420chan now has a web-based IRC client available, right here
Leave these fields empty (spam trap):
You can leave this blank to post anonymously, or you can create a Tripcode by using the float Name#Password
[*]Italic Text[/*]
[**]Bold Text[/**]
[~]Taimapedia Article[/~]
[%]Spoiler Text[/%]
>Highlight/Quote Text
[pre]Preformatted & Monospace text[/pre]
1. Numbered lists become ordered lists
* Bulleted lists become unordered lists


Community Updates

420chan now supports HTTPS! If you find any issues, you may report them in this thread
Man gets attacked in his home by two would be robbers gets put up on murder charges by Angus Guvinghadging - Mon, 09 Apr 2018 06:32:58 EST ID:EI1TkGKO No.167329 Ignore Report Quick Reply
File: 1523269978333.jpg -(44721B / 43.67KB, 679x509) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size. 44721

I really cant understand this shit.
Caroline Dumblepetch - Mon, 09 Apr 2018 07:45:22 EST ID:8c32w9KN No.167330 Ignore Report Quick Reply
What can't you understand, exactly? That someone's life was taken and the police have to do an investigation and gather evidence for a jury to decide what happened?
Eliza Gavingtut - Mon, 09 Apr 2018 09:13:16 EST ID:tlilhxRg No.167333 Ignore Report Quick Reply
Are you fucking retarded?

Don't fucking murder people in your house.
Rebecca Gonnerridge - Mon, 09 Apr 2018 10:26:58 EST ID:2cGW+VRz No.167338 Ignore Report Quick Reply
I know you can't understand it, OP. You think he was charged with something and he wasn't. Have you considered night school?
Reuben Sassleshit - Mon, 09 Apr 2018 10:29:36 EST ID:rtO8zSPd No.167339 Ignore Report Quick Reply
not really on topic so no bump but I was reading this in another tab and it seemed like an interesting comparison.
Augustus Gappersidge - Mon, 09 Apr 2018 16:29:41 EST ID:sClHa8sB No.167346 Ignore Report Quick Reply
That's fucking retarded. You don't have the time nor the benefit of the doubt to just assume a home intruder will just leave you alone after they coerce you with a weapon in your home. Stupid fuck deserved anything to happen to him for pulling that shit, up to and including death, and I hope the old man gets off scot-free. If fucking home intruders would rather get arrested than potentially killed for breaking into homes and threatening residents with weapons then don't fucking break into homes and threaten residents with weapons.
Angus Guvinghadging - Mon, 09 Apr 2018 17:31:05 EST ID:EI1TkGKO No.167348 Ignore Report Quick Reply
>Richard Osborn-Brooks, discovered two intruders in South Park Crescent
>One suspect, armed with a screwdriver, forced the man into his kitchen where a struggle ensued and he was stabbed, Scotland Yard said.
>Mr Osborn-Brooks, who suffered bruising to his arms, has been arrested on suspicion of murder.

Eugene Snodville - Mon, 09 Apr 2018 17:38:27 EST ID:fIz9xdLH No.167349 Ignore Report Quick Reply

Arrested on suspicion and charged are two legally and logically distinct things. Police can't charge anyone with a crime, that is something the prosecution can choose to do if they think there's a case. However it is standard procedure whenever anyone is killed by someone else, regardless of the stated circumstances, to make an arrest until all the evidence is in. People are known to lie, and not everything is a cut-and-dry "stand your ground" situation.

Granted, as is likely true for most of you, my gut also tells me this is just one of those cut-and-dry cases: but nonetheless there is a procedure to follow here, so quit freaking the fuck out.
Angus Guvinghadging - Mon, 09 Apr 2018 19:01:17 EST ID:EI1TkGKO No.167350 Ignore Report Quick Reply
In the states if some one breaks into your home and you kill them you are not usually booked. Unless there's some sort of circumstance where it looks like you went beyond self defense and moved into retaliation. This usually applies to Commonwealths.
Albert Bobbermidging - Mon, 09 Apr 2018 19:46:41 EST ID:F7sW6vBR No.167351 Ignore Report Quick Reply

