Author Topic: A slow descent into Hell...  (Read 1626 times)

Offline ravells

  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1982
A slow descent into Hell...
« Reply #30 on: January 14, 2004, 12:01:18 PM »
Thanks Storch,

Quite often the law is out of step with public sentiment, and from my very rudimentry understanding of US law, this may be the case where you live. It appears that in Florida, if a householder has shot a burglar, then the police don't enquire into the circumstances of the shooting even though the presumption of self defence might be rebutted by other facts.

It may well be that the police either sympathise with the householder, so don't press charges or don't bother pressing charges because they know that a jury will acquit regardless of any directions they may be given by the judge.

In the example you gave, the householder had a gun pointed at him, so he would have had clear grounds to successfully plead self defence (he would not even have to rely on the castle doctrine).

My interest in this topic is not whether people should have the right to have firearms (that one has been done to death in the past on previous threads) but whether it is legal to shoot any intruder in your home and successfully plead self defence.

Toad: You could argue that the chain of causation began when Mr Martin decided to buy the gun, but I understand what you say.  I seriously think that not many people had any sympathy with the dead burglar. What they were worried about was whether Mr Martin had broken the law.

If the Burglar had been advancing on Mr Martin, and if Mr Martin had formed a reasonable conclusion that the Burglar meant to do him harm, then I think he would have had a much better case to argue self defence and may well have succeeded.

Ravs

Ravs

Offline Toad

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 18415
A slow descent into Hell...
« Reply #31 on: January 14, 2004, 12:10:43 PM »
Was it illegal for Mr. Martin to buy the gun? Did he obtain it illegally? He's a farmer, right? I've visited England, stayed at farms.. most of them have shotguns even now. Why would legally buying or owning a gun be the start of the causation chain? Wouldn't the causation start with the first illegal act?

I'm sure he would have had a better case. My perception, however, is that he would likely have been convicted of something anyway, given the anti-gun sentiment in England. Is this incorrect?

I am not and would not be as worried about whether Mr Martin had broken the law; I'd be more cocerned about the burglar breaking the law.

I simply see the emphasis in the wrong area.

You break into someone's home at night you... and society.... should expect that it's quite possible something real bad may happen to you.

Want to avoid that? Easily done. Stay out of other folks' homes unless invited in. Doesn't seem that complex.
If ye love wealth better than liberty, the tranquility of servitude than the animated contest of freedom, go from us in peace. We ask not your counsels or arms. Crouch down and lick the hands which feed you. May your chains sit lightly upon you, and may posterity forget that you were our countrymen!

Offline Otto

  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1566
      • http://www.cris.com/~ziggy2/
A slow descent into Hell...
« Reply #32 on: January 14, 2004, 12:16:18 PM »
Quote
Originally posted by ravells
Thanks Otto.

would you:

shout a challenge to the burglar if he tried to break open your door, or;

No, I would give away my position

would you shoot through the door or;

Yes

would you wait until the burglar had broken open to door before deciding?

No.  

 Revs, I know this might sound 'macho' or cold blooded but all I have to prove is that he was in my house, at night, without my permission.  That I feared for my life goes without saying




When you got your permit, did you have to first show some knowledge about the law on the subject of self defence and the usage of firearms generally, or did the authorities give you a
booklet about it?

Pennsylvania is a 'Shall Issue" state.  By that I mean, if you are over 21, a US citizen, have no criminal record, no history of mental instability or court orders against you,( and a couple other things)  they have to give you the permit.   Now, I know that you wouldn't believe this, but excluding the two major urban areas of Philadelphia and Pittsburgh, gun crimes are simply NOT an issue in the state.   I grew up in western Pennsylvania where EVERY house had at least  a shotgun and I never remember ONE gun related crime.   Then I move to Philadelphia!   Talk about cultural shock!!!!

