Join Date
- Oct 2009
- Location
- Medina, Ohio
- Posts
- 1,286
Thanked: 530Well, here's the question. Was the burglar armed, or unarmed? Because if he got the jump on the family and was unarmed, just got lucky, then I'd say chase him down, give him a good wallop, and then wait for the authorities.. However if he had a knife/gun and used that to threaten the wife and kid? Beat. Hiss. Ass. I distinguish between damaging property, like in theft, and taking the threat to flesh, my family. One would be bad news and bruises, the other.. That's just not forgivable. At least not for me
-
The Following User Says Thank You to ShavedZombie For This Useful Post:
Stubear (12-16-2009)
-
12-16-2009, 04:46 PM #18
- Join Date
- Mar 2009
- Location
- Sussex, UK
- Posts
- 1,710
Thanked: 234I think most of us can understand why he did it, I think most of us feel confident we would do the same.
I also reckon most of us can understand why the courts do not want to make it seem like this kind of reaction is condoned.
-
12-16-2009, 04:50 PM #19
- Join Date
- Feb 2008
- Posts
- 3,763
Thanked: 735
-
12-16-2009, 05:31 PM #20
- Join Date
- Apr 2008
- Location
- Newtown, CT
- Posts
- 2,153
Thanked: 586