Yeah. From my understanding is that if someone dies in your home the police will question you on the spot, from which they can deduce that a home invasion likely occurred and that the home owner likely isn't a flight risk and circumstantial evidence backs up the botched home invasion that resulted in a death. From there then a relative of the deceased could try to press charges against the home owner and lead to a court hearing, but I don't think the police arrest the homeowner on site and let them sit in jail until an investigation is finished, not even for a day.
Charles Sedgeford - Mon, 09 Apr 2018 21:24:12 EST ID:kFmX3/Gj No.167353 Ignore Report Quick Reply
1523323452764.jpg -(46769B / 45.67KB, 620x372) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size.
Someone was stabbed to death with a screw driver. Just because it happened at someone's house doesn't mean that the police will just take the home owner's word at face value. If it was a murder and he were to escape or kill another person it would be their fault. I mean they let him go and didn't charge him, it was the UK so they probably didn't throw him in jail indefinitely while they investigated like they do in America. They just took him into their custody and let him go when they determined he was telling the truth and it was self defense during a home invasion.

I don't know about you, but the first thing I think of when I see a fist fight leading to someone getting stabbed to death with a screwdriver isn't botched home invasion. It seems like they were doing their job by the book and didn't overstep their bounds, but then again they aren't American.
Eliza Hobberkadge - Mon, 09 Apr 2018 21:53:32 EST ID:tlilhxRg No.167354 Ignore Report Quick Reply
Pretty fucking suspect though.
You don't just die from getting stabbed by a screwdriver.

I'm a bit of an amateur historian, and history is full of people getting knives, swords, spears and axes rammed in their flesh, and ending up just fine... sort of.

And those weapons will just go into flesh, and go and go and go and go until the blade ends and the hilt or handle begins. A screwdriver... You have to fucking ram that thing in there and keep ramming and ramming and ramming.
Nathaniel Blythefoot - Mon, 09 Apr 2018 22:16:34 EST ID:sClHa8sB No.167355 Ignore Report Quick Reply

Well, for one it was the old man's home. Two, there was likely circumstantial evidence all over indicating the two nonces broke in and the old man didn't lure them into his home to murder them.

Also, there isn't clear evidence that the old man grabbed the asshole's screwdriver and killed him with it, as mentioned in this updated article:


Also from that article:

>Richard Osborn-Brooks, 78, was arrested on suspicion of murdering intruder Henry Vincent, 37, who died following a struggle in the botched raid at his home, but was told he would face no further action over the death.

I think it's probably time to stop blindly defending some fuckhead burglar that tried to threaten the homeowner of the residence he was trying to rob.
Charles Sedgeford - Tue, 10 Apr 2018 01:32:24 EST ID:kFmX3/Gj No.167368 Ignore Report Quick Reply
No one is defending him, he's dead and everyone is fine with it.

While gathering evidence it's customary to bring people into custody, which is different than being charged. You know everything about this from hindsight provided by the officers. It takes time to collect evidence. I don't know how it works in the UK but in America the cops aren't even the ones that charge you, they give their findings to the prosecutor and the district attorney who decide weather or not to pursue charges and which ones to go for. Were they supposed to bust in and suck his dick?
David Neckleham - Tue, 10 Apr 2018 01:54:20 EST ID:ar9mMa8V No.167371 Ignore Report Quick Reply
There's nothing "suspect" about dying from a stab wound no matter what the object. If you happen to get hit in an artery you have a better chance of dying.
Oliver Bardfield - Tue, 10 Apr 2018 05:39:24 EST ID:cBVXQjbx No.167375 Ignore Report Quick Reply
I heard a blind guy sum this kind of thing up in a way that didn't necessitate direct action like the homeowner did. Robber sticks you up, takes your stuff, but insurance pays for the lost item. The robber being caught someday is just an added bonus (along with return of said stuff.) In other words the fact that someone died in the homeowner's dwelling is even more suspicious because it's not even necessary provided you are insured.

