pap-pa killed a robber - should he go to prison ?

[wasteofspace]

pap-pa killed a robber - should he go to prison ?

i am old school,
rules and regulations must apply,
this perpetrator has done wrong,
now don't expect sympathy for his die.
he went in tooled,
so i hear a gun replica,
now the out come in no Bermuda,
its more square then triangular.
just like the farmer,
who shot the kid,
going to prison for tony martin,
is shame the UK can not rid.
own up and admit,
this man is 72 and wanted no grief,
he's a flouriest doing funerals,
it is beggars belief.
the Conservatives need to change,
the law must be in the public favor,
lets put the fear of god in the criminals,
and who No's it could be the UK's savior.

(this was in the news in the uk today. a 72 year old man who was a florist was broken into and robbed but a fight broke out and the florist (pap-pa) stabbed the robber and he died. now i am thinking the robber should not have any rights or sympathy as he was the one doing wrong ?

just woundered dose anyone feel the joe is being a bit harsh ?



ps i have had something robbed from me - a lady called sadie robbed my heart but i will get it back lol good morning miss. how are you today ?)

 

[Siphorous]

One of the robbers is dead so he's hardly going to argue about rights and stuff. That being said, given Ken Clarke's talk recently about people defending themselves in such a manner not being prosecuted, it will be interesting to see what happens.

I can't personally believe the 72 year old is a murderer - the police still have to go through the motions based on the evidence at hand but I'd be surprised if that old bloke is done for murder to be honest.

 

[HK]

I don't believe in prosecuting people for harming people who break into their homes or businesses. I think it's appalling that a burglar could take someone to court for breaking their arm. Don't be a thief then you fucking idiot.

I'm sure there's a line, past which there's such a thing as unneccesary force, but how do you define that? That old guy probably didn't actually set out to kill that burglar, but if the opportunity to disable someone trying to steal your stuff arises, would you hesitate long?

 

[NY Tall Guy]

absolutely not...especially when it comes to matters of self defense...you think the robber would have cared if it had went the other way and stabbed the florist he was robbing to death? Absolutely not! Justice has been served imo...and kudos to the 72 yr old for sticking up for himself!!!

 

[sexysadie]

pap-pa killed a robber - should he go to prison ?

i am old school,
rules and regulations must apply,
this perpetrator has done wrong,
now don't expect sympathy for his die.
he went in tooled,
so i hear a gun replica,
now the out come in no Bermuda,
its more square then triangular.
just like the farmer,
who shot the kid,
going to prison for tony martin,
is shame the UK can not rid.
own up and admit,
this man is 72 and wanted no grief,
he's a flouriest doing funerals,
it is beggars belief.
the Conservatives need to change,
the law must be in the public favor,
lets put the fear of god in the criminals,
and who No's it could be the UK's savior.

(this was in the news in the uk today. a 72 year old man who was a florist was broken into and robbed but a fight broke out and the florist (pap-pa) stabbed the robber and he died. now i am thinking the robber should not have any rights or sympathy as he was the one doing wrong ?

just woundered dose anyone feel the joe is being a bit harsh ?



ps i have had something robbed from me - a lady called sadie robbed my heart but i will get it back lol good morning miss. how are you today ?)

True story, a man grabbed a woman, raped her til she almost died
Got a slap on the wrist for his horrible crime
Later she found out that she was carrying his child
And when he filed for custody .......I almost cried

It's pretty desperate when a criminal has more rights than his victim, where will it end?!

Hi joe...guess what, I'm keeping your heart

 

[Kyle B]

One of the robbers is dead so he's hardly going to argue about rights and stuff. That being said, given Ken Clarke's talk recently about people defending themselves in such a manner not being prosecuted, it will be interesting to see what happens.

I can't personally believe the 72 year old is a murderer - the police still have to go through the motions based on the evidence at hand but I'd be surprised if that old bloke is done for murder to be honest.

Agreed.

I honestly don't understand these cases. When a robber decides to break into somebody's house, he assumes all the risk of injury and harm as a result. All about taking responsibility for ones actions.

 

[JJBGT]

I would just say he was stabbed to death by a 72 year old, the robber did a sucky job of defending or getting out of the way. he had a chance and didnt take it, therefor, props to the old man and let him go free.

