Thief who has both legs and one arms broken by victim - claims that he is the real victim and that t
317 replies, posted
[QUOTE=ViralHatred;43687602]Unless your life was in immediate danger (i.e they were shooting at you) then no you can't shoot them, but even if you chased them to the end of say your driveway or across your field you can be charged with brandishing a weapon in a public place and threatening with a deadly weapon, if you were to fire and injure them it becomes assault with a deadly weapon.
Basically the uk laws go from "yes this is fine" to "holy shit no you are a very bad man" and escalate rapidly from there. Please note that I say can because in most cases you won't but it depends entirely on what the crown wants to do with regard to prosecution and the severity of the offence.[/QUOTE]
It also depends upon the jury remember, and reasonable people sit on the jury.
People that might think shooting at people to prevent theft is reasonable with sufficient warning.
Of course you shouldn't be able to chase after people beyond your property purely to shoot at them.
[editline]27th January 2014[/editline]
Plus, judges have said in the past, if you fuck with farmers in the country side, expect to get shot, that is a risk you take.
[QUOTE=JoeSkylynx;43687354]The guy has reported that this has happened on multiple occasions, it isn't really a stretch of the mind to say that it was probably these guy doing it constantly. If that is the case, I really have nothing to say. Shit happens when you poke a bear with a stick.[/QUOTE]
Factor in the other potential cost of repairing the fuel tank if they pierced it to get the fuel plus the potential cost in repairs if you attempt to run a diesel with no fuel in it too. Perhaps something he'd encountered in the past so was out for his own personal justice. Fair play I say, these thieves will most likely think twice before attempting this again.
[QUOTE=RainbowStalin;43687596]A fine and community service.
This is not the greatest monster of our generation this is a 50 year old man stealing some diesel.[/QUOTE]
If you think that will make them even think twice then you think too much of these people.
[QUOTE=Sgt-NiallR;43687612]I don't know, I'm not a lawyer.
That said, I'm incredibly hesitant to consider any form of injury justice. You don't need to brick someone to punish them.[/QUOTE]
Not to punish them no. But to make sure they don't think about doing it again then you're going to need more than a £75 and a slap on the wrist.
[QUOTE=Frustration96;43687735]If you think that will make them even think twice then you think too much of these people.
Not to punish them no. But to make sure they don't think about doing it again then you're going to need more than a £75 and a slap on the wrist.[/QUOTE]
How about, then, we fix the underlying problems that are driving people to crime?
Because I guarantee you, getting people out of poverty is a shitton more effective when it comes to preventing theft than fines, jail time, or physical assault.
The amount of people justifying the amount of violence used for thievery here is horrifying. What kind of a fucking "citizen's arrest" results in three broken limbs? All of which are pretty much useless for two or more months based on how long they take to heal.
And then back to poverty level living which will pretty much cause him to have to steal again.
[QUOTE=WaRRioRTF;43687805]The amount of people justifying the amount of violence used for thievery here is horrifying. What kind of a fucking "citizen's arrest" results in three broken limbs? All of which are pretty much useless for two or more months based on how long they take to heal.
And then back to poverty level living which will pretty much cause him to have to steal again.[/QUOTE]
Nothing forces him to steal PETROL.
If it was food he was stealing then I don't think anyone here would disagree with him, but it was petrol, so I believe this is warranted.
Also it's probably not the first time he has done this to the same guy if petrol was being stolen routinely.
how fucked up in the head do you have to be to break someones legs and arm over diesel?
like holy shit this is mad max tier stuff
i think if u stealsmthing and u get cought u become a slave of the guy u stole smthing from and he can kill u whenever he wants, no on e takes my stuff ffs
~Facepunch justice/blood thirst
[QUOTE=Frustration96;43687735]If you think that will make them even think twice then you think too much of these people.
[/QUOTE]
Drop the mightier than thou bullshit, do you think this guy is crawling around stealing diesel because he wants to? Maybe turn off your computer and go outside for a while and you'll realize not all criminals are batman villains.
[QUOTE=Frustration96;43687850]Nothing forces him to steal PETROL.
If it was food he was stealing then I don't think anyone here would disagree with him, but it was petrol, so I believe this is warranted.
Also it's probably not the first time he has done this to the same guy if petrol was being stolen routinely.[/QUOTE]
Stealing 50 quid worth of petrol warrants 3 broken limbs? Okay.
People living in poverty also often resort to any type of thievery, to make certain ends meet so that they wouldn't have to steal other things, for example, food.