But he's also blind and wouldn't be able to retaliate much.
Angus Gublingtare - Tue, 10 Apr 2018 08:38:54 EST ID:8c32w9KN No.167378 Ignore Report Quick Reply
Unfortunately, some US states have "Castle Doctrine" laws, which makes murdering anyone trespassing into your home (or even property) perfectly legal. I hope the UK (and every other first world nation) doesn't have these types of laws...

Plus there's the question of legitimate self defense. A screwdriver could be a deadly weapon if you try hard enough, so if there were signs of a struggle, then yeah, it's self defense. Maybe this would have played out differently if the cops could have determined the old man was in no physical danger and only stabbed the burglar in the back as he was leaving or something...
Oliver Bardfield - Tue, 10 Apr 2018 09:32:41 EST ID:cBVXQjbx No.167381 Ignore Report Quick Reply
1523367161898.gif -(1640681B / 1.56MB, 250x170) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size.
It reminds me of that scene from American History X where the outspoken protagonist has a verbal disagreement with a gentleman of the archaic complexion in his home and brutally murders him in the street. I don't remember what state that film takes place in (I think it's set in LA, so California?) but whatever the state laws are there on this subject the murderer quite clearly killed the victim well out of his own property so the 'self-defence' argument should really collapse at that point...

Gif related, it's from another scene of that film.
Walter Wullysedging - Tue, 10 Apr 2018 16:09:55 EST ID:rtO8zSPd No.167393 Ignore Report Quick Reply
>I hope the UK (and every other first world nation) doesn't have these types of laws...
In northern Europe the opposite is the norm if it makes you feel better.
Beatrice Sindercocke - Sun, 15 Apr 2018 14:31:18 EST ID:ZyEryNzm No.167602 Ignore Report Quick Reply
Okay so when OP posted this topic it was already known that this guy was released without charge. He was released on the 6th of April.

It all makes perfect sense to me. Someone died, the police need to investigate and the guy killed them. He absolutely deserved to walk free but you feel that if someone dies in circumstances like this the police are obliged to treat it seriously and confirm that things are as everyone assumed. If they're wrong then it's a murder we're talking about. In this case they found this and the guy walked rightfully. The police followed due process and if someone should cry foul later on it will serve in the old guy's defense. He was investigated properly.

Remember this is not US police. The guy probably got polite conversation and plenty of tea. UK police do everything thinking about how it would look on the tabloids the next day, they actually answer to and worry about what people think. Which is great. They're still humans wielding a lot of power to enforce laws set by some very shady people but you can't look at this through US centric vision.
David Chirringpure - Mon, 16 Apr 2018 08:24:47 EST ID:jajGWUvR No.167626 Ignore Report Quick Reply
>defending yourself and property

So even if you're worried that the person coming into your house has ill intent besides taking your stuff you should just bend over and let them violate you, your property, and hard work?

Also not everybody has insurance. You're a bitch if you think defending yourself and your progress in life in that situation isn't warranted. Bitch ass burglar sympathizer.

Not even remotely related and you're a retard for 2 reasons

1) There is no castle doctrine in California
2) It was because the victim was black in one of the most racist cities in the US at the time
Wesley Hicklefuck - Mon, 16 Apr 2018 08:59:41 EST ID:AHzFAh+3 No.167627 Ignore Report Quick Reply
Just because someone is robbing your house doesnt mean you get a fucking kill him.
Samuel Fussleson - Mon, 16 Apr 2018 09:25:08 EST ID:8c32w9KN No.167628 Ignore Report Quick Reply
Being "worried" is not a license to kill.

You're not "defending your life" unless someone is actually trying to kill you. This is true in your home as well as on the street.
Polly Pitthall - Mon, 16 Apr 2018 10:11:48 EST ID:ojjwPRrO No.167629 Ignore Report Quick Reply
>1) There is no castle doctrine in California
actually i do believe there is (Penal Code 198.5). you might be confused with "stand your ground" provisions, which CA does not have.
Clara Dishmutch - Mon, 16 Apr 2018 12:42:35 EST ID:M6dL3wIr No.167635 Ignore Report Quick Reply

it is if you're a cop. "I felt a twinge of emotion so I unloaded 4 clips into the handcuffed suspect." "NOT GUILTY!"
Rebecca Blythewill - Mon, 16 Apr 2018 12:46:34 EST ID:rxHptHSi No.167636 Ignore Report Quick Reply