 

[Joe the meek]

I don't believe in prosecuting people for harming people who break into their homes or businesses. I think it's appalling that a burglar could take someone to court for breaking their arm. Don't be a thief then you fucking idiot.

I'm sorry, but I don't seem to know the whole story per the OP.

Here in the US we have what are called castle doctrine laws. Each state may vary on the law and stipulates when deadly force can be used when an intruder breaks into your home.

Personally, I don't think someone should have the right to kill someone else just for breaking into the home.

General rule of thumb, everyone should have a game plan if they find someone breaking into their home.

Here is a tactical fact that can not be disputed. It is easier to defend than to be on the offensive, given both opponents are the same in number (meaning if someone comes into your home, your chances of survival increase by bringing them to you, not you going to them). Another fact is that if someone breaks into your home, you have no clue as to what kind of weapon they may have. Another fact is that if you do kill someone on your property, there is a good chance that it's going to cost you more time and money than they burglar could of stole in the first place. Then you have the issue of what could happens if you end up killing someone by mistake. I know of more than a couple of cases of where people came home drunk, broke into what they thought was their house, and ended up dead because of it (I don't think someone should die for a stupid mistake).

Don't get me wrong, someone breaks into my home (which would be kind of hard to do to begin with without anyone knowing) and they intend me or my family harm, they are going to be buried, BUT first they will first be given the opportunity to get out.

 

[Joe the meek]

Agreed.

I honestly don't understand these cases. When a robber decides to break into somebody's house, he assumes all the risk of injury and harm as a result. All about taking responsibility for ones actions.

If you break into my home and find out that I have more firepower than you, and you decide to run, do I have the right to shoot you in the back as you flee?

What if I find you downstairs in my own home, and you get struck in the leg with a shotgun blast and you go down. Do I have the right to come up to you and put a couple into your head to make sure that you never do this again?

Better yet, what if you're in my garage and I go out to investigate. I confront you, you give me a story that you ended up at the wrong place by mistake. Do I have the right to shoot you where you stand, being that you're on my property?

 

[HK]

I don't think you should actually set out to kill someone who breaks into your home, but if they attack you and you've only got so many options, you're going to do what you can to protect yourself and your family.

I doubt that old man actually thought 'I'm going to kill this robber' but when you're defending yourself, sometimes things can go farther than intended.

If you break into other people's property, you have no rights. You shouldn't fucking be there. Obviously there's such a thing as unreasonable force, as per your example of shooting someone who's already been disabled. But hey, if you go and break into someone's house or garage (maybe you don't lock your garages in the US but we do over here so it's very difficult to be there 'by mistake') then you're taking the risk of being confronted by someone a couple of sandwiches short of a picnic.

It's very unlikely the majority of people set out to kill burglars, but the majority also probably have no idea exactly how hard you can hit someone before they might die, or where the better places to stab someone if you only want to wound them are. And if someone is doing their best to hurt you first, what are your other options exactly?

 

[Joe the meek]

I don't think you should actually set out to kill someone who breaks into your home, but if they attack you and you've only got so many options, you're going to do what you can to protect yourself and your family.

I doubt that old man actually thought 'I'm going to kill this robber' but when you're defending yourself, sometimes things can go farther than intended.

If you break into other people's property, you have no rights. You shouldn't fucking be there. Obviously there's such a thing as unreasonable force, as per your example of shooting someone who's already been disabled. But hey, if you go and break into someone's house or garage (maybe you don't lock your garages in the US but we do over here so it's very difficult to be there 'by mistake') then you're taking the risk of being confronted by someone a couple of sandwiches short of a picnic.

It's very unlikely the majority of people set out to kill burglars, but the majority also probably have no idea exactly how hard you can hit someone before they might die, or where the better places to stab someone if you only want to wound them are. And if someone is doing their best to hurt you first, what are your other options exactly?

My point is that instead of a confrontation, you're always better off first alerting the authorities, then letting the intruder know YOU know they are breaking the law and that the authorities have been called. By maintaining a defensive position, you increase your chances for survival. By actually going out of a secure location (such as a locked bedroom), you've just increased the odds that you are going to get hurt.