The people in poverty are more likely steal from those more financially capable than from stores. In certain cases it does not even matter what is stolen, aslong as they can do something with it to make ends meet.
[QUOTE=Number-41;43687915]i think if u stealsmthing and u get cought u become a slave of the guy u stole smthing from and he can kill u whenever he wants, no on e takes my stuff ffs
~Facepunch justice/blood thirst[/QUOTE]
strawman alert
It may have been excesive but imagine someone is stealing stuff you own in front of your face. I would get mad.
[QUOTE=Seibitsu;43687997]It may have been excesive but imagine someone is stealing stuff you own in front of your face. I would get mad.[/QUOTE]
People get mad when someone spills their drink, but breaking their legs is universally considered an overreaction to that.
[QUOTE=WaRRioRTF;43687954]Stealing 50 quid worth of petrol warrants 3 broken limbs? Okay.
People living in poverty also often resort to any type of thievery, to make certain ends meet so that they wouldn't have to steal other things, for example, food.
The people in poverty are more likely steal from those more financially capable than from stores. In certain cases it does not even matter what is stolen, aslong as they can do something with it to make ends meet.[/QUOTE]
Where does it say he lives in poverty?! He's complaining that he can't fucking fish or walk his dog, not looking for work to help feed his family or keep the current job he might have.
If anything he's now probably on benefits that'll allow him to live more comfortably.
And if stealing would have only resulted in him getting a slap on the wrist, what's to stop him from doing it again?!
You people are treating this guy like he's a bloody martyr.
From what I understand from the article, it was the thiefs who brought the sign post as a weapon, and the owner just managed to get it from them and use it to defend himself.
I mean, come on guys, what do you expect someone in his situation to do? Should he politely have asked the thiefs to go away? Or somehow have known that he shouldn't hit the man who was stealing his livelihood too hard?
You know, when your adrenaline is pumping, it's hard to know when enough is enough. Although I think the thiefs injuries are severe and that he doesn't deserve it, I don't blame the owner. He was just reacting to the situation as anyone who is constantly being robbed would react.
This reminds me of one of my friends, he got mugged and ended up giving the mugger a compound fracture.
He ended up getting cautioned by the police. :v:
[QUOTE=slamex;43688040]Where does it say he lives in poverty?! He's complaining that he can't fucking fish or walk his dog, not looking for work to help feed his family or [b]keep the current job he might have.[/b]
If anything he's now probably on benefits that'll allow him to live more comfortably.
And if stealing would have only resulted in him getting a slap on the wrist, what's to stop him from doing it again?!
You people are treating this guy like he's a bloody martyr.[/QUOTE]
[quote=Article]Unemployed Kevin Green, 53, suffered two broken legs and a broken arm when..[/quote]
idk about you but I really can't consider someone unemployed and 53 "able to support his family well".
Benefits, probably. I am not sure how the healthcare system there works. Even then, his benefits end as soon as his limbs heal. And then he's back in the shithole. It's a horrible solution.
Oh and, sorry but I don't think an unemployed person at the point where he has to steal will just be like "I have no money and I already got my limbs broken from the last time I tried to commit thievery so I'll just sit here and starve"
[QUOTE=WaRRioRTF;43688133]idk about you but I really can't consider someone unemployed and 53 "able to support his family well".
Benefits, probably. I am not sure how the healthcare system there works. Even then, his benefits end as soon as his limbs heal. And then he's back in the shithole. It's a horrible solution.
Oh and, sorry but I don't think an unemployed person at the point where he has to steal will just be like "I have no money and I already got my limbs broken from the last time I tried to commit thievery so I'll just sit here and starve"[/QUOTE]
I'm going to stop argueing, because I have my views on this guy, and you have views on that guy, and that's fair enough. I'm not going to be able to convince you and visa versa. But I don't think you should be protecting a man who broke the law, and then got beaten up with the same weapon he or his step-son brought with them.
The point of self-defense is pretty obvious. It's to defend yourself, not your property
probably didn't need to wail on him with like a solid fence post, but he didn't know if the guy was armed or how old he was or anything because it was dark and he could only see the guy.
still funny as hell the burgers response, get over it, you got the shit beat out of you for trying to politely steal from someone's livelyhood
[QUOTE=TestECull;43687245]When you try to steal something you forfeit any right to not having your face caved in.[/QUOTE]
nah let's just kill him instead because fuck it! You know there's a difference between citizen's arrest and just beating the shit out of somebody out of anger.
I mean fucking look at those guys he did not need to break his fucking legs to hold him down until police arrived.
