UK man who attacked armed thugs holding family hostage is jailed - Polidicks

I drew a comic to illustrate why the ruling is right. Unfortunately it is a shit analogy and doesn't prove my point at all but oh well. [media]http://www.cubeupload.com/files/dbfc00dataintrite.png[/media]

[QUOTE=A.C.I.D;18943446]Cause criminals aren’t people. Perhaps we should take this one step further- maybe we should put them in forced labour camps and work them to death for the good of the nation. Best warn little Jimmy not to steal that candy! You wonder why people have such negative stereotypes of conservatives.[/QUOTE] Yes, go ahead and make that connection, because stealing a 2$ item and getting caught later is the same level of crime as breaking into a man's house and holding him and his family hostage while armed.

[QUOTE=Septok;18943415]Well if you're trespassing on somebody's property and you threaten them, I can say whatever happens, happens. If the victim dies, then the criminal gets charged. If the criminal dies, then the victim gets charged. You find this fair? If you do, then your sense of fairness is skewed. But that's why the justice system isn't actually a justice system, it's a legal system.[/QUOTE] To be honest, I think you have a skewed sense of fairness if you think you are in a position to decide who should and shouldn't die. In the UK the death penalty is not used for a reason, so if the state doesn't have the right to take a persons life then why does anyone else? The justice system may not seem fair, but it prevents people from running around doing whatever the hell they want to criminals. These laws are in place to maintain order, and people should not be allowed to undermine them regardless of the circumstances.

Im sorry to say this but, LOL

[QUOTE=smurfy;18943613]I drew a comic to illustrate why the ruling is right. Unfortunately it is a shit analogy and doesn't prove my point at all but oh well. [media]http://www.cubeupload.com/files/dbfc00dataintrite.png[/media][/QUOTE] That's not what happened

[QUOTE=David29;18943653]To be honest, I think you have a skewed sense of fairness if you think you are in a position to decide who should and shouldn't die. In the UK the death penalty is not used for a reason, so if the state doesn't have the right to take a persons life then why does anyone else? The justice system may not seem fair, but it prevents people from running around doing whatever the hell they want to criminals. These laws are in place to maintain order, and people should not be allowed to undermine them regardless of the circumstances.[/QUOTE] People should not be able to gun down criminals anywhere they feel like it, I agree with that. But if you are committing a criminal act on their property, well, sayanora if they aren't very nice people buddy.

Is it even legal to defend yourself in the UK anymore? Damn.

[QUOTE=David29;18943653]To be honest, I think you have a skewed sense of fairness if you think you are in a position to decide who should and shouldn't die. In the UK the death penalty is not used for a reason, so if the state doesn't have the right to take a persons life then why does anyone else? The justice system may not seem fair, but it prevents people from running around doing whatever the hell they want to criminals. These laws are in place to maintain order, and people should not be allowed to undermine them regardless of the circumstances.[/QUOTE] When did I say that? You need to read my post instead of just going after one tiny little part of it. Seriously, it seems as if you're not even replying to my post. The only [u]opinion[/u] I have is that the courts should be a bit more lenient towards the victims if the criminal happens to meet unfortunate circumstances. It's not their fault they were attacked by a criminal, and in that situation I doubt all people are capable of reason.

[QUOTE=Clever-Balls;18943692]That's not what happened[/QUOTE] He's making a point. And I agree with him. Those of you in this thread who say criminals have no rights and should not be protected by the law are forgetting that a large number of FPers are criminals. I wonder how many people here download files illegally... *Grabs cricket bat*

[QUOTE=SnakeHead;18943747]Is it even legal to defend yourself in the UK anymore? Damn.[/QUOTE] Yes, it's just not legal to chase someone down and beat them so hard with a cricket bat that you leave them with brain damage.

[QUOTE=SnakeHead;18943747]Is it even legal to defend yourself in the UK anymore? Damn.[/QUOTE] Defending yourself is against the law.

[QUOTE=SnakeHead;18943747]Is it even legal to defend yourself in the UK anymore? Damn.[/QUOTE] They weren't defending themselves. They chased one of them down and started wacking him about the head with a cricket bat.