So if you want to kill somebody in the US you just lure them into your house and once they're dead you can call the cops who will get rid of the body for you and don't even try to find out what happened there?
Rebecca Clurryway - Mon, 16 Apr 2018 13:29:36 EST ID:ZyEryNzm No.167638 Ignore Report Quick Reply
This should be obvious but a lot of people in this thread missed it. This is why you HAVE to at least investigate to confirm someone is innocent if people turn up dead. That way if you did stich them up the police at least have a chance to discover it and send you down. Obviously you need decent police and humane custody so I guess there's no good solution in the US.
Martin Chashleck - Mon, 16 Apr 2018 15:32:42 EST ID:sClHa8sB No.167641 Ignore Report Quick Reply

lol I like imagining you inside your home when two armed fuckwads break in and you think "This is fine, my life isn't at risk, they just want money!" Thanks for being a shining example of Darwinism at work.
Samuel Wecklefield - Tue, 17 Apr 2018 13:34:12 EST ID:3eEkMvU4 No.167671 Ignore Report Quick Reply
If your life isn't at risk, you shouldn't be allowed to murder someone just because they wandered onto your property. What the fuck is wrong with you?
Phyllis Clonkinworth - Tue, 17 Apr 2018 15:32:04 EST ID:tlilhxRg No.167679 Ignore Report Quick Reply
This kind of thinking is what gets innocent drunk confused people killed because they walk up the wrong house, and some fucking retarded cunt blows them into gibs because MURRICA DUN TRED UN MEH.
Edwin Greenstock - Wed, 18 Apr 2018 05:00:32 EST ID:F7sW6vBR No.167708 Ignore Report Quick Reply

>they wandered onto your property
>Thread is about a home invader getting killed while invading someone's fucking home and threatening the home owner

Not sure if retarded and/or just a contrarian dicknose...


>This kind of thinking is what gets innocent drunk confused people killed because they walk up the wrong house
>Thread is about a home invader getting killed while invading someone's fucking home and threatening the home owner

Not sure if retarded and/or just a contrarian dicknose...
Nell Fazzlewell - Wed, 18 Apr 2018 14:18:28 EST ID:gMoVuqfZ No.167721 Ignore Report Quick Reply
The black guy shot at his house before he killed him, both of them were scumbags.
James Sonderhall - Wed, 18 Apr 2018 14:26:22 EST ID:kFmX3/Gj No.167723 Ignore Report Quick Reply
They were actually stealing his car and he caught them if I remember right. The only black person to shoot anyone in the whole movie was at the end, and his brother did kill that kid's brother, just because he quit being a skinhead that day doesn't mean the whole world knew his change of heart. That's gangster life, if you play you pay.

Interesting side note, a majority of gangs in Mississippi are white but their gang laws are used exclusively on black people according to a data sample of convictions using their gang enhancement law between 2010 and 2017.
John Fanway - Wed, 18 Apr 2018 14:28:57 EST ID:X2OC0bps No.167724 Ignore Report Quick Reply
>I said something retarded, now I have to pretend like I wasn't keeping up with the conversation in the thread.
Nice deflections.
Basil Sapperbotch - Wed, 18 Apr 2018 15:44:58 EST ID:o4BwxZhq No.167725 Ignore Report Quick Reply
>Interesting side note, a majority of gangs in Mississippi are white but their gang laws are used exclusively on black people according to a data sample of convictions using their gang enhancement law between 2010 and 2017.

