"I'd blow the legs off any intruder in my home" says councillor

walshb

GSF wrote: »

So now if you want to bump someone off all you have to do is invite them around to your house, kill them and claim he was an intruder. Since by your rules you have 100% right in all circumstances to kill anyone you choose in your home, you can't be prosecuted. I suppose be your rules you could even knock off the missus and get away with it.

Not sure that is anything to do with the post you quoted. I do not agree with the blase and nonchalant attitude that a person would blow another away for being on their property. That is a scummy attitude IMO. Dangerous attitude too.

Death and Taxes

CptMackey wrote: »

I can't understand this mentality tho. If they enter your home unlawfully why should the home owner be held responsible at all if the burglar is shot. They should have NO protection under the law once the enter your home. They are hardly there for your benifit.

The point is they do! This is not the wild west.

VinLieger

GSF wrote: »

So now if you want to bump someone off all you have to do is invite them around to your house, kill them and claim he was an intruder. Since by your rules you have 100% right in all circumstances to kill anyone you choose in your home, you can't be prosecuted. I suppose be your rules you could even knock off the missus and get away with it.

Another attempt to deliberately misquote me and derail the topic, sad really.
Where did i say anything about inviting someone over? My post that you quaoted specifically said "invade" which i think we can all logically agree means unwanted and uninvited intruder/burglar/criminal etc so please point out where i mention premeditated murder by inviting someone into my home?

murphaph

Denerick wrote: »

A citizen has a right to defend themselves in their own home, I think this is (Or should be) a no brainer. But the kind of populist pigwash this councillor is spouting, attempting to appeal to the most base instincts of the electorate, is exactly the reason why Irish democracy is such a cesspool.

Indeed, whilst citizens can and do have the right to defend themselves against physical attacks, the councillor should perhaps have raised the issue of law and order in a more mature way. Like why do we incarcerate so many non-violent offenders, rather than using modern technologies like tagging to cheaply imprison them in their own homes, saving the real prison spaces for dangerous people.

There are lots of ways decent society could improve the criminal justice system and while I am deeply frustrated by the law sometimes, the solution is not to break it, but to fix it. The councillor's own party are in government, so why not have a word about it with the boss?!

MadsL

walshb wrote: »

Not sure that is anything to do with the post you quoted. I do not agree with the blase and nonchalant attitude that a person would blow another away for being on their property. That is a scummy attitude IMO. Dangerous attitude too.

Stop! I'm armed! Leave now!
(Guy comes towards you)
Apply reasonable force.

Of course in Ireland, by the time you have unlocked all the safes and actually assembled the firearm and unlocked the ammo, you have been battered to death.

WileyCoyote wrote: »

The point is they do! This is not the wild west.

Intruders have only the protection of the law in that a householder may apply reasonable force. If I am in fear of my life from an armed intruder then that is reasonable force. The reality being is that most Irish burglers would run like hell if shown a gun.

spikethedog

If any one of these 'gentlemen criminals' wants to come into my house, creep around my kids and my bedroom trying to rob or cause harm thy can expect to be dispatched in one go.
I think it's right and proper that any householder has the right to use whatever force he/she deems necessary to end a threat.
If these people stay out of my home they won't have any problems.

thebman

murphaph wrote: »

Indeed, whilst citizens can and do have the right to defend themselves against physical attacks, the councillor should perhaps have raised the issue of law and order in a more mature way.

You forget they are gombeen men and not capable of professional conduct in many instances.

Not stating it about the person in this case in particular but making a more general comment that I don't think our councilors are as professional as you'd expect from a glance at their pay packets.

Scofflaw

Before posting, people, please stop and consider this - if you can't add more to the thread than "I'd totally blow away these scumbags if they were in my house", please don't post, because you'll get an infraction and your post deleted.

moderately,
Scofflaw

rasper

The last think society needs is yo rile up every gobsyite in the country to sleep with a shotgun under the bed, imagine for every scumbag burgalar shot they d be 20 accidental , anotyer 20 domestics , another 20 spur of moment suicides and not to mention a lot of stolen guns
We need less guns not more

VinLieger

rasper wrote: »

The last think society needs is yo rile up every gobsyite in the country to sleep with a shotgun under the bed, imagine for every scumbag burgalar shot they d be 20 accidental , anotyer 20 domestics , another 20 spur of moment suicides and not to mention a lot of stolen guns
We need less guns not more

Who said anything about giving people guns? this is about defending your property and if a councillor should be expressing views mentioned in the title

seamus

MadsL wrote: »

you have been battered to death.

