Thread: Justice?

You don't get sane people to spy on their own citizens and pretend nations you don't like are loaded down with nukes (or kill presidents).

Originally Posted by Stubear

The reason this guy has been jailed is that he chased the criminal down and then beat him up, whereas he "should" have let him escape.

Escape no But breaking a baseball bat takes a hell of an effort. Just last week I caught a shoplifter with hundreds of dollars worth of items and of course he tried to run so after a block I knocked him to the ground and kept him there until the police arrived and remember we have snow here now and it was about -10 degrees celcius and the police arrived about 20 minuter later. And that I see as self defence or keeping a criminal at the scene and sure I wasn't prosecuted for anything. But if I had beaten him up with a baseballbat until the police got there I would be in jail about now.

I am from Sweden BTW.

Originally Posted by Stubear

Personally I think the homeowner should have been exonerated and the criminal locked up.

Exonerated for keeping the criminal at the scene yes but prosecuted for the assault which I see all the hits with the bat after the criminal was subdued as. And it doesn't take breaking a bat to keep a guy down. The burglar/kidnapper/thief(?) should rightly have gone to jail as soon as he was let out of the hospital.

Originally Posted by Stubear

If you live outside the law you should not expect to receive protection from it, and if you're burgling my house you should expect to get a clobbering.

Hadn't they already left the house and now the burglar was the one who was being chased and then beaten when he got caught in someone's garden.

Originally Posted by Stubear

What I want to know is do you agree with the judges sentancing, or do you think that getting beaten up (or shot, as in the case of Tony Martin) is, and should be considered as, an occupational hazard of being a criminal?

I agree with the charging of the home-owner but the burglar should have been sent to jail.

My 2 ören

Originally Posted by Stubear

Personally I think the homeowner should have been exonerated and the criminal locked up. If you live outside the law you should not expect to recieve protection from it, and if you're burgling my house you should expect to get a clobbering.

I agree 100%, but you probably expected that from me

First of all, just let me say that I feel for my UK bretheren who have been stripped of their arms by their own government. What a travesty. The burglar knew he could break into this home without much consequence. Afterall, the occupant is going to be unarmed as required by law. Do you think the burglar would have been likely to break into a home in Switzerland, where every man is required to keep at home a full on "assault" weapon such as the Sig Sauer SG550? I believe this makes a burglary much less likely.
Secondly, justice was not at all served here. The criminal deserved what he got (In my opinion he deserved much worse). My heart goes out to the guy for protecting his family and making sure that the criminal could not escape into the night only to come back and do it again next week, next month, or next year. That guy did the right thing.

@IanS

I don't know if you know, but when your body is charged with adrenalin, higher brain function and rational thought are the first to go. This is why in MA, you practise patterns thousands and thousands of times, and then some more. Not only to learn to do them correctly, but to ingrain them in a way that when you need them, you don'y have to think about them.

His family was threatened with serious physical harm. He saw an opportunity to strike back and he took it. I can virtually assure you that at that moment, rational thought was not involved.

Now, you can call that barbaric, but it's a biological fact that not many people would stop beating as soon as the person stopped moving. Perhaps you would be more civilized, overcome the torrent of adrenalin and emotions, regain your higher brain functions and stop beating the second he stopped moving.

then again, ... maybe not...

Bruno is dead on with that one, there has been quite a bit of study on that one. The classic "fight or flight" reflex that's down in our brain along with other "involuntary" functions.

Originally Posted by shooter74743

Bruno is dead on with that one, there has been quite a bit of study on that one. The classic "fight or flight" reflex that's down in our brain along with other "involuntary" functions.

ok but how does this factor in as far as guilt or innocence of breaking the law?

I don't know the laws there where he is from & won't even try to act like i do, however my opinion is that the law is WRONG. This man should be patted on the back and acknowledged as a hometown hero IMO. It is in a man's nature (and many animals) to protect their family, this is no different. Here in the US, (well, most states anyway) a crook knows that they are gambling with their LIFE if they break into a home when the family is home...IMO, it should be that way EVERYWHERE. Guns, knives, bats, or hands aren't even the issue. This particular law gives the crooks more rights than a honest & hard working person. Just imagine if you were in this man's shoes...what would you do? I would have done the same if in his country, here, the crooks would have not left the house and the coroner would have given them their next ride. I can live with that & with a clear consience (sp?) & knowing that I would/will have to answer to this when my time comes at the Pearly Gates.

In my view justice was served until the so called "justice system" became involved.

Threaten me and run away, threaten my wife and children and you may run, but you can't hide.

We refer to this reaction as "Momma bear overdrive".

I still think that people are misinterpreting on what basis this man was charged. He was not charged for using excessive force to protect his family or home.

He was charged for what was effectively the revenge, his family was safe, his home was safe. If he had done this the next day, or a week tomorrow, he would have gone down for GBH. If he had tracked this lad down and shot him dead a week later in the street in the states, he would have gone down for what? A crime of passion? Third degree murder?