[QUOTE=Thund3rdome;18941400]What the shit, fucked up criminal system.[/QUOTE] I actually don't know where to stand on this one... On one hand, these guys obviously invaded their home. On the other hand, the brain injury was dealt when these men were already off the property fleeing, and apparently when this "Salem" guy was already on the ground and somewhat defenseless. I mean, it's one thing to chase intruders out of your home. It's kind of another thing altogether to chase them down the block then smash their skulls open with a croquet bat. Not as much of an act of self-defense there.

[QUOTE=David29;18943804]He's making a point. And I agree with him. Those of you in this thread who say criminals have no rights and should not be protected by the law are forgetting that a large number of FPers are criminals. I wonder how many people here download files illegally... *Grabs cricket bat*[/QUOTE] Everyone is a criminal. You cannot deny doing something like jay walking one time in your life or downloading old games on tpb.

[QUOTE=doonbugie;18943882]Everyone is a criminal. You cannot deny doing something like jay walking one time in your life or downloading old games on tpb.[/QUOTE] There's a difference between a violent criminal and an every day criminal, don't you think?

This is why I'm scared of the UK.

[QUOTE=SnakeHead;18943747]Is it even legal to defend yourself in the UK anymore? Damn.[/QUOTE] If the same thing happened in the US charges would be filed there as well. You can't chase someone down and then claim self-defense.

You cannot chase somebody down with a cricket bat and beat them. You cannot invade someones home And just to nail this on the table, Chasing somebody is a attack not a defense. A defense would be if somebody is attack you and your fighting back.

[quote]leaving intruder Salem with a permanent brain injury[/quote] What's there to lose?

'Cause in the UK, self-defence is a "dreadful, violent crime" :frogdowns:

[QUOTE=Septok;18943793]When did I say that? You need to read my post instead of just going after one tiny little part of it. Seriously, it seems as if you're not even replying to my post. [/QUOTE] Hang on, what the hell? You asked how it was fair that in either situation a criminal or a victim would both get charged with murder if one killed the other. I was responding to that by pointing out that no one person, including either youself or the state, is in a position to decide when a murder is 'legal'. Perhaps you are the one who needs to read more carefully...

Wow, that's fucked up...

[QUOTE=Deadly-Virus;18944032]'Cause in the UK, self-defence is a "dreadful, violent crime" :frogdowns:[/QUOTE] Don't read the thread will you?

[QUOTE=The mouse;18941582]:suicide: FFS How retarded is my country, Britian is a Exteme Liberal paradise where People can get prosecuted for self defence, This is why I Want a Far right wing country[/QUOTE] That would be far, far worse.

[QUOTE=David29;18944038]Hang on, what the hell? You asked how it was fair that in either situation a criminal or a victim would both get charged with murder if one killed the other. I was responding to that by pointing out that no one person, including either youself or the state, is in a position to decide when a murder is 'legal'. Perhaps you are the one who needs to read more carefully...[/QUOTE] Yes, because it's entirely the victim's fault for being attacked. Normally if a victim kills a criminal after they're attacked they're charged with voluntary manslaughter, not murder. Which seems to have been what happened here, and I find is appropriate. The guy got lucky, with only 2 and a half years, really.

[QUOTE=markg06;18942423]Because we don't right? I mean who needs self defence laws anyway you should be allowed to brutalise and murder anyone who dares step foot on your property.[/QUOTE] Oh god. Just think of what'd happen to the jehovah's witnesses. :downs:

[QUOTE=Septok;18944240]Yes, because it's entirely the victim's fault for being attacked. [/QUOTE] Does that matter? It still doesn't mean they can do what they want and beat the crap out of the guy. Remember that it's not so much the fact that the criminal didn't deserve it I'm concerned about, but rather that people should not feel they can ignore the law because they got attacked. Remember that the police only use when necessary, and even then that's just to subdue them. It should be no different for anyone else.

[QUOTE=The_Lizard_Xing;18942353]This is why I like US government. You have the right to fight for your loved ones.[/QUOTE] This wouldn't have gone much differently here in the US. He had the guy down, then he broke the bat on his head.

The intruders got what they deserved. The guy who hit them deserves a beer.

Its so blindly obvious when people don't read past the thread title.