Because violent burglaries are so common...

The reality being is that most Irish burglers would run like hell if shown a gun.

FYP.
Assuming an automatic "he's here to hurt me, I must kill him" approach is the mind of someone deeply paranoid and disturbed.

Thieves want to rob stuff and make profit. There is no profit in attacking the homeowner. They will not pay any regard to the homeowner's safety, but it's exceptionally rare that they will seek out the occupant to attack them. In most cases if confronted or disturbed, they will run because they don't want to risk being caught.
Therefore there is no good cause to assume that someone who is unlawfully in your home intends to cause you or your family injury.

walshb

seamus wrote: »

Because violent burglaries are so common...FYP.
Assuming an automatic "he's here to hurt me, I must kill him" approach is the mind of someone deeply paranoid and disturbed.

Thieves want to rob stuff and make profit. There is no profit in attacking the homeowner. They will not pay any regard to the homeowner's safety, but it's exceptionally rare that they will seek out the occupant to attack them. In most cases if confronted or disturbed, they will run because they don't want to risk being caught.
Therefore there is no good cause to assume that someone who is unlawfully in your home intends to cause you or your family injury.

With all due respect how the hell can you know what an intruder may and may not do. Yes, most times they will steal and leave, but is that any comfort to you if they break into your home? Is that what you should think?

"Sit tight, statistics show that most burglars will steal and leave. We'll be grand. So will the children. Oh, but what if I am the unlucky one who gets beaten to death and my wife and children are attacked."

I would rather act and try to assure my safety than not act and hope for the best.

who_me

WileyCoyote (Accelleratii Incredibus!) wrote: »

I thought the Garda Superintendent at the meeting in question summed it up best when replied "I am glad you don't own a gun".
Citizens do not have the right to shoot anyone entering btheir home, noot even a burglar, they can only act proportionally to the threat, and an unarmed burglar running away from you poses no immediate threat.

To me, that's a very simplistic, naive view. If you wake the middle of the night, finding someone in your home, you have no idea of what is going on. You don't know if they're alone or part of a group. You don't know if they're armed or not. You don't know if their intent is theft, or assault/rape, or physically forcing someone to hand over your bank details etc.

If a burglar is 'running away', are they going home? Are they going to fetch help? Are they running for a weapon?

Having suffered an attack in the street outside my home, I too keep a knife by my bed (I'd keep a gun, if I could legally get one). I've no idea if I could use it, if push came to shove, but I've no time for the opinion that my safety as a home occupant takes second-fiddle to the safety of a burglar.

seamus

I would rather act and try to assure my safety than not act and hope for the best.

Killing an intruder because there's a one-in-a-million chance that he will attack you and beat you to death is paranoia. I don't have a weapon at home because I know that the odds of such a thing happening are tiny. Likewise, I don't believe that anyone who has a weapon at home purely for self defence is incapable of using that weapon rationally.

As I mentioned in another thread, lots of people have stories of intruders who didn't even intend to steal anything - drunk kids who got confused and thought they were locked out of their own homes. But screw them, let's just blow the legs off anyone who dares to stand on my property.

walshb

who_me wrote: »

To me, that's a very simplistic, naive view. If you wake the middle of the night, finding someone in your home, you have no idea of what is going on. You don't know if they're alone or part of a group. You don't know if they're armed or not. You don't know if their intent is theft, or assault/rape, or physically forcing someone to hand over your bank details etc.

If a burglar is 'running away', are they going home? Are they going to fetch help? Are they running for a weapon?

Having suffered an attack in the street outside my home, I too keep a knife by my bed (I'd keep a gun, if I could legally get one). I've no idea if I could use it, if push came to shove, but I've no time for the opinion that my safety as a home occupant takes second-fiddle to the safety of a burglar.

I agree with a lot of what you say, but if someone is running away and you act and kill them then you deserve to face prosecution. This is not Paul Kersey Death Wish country we live in. There is a police force. You could opt to report the crime. Now, if the intruder is not running away and presents a very real threat to your life then I would act. I will not hope for the best.