Sometimes I forget to lock my doors at night, it really doesn't bother me. I've taken precautions beforehand, and locking the doors isn't going to really make a difference in my case. If you don't take precautions for a home burglary, locking your doors isn't going to make much of a difference to someone who may actually know what they're doing.

That said, all you need to do is invite a couple of guys over your place, let off about 2,000 rounds in a couple of hours, and you'd be amazed at how people don't end up on your property by accident

 

[HK]

Sure, most people would rather call the police and wait in a locked room. If you get that choice, good for you. But when I was young, my parents had three daughters living with them, so there was no way my dad would have locked himself in the bathroom knowing we were in our bedrooms and just let a robber roam through the house.

Most people with families would probably feel the same way, since it's unlikely anyone with kids has them all sleeping in the same room together behind a locked door.

It's all very well to say 'here's what you should do ideally' and I think everyone would rather avoid confrontation if they can, but a burglary isn't ideal circumstances, you have no control over what an intruder might be after or what they do once you make your presence known to them.

 

[Joe the meek]

Sure, most people would rather call the police and wait in a locked room. If you get that choice, good for you. But when I was young, my parents had three daughters living with them, so there was no way my dad would have locked himself in the bathroom knowing we were in our bedrooms and just let a robber roam through the house.

Most people with families would probably feel the same way, since it's unlikely anyone with kids has them all sleeping in the same room together behind a locked door.

It's all very well to say 'here's what you should do ideally' and I think everyone would rather avoid confrontation if they can, but a burglary isn't ideal circumstances, you have no control over what an intruder might be after or what they do once you make your presence known to them.

You've just pointed out the main reason why people need to plan.

How many people do you think actually discuss with their children what to do if someone is found in their home at night that shouldn't be there?

No different that having a plan of action in case of a house fire. How many people do you think plan for that?

Yes, the unknown can always change and you may have to improvise, but at least have a plan.

 

[HK]

I agree that a plan is a good idea.

I'm just saying even with plans, or whatever you try to do to avoid things going badly, you don't always get a choice.

 

[sexysadie]

I don't believe in prosecuting people for harming people who break into their homes or businesses. I think it's appalling that a burglar could take someone to court for breaking their arm. Don't be a thief then you fucking idiot.

I'm sure there's a line, past which there's such a thing as unneccesary force, but how do you define that? That old guy probably didn't actually set out to kill that burglar, but if the opportunity to disable someone trying to steal your stuff arises, would you hesitate long?

I don't think I'd try to kill somebody for stealing my stuff, isn't that what they teach you in self-defense , to let them HAVE the stuff if it means they'll then leave without hurting anybody? STUFF can be replaced, a human life cannot. That being said.....if it meant saving my life or the lives of my loved ones, I'd probably opt to shoot, or at least wound. I have a phone in every room and a cell phone right beside my bed, I hope that if I heard somebody breaking into my home I could get to one of them before anybody got hurt.

In the case of the robber and the flourist...the man was 72 years old for pity's sake, and he was defending himself and his home, as far as I'm concerned it's good riddens to bad rubbish.

 

[Joe the meek]

That being said.....if it meant saving my life or the lives of my loved ones, I'd probably opt to shoot, or at least wound.

If you actually own a firearm, you NEVER, EVER shoot to wound. You pull that trigger, you're shooting to kill.
One reason why you try to eliminate any possibility of needing to pull that trigger in the first place.

Anyone have a news link to the story?

 

[sexysadie]

If you actually own a firearm, you NEVER, EVER shoot to wound. You pull that trigger, you're shooting to kill.
One reason why you try to eliminate any possibility of needing to pull that trigger in the first place.

Anyone have a news link to the story?

If I HAD a gun, which I don't, but if I DID...I wouldn't even think about pointing it at anybody who didn't have one....I'd only shoot if it meant saving either my life or somebody else's.

 

[sexysadie]

http://www.documentingreality.com/forum/f225/shopkeeper-72-stabs-armed-robber-death-84271/

 

[Joe the meek]

http://www.documentingreality.com/forum/f225/shopkeeper-72-stabs-armed-robber-death-84271/

Thanks.

Cased closed, man is innocent

 

[sexysadie]

lol...Sir Joe the Judge has ruled!