Many states have gun safety course requirements but PA does not.   I did take a day long course related to all the issues, legal and psychological, related to concealed carry but it wasn't required.   Remember, in some states you will NEVER get a permit.  New York, Maryland and New Jersey come to mind but in New Hampshire there are no laws at all about carrying a concealed weapon.  It is by no way universal.


Ravs
« Last Edit: January 14, 2004, 12:20:10 PM by Otto »

Offline LePaul

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 7988
A slow descent into Hell...
« Reply #33 on: January 14, 2004, 12:34:02 PM »
I think Masschussetts has some pretty harsh gun laws that would do more harm to the victim of the burglary as well (Ironic, since Massachussetts sorta got the revolution going to get away from English rule, eh?)

While I like the english people and all, their laws seem to be made in make beleive.  

Hey Dowding, we'll trade you OJ for the monarchy  ;)

My folks place are burglarized a a long time ago while i was still living there.  Had I caught them in the act, they'd be dead.  Period.  No wild west or vigilanate stuff...I'm defending the home, they came to me..and I'm just expediting their eggress.  The investigating cop asked if I wouldve wounded/held them til the PD arrived or capped em.  Right, and listen to their make beleive lawsuits and all their stress from me capturing them in my home...right.  Pop Pop.

Offline ravells

  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1982
A slow descent into Hell...
« Reply #34 on: January 14, 2004, 12:44:31 PM »
Thanks Toad.

 (I was being facetious about the chain of causation being started by Mr Marting obtaining the gun). Nevertheless, the question before the court was not whether the kid who got shot was a burglar and deserved it. The question was whether Mr Martin had acted in self defence.

I think your perception that he would have been convicted anyway had the burglar been approaching him is partly correct (although we shall never know and the precise circumstances would count for much).  

It is certainly the (curious) case that although the law in the UK and the US (apart from the 'castle doctrine') appear to me to be largely identical, what the Americans would define as 'reasonable' compared to the Brits in terms of whether the force used was reasonable, vary enormously.

My impression about the Martin case (I havn't read the transcripts) is that the prosecutor managed to convince the jury that Martin was not actually defending his home and property when he shot the burglars, but was exacting revenge (they had robbed Martin before).  I believe the prosecutor did a good job in painting Martin as some sort of vigalante and if this were the case, I could understand why the jury chose to convict.

I entirely agree with you, Toad, that society tends to forget the victim and looks towards the welfare of the accused.  However it is not the primary function of the courts to protect the victim, but to ensure that the accused gets a fair trial.  Don't forget that the surviving burglar in the Martin case was put away for burglary.

The question as to whether a burglar deserves a summary death sentence for entering someone's home is, I think, quite a complex one because there are so many scenarios which might occur. For example, I'm sure you would agree that it would be wrong for you to shoot dead an impoverished ten year old who popped into your hall through an open door to steal a pair of rollerblades.

The difficulty with law making is that there will always be a spectrum of situations which will arise which may not always fit neatly into the laws we make.

Otto,

Your actions do not sound 'macho' or 'cold blooded' at all, but quite sensible. What is interesting is that 'it goes without saying that you would be in fear of your life'. Is that because most burglars in the US are likely to be armed themselves?  Maybe that would explain the difference between the UK and the US in applying the law of self defence in this area.
« Last Edit: January 14, 2004, 12:47:17 PM by ravells »

Offline Furball

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 15781
A slow descent into Hell...
« Reply #35 on: January 14, 2004, 12:58:35 PM »
I am british, and i think that if someone breaks into your home you should have every right to shoot the b*****d or castrate them slowly with a rusty saw if necessary.

This law where you cant protect your own home is ridiculous.

Quote
Originally posted by lazs2
No... In the U.S. every citizen is considered a threat to burglars...
lazs


I agree totally with this.  If you know the person inside that house has a gun, you would really think twice about breaking in.
I am not ashamed to confess that I am ignorant of what I do not know.
-Cicero

-- The Blue Knights --

Offline Otto

  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1566
      • http://www.cris.com/~ziggy2/
A slow descent into Hell...
« Reply #36 on: January 14, 2004, 01:02:19 PM »
Quote
Originally posted by ravells
Thanks Toad.