Color me not-surprised....
Angus Bleckleham - Wed, 18 Apr 2018 16:05:08 EST ID:qGAVHluK No.167727 Ignore Report Quick Reply
>Color me not-surprised....
Walter Sottingwud - Wed, 18 Apr 2018 17:46:12 EST ID:sClHa8sB No.167728 Ignore Report Quick Reply

The only retard not able to keep up with a topic is you, John.
Ernest Piblingwater - Wed, 18 Apr 2018 22:01:25 EST ID:QZvATzGV No.167729 Ignore Report Quick Reply
is he perhaps the same guy as M+YmEreU? seems to use the same deflection + ad hom non-arguments and ultimately never actually addresses rebuttals.
Oliver Camblefurk - Thu, 19 Apr 2018 05:14:43 EST ID:F7sW6vBR No.167734 Ignore Report Quick Reply

The rebuttals are retarded, though. The story and conversation is about armed home invaders, not about serial killers luring victims into their own home to somehow get away with free murder or drunk/stoned people accidentally wandering into someone else's home. Why are you such a retard? How did you become this way?
Hannah Dubblestedge - Thu, 19 Apr 2018 10:08:49 EST ID:7hnOqSlS No.167736 Ignore Report Quick Reply
im not the guy you made your retarded retard replies to you retard. thanks for proving them right about you being a retard.

also lrn2 context. conversations are not static, they are dynamic. not every post will be addressing OP directly.
Nell Pedgecocke - Thu, 19 Apr 2018 10:23:47 EST ID:ojjwPRrO No.167737 Ignore Report Quick Reply
they're talking about incidents like this:
>was a Japanese exchange student who was shot dead while residing in Baton Rouge, Louisiana, United States.
>Hattori was on his way to a Halloween party and went to the wrong house by mistake.
>The property owner, Rodney Peairs shot and killed Hattori, thinking he was trespassing with criminal intent.
>The homicide and Peairs' acquittal in the state court of Louisiana received worldwide attention.
Isabella Sickletot - Thu, 19 Apr 2018 10:55:29 EST ID:qGAVHluK No.167738 Ignore Report Quick Reply
Something like this just recenlty happen in California. Some black kid got lost and knocked at this for directions and the husband ran out and shot at him.

Look man, I know this shit is gray area, but you cant just assume anyone knocking on your door has an intent to kill you.
Angus Gishlit - Thu, 19 Apr 2018 11:17:48 EST ID:UwR6TJBS No.167739 Ignore Report Quick Reply
well what's worse is of course that you don't actually need to have felt your life was in danger. you merely need to claim you felt so. feelings are easy to lie about.
Oliver Camblefurk - Thu, 19 Apr 2018 14:55:12 EST ID:F7sW6vBR No.167740 Ignore Report Quick Reply

Nah, you're retarded. If you follow the comment chain you would see that they were replying to a post about an armed home invasion, not some side convo about serial killers or drunk/stoned people. Stop being a faggot, Hannah.


Yeah, no shit bad shit can happen if you go to the wrong house, even when sober. What the fuck does this have to do with the two plonkers that broke into the old guy's home and tried to rob him while threatening him with weapons?


Read the OP, that was a completely different scenario and isn't like the story in the OP at all.
Oliver Camblefurk - Thu, 19 Apr 2018 14:57:11 EST ID:F7sW6vBR No.167741 Ignore Report Quick Reply
Also, as an aside, holy fucking christ are you /pol/ fags the dirt worst. I see why now Kirt nuked /pol/ if all you fags do is just think "Huh, this story about X reminds me of Y so I'm just going to blather on about Y because I'm mad and I want to argue about something completely irrelevant to the topic of this thread".
Nell Pedgecocke - Thu, 19 Apr 2018 15:36:55 EST ID:ojjwPRrO No.167743 Ignore Report Quick Reply
the question originally brought up here: >>167378 was about what exactly justifies the argument of "self defense". for the record, i do think the guy in OP's story was justified in how he reacted to the intruder, but the question raised is certainly pertinent to the discussion.

then the concept of "castle doctrine" was brought up because in the US (where CD applies in certain jurisdictions), the use of force in your home doesn't even need to be justified by the concept of self defense, thus shutting down even the need to consider self defense (as long as you claim you were afraid for your life, etc.).

seriously though, if you're actually trying to engage in discussion and not just petty shitposting, stop with the ad-homs and actually put together arguments.
Nell Pedgecocke - Thu, 19 Apr 2018 16:02:50 EST ID:ojjwPRrO No.167745 Ignore Report Quick Reply
sorry for the double post, lemme elaborate on your question:
>What the fuck does this have to do with the two plonkers that broke into the old guy's home and tried to rob him while threatening him with weapons?