Death and Taxes

who_me wrote: »

To me, that's a very simplistic, naive view. If you wake the middle of the night, finding someone in your home, you have no idea of what is going on. You don't know if they're alone or part of a group. You don't know if they're armed or not. You don't know if their intent is theft, or assault/rape, or physically forcing someone to hand over your bank details etc.

If a burglar is 'running away', are they going home? Are they going to fetch help? Are they running for a weapon?

Having suffered an attack in the street outside my home, I too keep a knife by my bed (I'd keep a gun, if I could legally get one). I've no idea if I could use it, if push came to shove, but I've no time for the opinion that my safety as a home occupant takes second-fiddle to the safety of a burglar.

Why are you quoting my post? I never said ,nor inferred that "safety as a home occupant takes second-fiddle to the safety of a burglar"

walshb

seamus wrote: »

Killing an intruder because there's a one-in-a-million chance that he will attack you and beat you to death is paranoia. I don't have a weapon at home because I know that the odds of such a thing happening are tiny. Likewise, I don't believe that anyone who has a weapon at home purely for self defence is incapable of using that weapon rationally.

As I mentioned in another thread, lots of people have stories of intruders who didn't even intend to steal anything - drunk kids who got confused and thought they were locked out of their own homes. But screw them, let's just blow the legs off anyone who dares to stand on my property.

I am not saying I would confront the intruder all guns blazing attitude. I would at least try to assess the danger in the time I have. Now, I would hate to think that I could kill someone who just happened to be on my property and that they weren't a real immediate danger. Every situation is different. But, to rely on statistics and hope when a stranger breaks into your home could see you six feet under. I don't think it's paranoia at all to think this. I am not in the camp that thinks it's fair game to shoot dead a person who happens to be illegally on their property.

antoobrien

If somebody enters the home with intent to do do something illegal they have broken the social contract and should relinquish any rights to that would normally apply, as the occupants should have the right to defend their property.

If the invader ends up in less than full health as a result of the incident then tough, they should have considered that possibility before breaking in.

who_me

WileyCoyote (Accelleratii Incredibus!) wrote: »

Why are you quoting my post? I never said ,nor inferred that "safety as a home occupant takes second-fiddle to the safety of a burglar"

Because you said citizens do not have the right to shoot a burglar in their home unless they present a threat. (And I pointed out it's impossible to determine the threat posed by a burglar until it's too late to effectively defend yourself).

That, to me, is placing the safety of the burglar ahead of the safety of the home occupant.

Death and Taxes

who_me wrote: »

Because you said citizens do not have the right to shoot a burglar in their home unless they present a threat. (And I pointed out it's impossible to determine the threat posed by a burglar until it's too late to effectively defend yourself).

That, to me, is placing the safety of the burglar ahead of the safety of the home occupant.

Thats the law, don't blame me for it!

who_me

walshb wrote: »

I agree with a lot of what you say, but if someone is running away and you act and kill them then you deserve to face prosecution. This is not Paul Kersey Death Wish country we live in. There is a police force. You could opt to report the crime. Now, if the intruder is not running away and presents a very real threat to your life then I would act. I will not hope for the best.

"Running away" is a vague thing to define. If it's 100m down the road and the burglar is still running, then fair enough. But if it's inside your home, are they running away, or running to get a weapon, or running to get backup. Are they charging at you, or running by you to get to the door?

I heard of a recent incident in my neighbourhood where some guys from a house came out to stop a neighbour's car from being vandalised. The group vandalising the car 'ran away', only to loot a nearby garden shed and came back and beat the crap out of them, leaving at least one with permanent scarring. Am I advocating killing anyone committing a crime? No, of course not. I'm just saying just because someone is 'running away' doesn't mean the incident is over and you're now safe.

who_me

WileyCoyote (Accelleratii Incredibus!) wrote: »

Thats the law, don't blame me for it!

Fair enough. I didn't mean to single you out, sorry.

FTA69

seamus wrote: »

Killing an intruder because there's a one-in-a-million chance that he will attack you and beat you to death is paranoia. I don't have a weapon at home because I know that the odds of such a thing happening are tiny. Likewise, I don't believe that anyone who has a weapon at home purely for self defence is incapable of using that weapon rationally.