 Otto,

Is that because most burglars in the US are likely to be armed themselves?  Maybe that would explain the difference between the UK and the US in applying the law of self defence in this area. QUOTE]

If we are going to be honest I would have to say "yes".  But if he had a Cricket bat would you be less frightened if you only had a pillow?

I've posted way too much in this thread so I'd like to wrap up my part by quoting not an American but an Englishman (and great one at that)

"It is seldom that a Gentlemen ever needs a pistol.  But, when he does, he needs it desperately...."

Winston Churchill
« Last Edit: January 14, 2004, 01:09:03 PM by Otto »

Offline ravells

  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1982
A slow descent into Hell...
« Reply #37 on: January 14, 2004, 01:02:19 PM »
Lol,

Is that what the guy in your avatar is doing, Furball?

Ravs

Offline Furball

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 15781
A slow descent into Hell...
« Reply #38 on: January 14, 2004, 01:04:55 PM »
yes, his house is being broken into by the entire Leeds Utd football team, damn criminals they are.
I am not ashamed to confess that I am ignorant of what I do not know.
-Cicero

-- The Blue Knights --

Offline Nashwan

  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1864
A slow descent into Hell...
« Reply #39 on: January 14, 2004, 01:18:58 PM »
Quote
Was it illegal for Mr. Martin to buy the gun? Did he obtain it illegally? He's a farmer, right? I've visited England, stayed at farms.. most of them have shotguns even now.


I don't know any farmers without a shotgun. However, Martin had his shotgun certificate revoked in 1994.

Martin had caught a man stealing apples from his trees. As the man drove away, Martin fired at, and hit, his car.

Offline gofaster

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 6622
A slow descent into Hell...
« Reply #40 on: January 14, 2004, 01:29:56 PM »
The kindly Dr. Shipman will tend to his wounds.

"Tell me where it hurts."

Offline Furball

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 15781
A slow descent into Hell...
« Reply #41 on: January 14, 2004, 01:31:47 PM »
shipman is dead. hung himself in his cell with a pillowcase.

http://www.sky.com/skynews/article/0,,30000-12972157,00.html
I am not ashamed to confess that I am ignorant of what I do not know.
-Cicero

-- The Blue Knights --

Offline gofaster

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 6622
A slow descent into Hell...
« Reply #42 on: January 14, 2004, 01:33:46 PM »
I'd heard it was bedsheets.  Too bad.  He would've made an interesting psych study.

"Here, I have something to help with the pain."

Offline Furball

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 15781
A slow descent into Hell...
« Reply #43 on: January 14, 2004, 01:34:57 PM »
or,

'break into lazs house and see what happens' study
I am not ashamed to confess that I am ignorant of what I do not know.
-Cicero

-- The Blue Knights --

Offline lazs2

  • Radioactive Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 24886
A slow descent into Hell...
« Reply #44 on: January 14, 2004, 02:47:56 PM »
ravells... he would not be convicted in CA... we have no rule that disallows shooting a person who broke into your house in the back.   they broke in.... they were not related to the homeowner  and for sure he knew thay had broken in but...

It is usually dark when burglars break in so yu don't know if they are armed or not... even in the daytime a screwdriver or prybar or hammer is considered a weapon.   Most burglars do not carry firearms.   If you live in a two story house then the burglar being on the stairs cuts off your retreat.

in practical sense... If I couldn't determine if they were armed because of darkness or whatever.... I would just shoot.   If I could see I would tell them to freeze... any movement and I would shoot.   This is if I knew they broke in of course.   I don't shoot rude people who knock and then barge right in yelling HELLO?   But I have made one or two think that I allmost did.   To summarize... any doubt and I shoot... we will sort it all out latter.

In cases of burglary the cops often coach the homeowner on what to say...  "but you were afraid that he was going for a weapon right?"

lazs