it has to do with "drawing a line," in this case regarding what justifies the use of deadly force for the purpose of "self defense" (most political debates can be distilled down to this kind of line drawing, imo). in OP's situation the line was drawn too far, while in the Hattori case the line was drawn too near. bringing up the Hattori case helps put the discussion in the perspective of a spectrum rather than as a black or white binary dilemma.

so where exactly should the line be drawn? both cases drew scrutiny and criticism because people considered "the line" to be drawn improperly. there's probably a better, more sensible line somewhere in between.

and that is what the fuck the Hattori case has to do with the two plonkers that broke into the old guy's home and tried to rob him while threatening him with weapons.

honestly interested in discussing where you would personally draw that line, but only as long as you're willing to be civil/rational in your discourse. calm down, take a deep breath, and chill before your next post.
Charlotte Grimson - Thu, 19 Apr 2018 16:33:55 EST ID:M6dL3wIr No.167746 Ignore Report Quick Reply
honestly someone who breaks and enters in another persons home is clearly violating grave codes of civilized conduct. like an ant which starts attacking other members of its colony. they dont get to live anymore. if you are going to violate my right to privacy, safety, and sanctuary, or anyone else's in their own abode, why would you advocate for the defense of that person? if they are killed society improves as a whole.
Barnaby Suddlestone - Thu, 19 Apr 2018 17:32:38 EST ID:ZyEryNzm No.167748 Ignore Report Quick Reply
>in OP's situation the line was drawn too far,
No it wasn't. The old man walked free.

I said this before, but by the time this thread was posted he was already at home. I tried being rational but everyone ignored me and kept ignoring me. The UK has a law that says "reasonable force" is excused. And that is dictated by a lot of factors. In this case it's obvious the guy used reasonable force as far as could be reasonably expected of him. I say this because he did not go to court.

So anyway stop being stupid and debating hypotheticals and extremes.The facts are that the line was drawn right. The guy was investigated and not charged. When someone dies in your house the sensible solution is that you should be let off if you can prove you defended yourself and did not use excessive force. The loose terms lets the judge and jury use their judgement if it even gets that far. Which it did not. It is not sensible to just ignore a dead body though I hope they brought the old dude lots of reading materials.

Judgement was exercised and the system worked. Instead of a stupid dumb fuck black and white law which you stupid fucking moron americunts are deliberating, you allow the particulars of the situation to dictate the action. You ask questions not limited to:
>did the violence continue when the threat was neutralised?
>how vulnerable or frightened was the defendant?
>How did the "victim" react to the realisation the defendant would fight back?
>How did the "victim" threaten or work the defendant before?

An old man has to put his life at risk to use a light touch, he'd have been afraid and he didn't pursue the dead guy once he was neutralised. I imagine they didn't find the guy looking like a pin cushion or decided the old guy had clearly panicked if they did.

What the fuck is wrong with you? When someone dies there is an investigation. Often just to confirm what is already know. God damn you guys suck.
Nathaniel Bicklekudge - Thu, 19 Apr 2018 20:32:30 EST ID:F7sW6vBR No.167758 Ignore Report Quick Reply

Nah, man, shut the fuck up. Our dialogue was about the OP's story, not about whatever bullshit off-topic discussion you think you were trying to have. When you start responding to me about serial killers and drunk/stoned people getting killed for showing up to the wrong house then you've veered off into your own discussion and you're a faggot for trying to rope others into the bullshit conversation you're trying to start in a thread about something with completely different circumstances.

So again, go fuck yourself. Go on /law/ or /pss/ if you want to discuss hypotheticals or bring up completely unrelated cases about people getting murdered instead of trying to shit up a thread about goddamned armed home invaders getting fucked up because they were fucking shitty ass home invading assholes threatening a civilian in their own home that they broke into. Seriously, you're a faggot. Like holy shit, what is wrong with your brain?