I agree with you in many respects, the vast majority of house break-ins occur during the day while you're at work. Often the thief(ves) will ascertain a way in to your house, knock on the door and if they're satisfied there's nobody home, in they go; they'll usually find some sort of gear bag in the house and fill that in case they find large valuables like laptops, tablets etc. They aim to be in and out fairly quickly. Thieves are just that, people who just want to thieve and get away. Robbers on the other hand, also exist. There are people out there whose MO is to find vulnerable people on their own, often elderly people (due to the fact they "don't trust banks") and then invade the house with the view to forcing them to give up cash. Similarly some thieves do operate at night, and when confronted can easily turn violent due to the fact they're pumped with adrenalin and often off their heads on drugs. Violence in the context of home break ins is very rare, but neither is it a "one in a million" chance and there are many examples out there that prove that.

Is keeping a weapon handy a viable option? Probably not. Is a dog a better option? Probably, but then a lot of burglars have no problem dipping a slice of bread in weedkiller and sugar and posioning the poor animal. Every case is different like. Similarly this notion of "proportional force" is vague to say the least. If I came home from work early to find someone rooting around the sitting room and I flaked the head off him would that be "unreasonable force"? I would argue it isn't but then some would disagree.

At the very least I do think in general that the law be on the side of the victim and not the person who decides to break into houses to feed a drug habit or whatever.

walshb

who_me wrote: »

"Running away" is a vague thing to define. If it's 100m down the road and the burglar is still running, then fair enough. But if it's inside your home, are they running away, or running to get a weapon, or running to get backup. Are they charging at you, or running by you to get to the door?

I heard of a recent incident in my neighbourhood where some guys from a house came out to stop a neighbour's car from being vandalised. The group vandalising the car 'ran away', only to loot a nearby garden shed and came back and beat the crap out of them, leaving at least one with permanent scarring. Am I advocating killing anyone committing a crime? No, of course not. I'm just saying just because someone is 'running away' doesn't mean the incident is over and you're now safe.

Ok, so be clearer about what you mean when you mention running away.

I think a common ground needs to be reached. I am right in the middle. I abhor the attitude that they will "get it" for being on my property. But, I can also understand that terror and fear and split seconds when a person is confronted with real danger, and I wouldn't slate them for acting first. As I said, every situation can be different.

flutered

meoklmrk91 wrote: »

I don't see anything wrong with what he said.

i am in total agreement with him, people who break into peoples homes, with the intention of robbing and inflicting gbh on elderly people, deserve to be greeted with open arms:D:D instead of giving the elderly alarms, a tazer should be issued.

rasper

flutered wrote: »

i am in total agreement with him, people who break into peoples homes, with the intention of robbing and inflicting gbh on elderly people, deserve to be greeted with open arms:D:D instead of giving the elderly alarms, a tazer should be issued.

Gurantee , most of those tazars would be taken from them, just coz someone has a weapon doesn't mean they r able to use it

walshb

rasper wrote: »

Gurantee , most of those tazars would be taken from them, just coz someone has a weapon doesn't mean they r able to use it

Even with a weapon an elederly person is still in real danger.

FTA69

You're always better off not confronting a burglar to be honest, once you and your family are safe. At the end of the day your possesions are never worth your life. That having been said if someone chases a burglar out of the house, catches him a few hundred yards down the road and gives him a few digs I wouldn't see a major issue in that either.

walshb

FTA69 wrote: »

You're always better off not confronting a burglar to be honest, once you and your family are safe. At the end of the day your possesions are never worth your life. That having been said if someone chases a burglar out of the house, catches him a few hundred yards down the road and gives him a few digs I wouldn't see a major issue in that either.

The issue is not not so much you confronting him/her, but the possibility that if you do not then you could end up in a bad way. If I knew that myself and my family were not going to be harmed I would help the thieves pack the stuff away, but nobody can know what any stranger(s) is capable of when they enter your home uninvited with the intention to commit a crime.

howamidifferent

Some guy on Mat Cooper spoke yesterday of confronting 3 blokes who had broken into his shed. He had in his hand a legally held shotgun and told them to get lost or else...One replied "you have only 2 shots in that. When their gone we'll put a screwdriver through your head". He was completely thrown by this answer and backed off to leave them out. He said they sauntered away without a care in the world. :eek: