Lord_Melchet wrote:
The issue of the criminals is completely seperate, yes they were pikey low life scum, but your argument was that he was defending his life which is plainly wrong, yes he was defending his property from thiefs but that does not justify shooting someone in the back. That my dear chap is murder whichever way you look at it.
The wider issue is that the old adage that crime does not pay is incorrect and the cure to the problem lies in stiffer penalties for the crime not in placing a gun in everyones hand
I read that if someone comes into your home with out being invited,(ie breaks in) you can do whatever you see fit to him. Or I'm an idiot
This is a grey area, you can use reasonable force. the problem is that this is defined by the court after the event and therefore cannot replecate what you in a moment of terror viewed as reasonable