Thank you! God damn is it a breath of fresh air to see someone that isn't retarded on here.
Cyril Banningmutch - Thu, 19 Apr 2018 20:53:09 EST ID:ojjwPRrO No.167760 Ignore Report Quick Reply
ah, good to know, missed your post. in that case you're right, that's fine.

neither example was hypothetical.

extreme cases such as the Hattori case are useful in examining legal/moral boundaries and in assessing consequences of the kinds of precedents set by them. i think they're very useful to study, so i'll have to disagree with you there.

>stop being stupid
>stupid fucking moron americunts
>What the fuck is wrong with you?
>God damn you guys suck.
your post was otherwise logical and coherent. how did these emotional outbursts help further the discussion or help make for more constructive discourse? if there isn't a good reason, i'd suggest dropping them. they generally help only to further entrench partisanship. even when you actually make good, valid points and arguments, it encourages people to be unnecessarily contrarian. i don't claim to be a saint myself, i'm sure i've made shitty outbursts like these too in the past, but let's at least try. on my end clearly i can do a better job reading through the thread, though - mostly just read through the posts of the guy i was replying to.
Cyril Banningmutch - Thu, 19 Apr 2018 20:57:04 EST ID:ojjwPRrO No.167761 Ignore Report Quick Reply
>Nah, man, shut the fuck up
stopped reading. clearly i gave you too much credit. blocked. moving on.
Nathaniel Bicklekudge - Thu, 19 Apr 2018 22:29:21 EST ID:F7sW6vBR No.167763 Ignore Report Quick Reply

Seriously, go fuck yourself, faggot. In fact, fuck yourself with that makeshift board cop badge you made for yourself.
Nathaniel Cizzlehag - Thu, 19 Apr 2018 23:05:00 EST ID:EhvPs+Md No.167765 Ignore Report Quick Reply
1524193500658.gif -(1822016B / 1.74MB, 323x400) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size.

and now for the news at 10:
>Thread reaches critical limit as multiple foes constantly get confused about who they are arguing with in the first place
Martin Sankinford - Thu, 19 Apr 2018 23:16:03 EST ID:jajGWUvR No.167766 Ignore Report Quick Reply
1 or 2 people here believe the line should be somewhere around where if someone broke into your house while you were away and raped your wife, she shouldn't have done anything in defense because she wasn't sure she was gonna be raped, she just thought they were gonna take the TV. To me, this is absurd. And obviously this is an extreme example but it goes to show the nature of a home invasion, the multitude of intentions and the uncertainty and fright that someone would experience while being invaded.

So long as the people have broken into your home, violating your personal safe space, they are invading you and threatening you, your livelihood and your personage. The robbers are the ones that crossed a line, and it is a deadly one when you go into someone's home and they don't know what your intentions are. After that point, your safety is not ensured, and should not be protected by the government.

It may not always be necessary for the homeowner to use deadly force but I believe that in any scenario it is justified for the homeowner to use force. And given the uncertain nature of a home invader's intent, a homeowner should never be faulted for erring on the side of caution.
Clara Gazzlestone - Fri, 20 Apr 2018 00:08:48 EST ID:M6dL3wIr No.167767 Ignore Report Quick Reply

man i wish i could watch her do that naked. Look at the set on her!
Clara Gazzlestone - Fri, 20 Apr 2018 00:10:44 EST ID:M6dL3wIr No.167768 Ignore Report Quick Reply

i agree completely
Emma Trotridge - Fri, 20 Apr 2018 08:32:24 EST ID:8c32w9KN No.167771 Ignore Report Quick Reply
You have really bad reading comprehension, man.
Eliza Crishdock - Fri, 20 Apr 2018 08:59:50 EST ID:qGAVHluK No.167772 Ignore Report Quick Reply
fucking lold
Cyril Bardfield - Fri, 20 Apr 2018 12:19:42 EST ID:w4G8ki2H No.167774 Ignore Report Quick Reply
There is a huge difference between someone walking on your grass and breaking into your home to rob you with the threat or use of violence. If you can't tell the difference then just stop posting.
Eliza Crishdock - Fri, 20 Apr 2018 12:58:10 EST ID:qGAVHluK No.167776 Ignore Report Quick Reply
That depends, did the guy hae a weapon?
Nathaniel Bicklekudge - Fri, 20 Apr 2018 13:58:21 EST ID:F7sW6vBR No.167777 Ignore Report Quick Reply