[QUOTE=JoeSkylynx;43687497]Same in the United States and Canada. You kill a man for trying to rob your house? Fair game. They find out you put a round into his skull after he tripped on your floor, and fell to the ground while retreating? Oh you are in for 1st Degree Murder charges.[/QUOTE]
what in the fuck makes the second part of what you said unreasonable
don't shoot people over your fucking tv's if you want to pretend you're on moral high grounds compared to thieves
[QUOTE=innerfire34;43688291]what in the fuck makes the second part of what you said unreasonable
don't shoot people over your fucking tv's if you want to pretend you're on moral high grounds compared to thieves[/QUOTE]
One is defending your home, one is straight-up murder.
[QUOTE=innerfire34;43688291]what in the fuck makes the second part of what you said unreasonable[/QUOTE]
because it is entirely unnecessary and purely out of revenge.
[QUOTE=Sir Whoopsalot;43688306]One is defending your home, one is straight-up murder.[/QUOTE]
Pretty sure by that logic they are both straight up murder.
Else if you are about to get killed by someone after breaking into their home just drop to the ground so they charged with 1st degree murder.
[QUOTE]Mr Woodhouse grabbed a fence post one was carrying as a weapon - and used it to fight back against them.[/QUOTE]
He got beat with his own weapon lol
[QUOTE=innerfire34;43688291]what in the fuck makes the second part of what you said unreasonable
don't shoot people over your fucking tv's if you want to pretend you're on moral high grounds compared to thieves[/QUOTE]
no one is saying they are on the moral high ground, but the thief is fucking responsible for breaking the law in the first place. you dont know what the fuck hes got and he can kill you over a TV. seriously you hear it all the time here near Atlanta, a common burglary turns into murder.
In all fairness when it's two against one your best bets (besides not fighting in the first place) are to incapacitate one person as quickly as possible. Two against one can go very bad very quickly, and for all you know they'd beat YOU within an inch of your life (or to death, even).
If I'm trying to perform a citizens arrest on two people I imagine AT LEAST one (if not both) of them is going to wind up with something broken, dislocated, or otherwise rendered useless because it's much harder to perform such an action against two, perfectly functional individuals than it is against one who you've managed to grapple with and get into a headlock or something.
[QUOTE=innerfire34;43688291]what in the fuck makes the second part of what you said unreasonable
don't shoot people over your fucking tv's if you want to pretend you're on moral high grounds compared to thieves[/QUOTE]
It's better that you shoot a thief than for you to be shot by a thief. When someone else puts you in a dangerous situation, you should always assume the worst until proven otherwise, and proceed to attack with as much force as is necessary to make sure the other person is no longer a threat.
[editline]27th January 2014[/editline]
[QUOTE=sltungle;43688480]In all fairness when it's two against one your best bets (besides not fighting in the first place) are to incapacitate one person as quickly as possible. Two against one can go very bad very quickly, and for all you know they'd beat YOU within an inch of your life (or to death, even).
If I'm trying to perform a citizens arrest on two people I imagine AT LEAST one (if not both) of them is going to wind up with something broken, dislocated, or otherwise rendered useless because it's much harder to perform such an action against two, perfectly functional individuals than it is against one who you've managed to grapple with and get into a headlock or something.[/QUOTE]
Unless you're huge, keeping someone down usually requires either your entire body or beating them so badly they can no longer move. I agree that in a two versus one situation, provided the other person doesn't just abandon his accomplice, it's pretty much a foregone conclusion that if you intend to apprehend them you need to take down one of them before you can handle the other one.
I don't necessarily think the guy deserves two broken legs and a broken arm for what he was stealing, that being said he made it inevitable that it would happen through his own actions and I applaud the restraint shown by the guy trying to make the citizens arrest.
[QUOTE=Carne;43687315]Breaking the arms and legs of someone who stole diesel does not sound like justice to me.[/QUOTE]
Does putting an angry man who has been a victim of many thefts in jail sound like justice either? He went over the top, but he wasn't entirely in the wrong. Anything more than a slap on the wrist and/or a warning to be more careful would have been inappropriate for the owner.
Also don't forget, these guys entered his tyre yard armed with a signpost. He actually had to take it from them. You don't go into a place armed unless you intend to intimidate and possibly harm someone. I just can't bring myself to feel much sympathy for these two idiots.
Taking no sides here, but I'd just like to note that the weapon used to attack the robbers was [I]previously wielded BY[/I] the robbers, according to the article, which probably influenced his decision to use force.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.