Well said.
Oliver Honeyford - Sat, 21 Apr 2018 01:39:15 EST ID:M6dL3wIr No.167784 Ignore Report Quick Reply

sometimes i wish i could shoot people for walking across my yard.

nah im just joking

or am i
Fuck Pockledale - Sat, 21 Apr 2018 07:50:21 EST ID:ZyEryNzm No.167785 Ignore Report Quick Reply
Yeah, and the UK law allows the homeowner to use force. They use the term "minimum restraining force" in self defense in general. There is some judgment as to "minimum" and allowances made for the situation and human error. Some terrified old blind guy can't be counted on to judge this right
>the law protected him

If you make it always wrong to hurt someone else or always right to do so though, you create a dangerous imbalance.
>the uncertain nature of a home invader's intent
Is not very uncertain. Its not hard to tell if someone is hostile. Sure you don't know exactly what they're after but it's not hard to tell if they're hostile or not. If it is clear they are hostile and you accidentally over kill them that's fine and it was fine for the old man. If it's clear they're hostile and after they retreat you keep stabbing then that's not fine. If they are clearly not hostile then again its not fine to kill. I appreciate you don't know if they just want your shit or to kill you and rape your wife and in those cases if you get it wrong and kill someone who was just threatening you to get your shit you should walk.

>and you evidently do under UK law

The line might need tweaking a bit. Its somewhere after "they enter your house without permission" and before "You are certain they want to kill you". I'd say as soon as they show hostile intent force is required. If they retreat or cease that intent force becomes no longer allowed. You should not be trying to kill them but if they die in your attempt to preserve yourself that's fine. Aiming to disable your hostile intruder and accidentally killing them isn't the same as aiming to kill them and killing them.
Cornelius Singerwell - Sat, 21 Apr 2018 08:14:05 EST ID:EI1TkGKO No.167786 Ignore Report Quick Reply
A few years back a neighbor shot and killed a man who entered his home and was running off with stolen weaponry. He was arrested and charged for chasing the man, even though the man had a gun and could potentially harm anyone right then and there. He was firing back at the homeowner chasing him.

These issues are complicated as fuck
Cornelius Surringridge - Sun, 22 Apr 2018 14:37:21 EST ID:ZyEryNzm No.167802 Ignore Report Quick Reply
In which country and most importantly what did he get charged and sentenced for? Just saying "a neighbour" and "it's complicated" is a cop out. Also by "charged" do you mean "convicted"? These are pretty important details.

I googled UK examples and I found a guy who shoot someone in self defense and went to jail for possession of a shotgun without a certificate for 10 months and ONLY that. And Tony Martin (he's got a wikipedia page) which is a can of worms, but nethertheless, despite intentionally killing his burglars via an ambush he got a lenient sentence which was reduced by a year and then later changed to manslaughter because he was a bit insane. That is complicated.

Neither was being shot at by their intruder.

In the UK you have to secure your gun cabinet pretty carefully to prevent burglars just taking your guns. Otherwise you might lose your weapon certificate. You have to comply with training and regular police checks. If someone jacks your guns then they were either well prepared or you fucked up badly already. In the former case that's when things really do get complex. Though if they jacked your guns how can you shoot them unless you have guns elsewhere? Ie not in your cabinet.

I think the UK system works better than any system which gives you free reign to shoot intruders or one that says you can't. Its not perfect but you know that if you kill in self defense you will probably be okay, but if you kill someone who wasn't a threat you probably won't. You don't know for certain but it'll keep you honest. I mean if you genuinely fear for your life you'll still do whatever knowing that your odds are probably a lot better than if this potential murderer isn't opposed but if you don't then you're probably not going to take what is a huge risk when your own backside isn't at stake. Again not perfect but better than the extreme solution. Requires human judgement across the board really but I think the evidence is it tends to work alright. None of the cases I've found have made me doubt that set of rules.

Report Post
Please be descriptive with report notes,
this helps staff resolve issues quicker.