Crime in the UK

[AuH2O]

Britain's government is a joke:

http://www.opinion.telegraph.co.uk/opinion/main.jhtml?xml=/opinion/2004/10/31/do3102.xml&sSheet=/opinion/2004/10/31/ixopinion.html

[Filuwaúrdjan]

What a hate filled and biased little article that is

[AuH2O]

Is it untrue?

If someone comes into your house and is raping your wife are you allowed to fight them?

Are the robbery statistics accurate, that it is much higher in the UK than the US?

Ahh the facts, how troubling they can be...

[Filuwaúrdjan]

Is it untrue?

Most of it

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Yes; you are allowed to use "Reasonable Force" to defend yourself.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Fairly accurate

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Not sure. You're Cops are much, much more incompetent and corrupt than our Coppers (with the obvious exception of the West Midlands Serious Crime Squad. Oh and the entire 1980's).
Besides a hellofalot more people are KILLED in the U.S

You must be logged in to read this quote.

To you

[John Dibble]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Yes; you are allowed to use "Reasonable Force" to defend yourself.

Define 'reasonable' - you probably can't. Some judge in a courtroom will define it for you regardless of the fact that he wasn't even in the situation. How can that person actually determine what is reasonable?

If someone breaks into your home, you have no clue whether their intent is to rob you, kill you, rape your wife, pee on your furniture, or whatever - the safest thing to do is assume the worst situations, the lethal ones, rather than the laughable ones. As far as I am concerned, home invaders are no different than foreign invaders - they have come into your territory with hostile intent and must be expunged from that territory by any and all means necessary, including lethal force, which is the first option I would resort to. What force is reasonable can not be determined by an outside party because it is not their territory that has been violated.

BTW - I agree the article was biased. Don't know about hate filled, but certainly from a biased viewpoint. Of course, it's an opinion piece really - hard for it not to be biased.

[Filuwaúrdjan]

Define 'reasonable' - you probably can't. Some judge in a courtroom will define it for you regardless of the fact that he wasn't even in the situation. How can that person actually determine what is reasonable?

As the Criminal Law system in the U.K is based around Common Law, "Reasonable" is defined by precedent. And usually (but not always) common sense.
If someone broke into your house and started stealing things, you came downstairs shot him and he died, precendent dicates that that is a reasonable use of force and is a defense of self defense.
However if you were lurking in a stairwell with a loaded gun and shoot him in the back, it would *not* be reasonable force and would be )murder.
"Reasonable" [used in a hellofalot of circumstances for all kinds of offenses] was once defined as "what the Man on the Clapham Omnibus thinks" (it was a long time ago. Basically it translates as "the Man in the Street. In English Law [Scottish Law is different and more confusing] "Man" refers to both Men and Women)... which allows the Judge (interestingly in the U.K the higher up the tree a Judge gets the less corrupt, politically influenced etc. they get... a complete reversal of most other countries. Maybe it's getting to wear silly costumes...) to add some Common Sense to their directions to the Jury (who ultimately decide who is guilty or not guilty) and more importently in the actual sentencing.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

I see you're point, but IF POSSIBLE [very importent this] you shouldn't actually try to kill them.

[John Dibble]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

I see you're point, but IF POSSIBLE [very importent this] you shouldn't actually try to kill them.

Fine...I'll shoot him in the leg if I'm behind him.

[Filuwaúrdjan]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

I see you're point, but IF POSSIBLE [very importent this] you shouldn't actually try to kill them.

Fine...I'll shoot him in the leg if I'm behind him.

Heard of GBH? Although you could con the jury that he was running away to pick a knife up or something.

It's worth pointing out that in the U.K most house breakers don't have guns... too damn expensive (and besides handguns are illegal. If the Coppers stop you and you have an illegal firearm you might as well turn yourself in there and then...) and it raises the stakes.
Baseball Bats (optional) and running shoes/a fast car are the usual equipment.
If you just fire a gunshot into the air (provided they don't actually see you) or aim to miss (but very close) in over 90% of cases they'll leg it.

As the U.K doesn't have a real gun culture (some run down estates have a hollowed-out-imitation-handgun-culture though) comparing gun and self defense laws with the U.S is kinda illogical.

[AuH2O]

Do you have any evidence to show the examples used in the story are not true? Like, of an old lady being arrested for having a toy gun?

[John Dibble]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

I see you're point, but IF POSSIBLE [very importent this] you shouldn't actually try to kill them.

Fine...I'll shoot him in the leg if I'm behind him.

Heard of GBH? Although you could con the jury that he was running away to pick a knife up or something.

It's worth pointing out that in the U.K most house breakers don't have guns... too damn expensive (and besides handguns are illegal. If the Coppers stop you and you have an illegal firearm you might as well turn yourself in there and then...) and it raises the stakes.
Baseball Bats (optional) and running shoes/a fast car are the usual equipment.
If you just fire a gunshot into the air (provided they don't actually see you) or aim to miss (but very close) in over 90% of cases they'll leg it.

As the U.K doesn't have a real gun culture (some run down estates have a hollowed-out-imitation-handgun-culture though) comparing gun and self defense laws with the U.S is kinda illogical.

Actually, I'd stab him. I don't have a gun, not yet anyways. I do have stabbing implements though - two long daggers. You are right that criminals will usually run if they think their victim is armed, which is why I think everyone should be armed, lol.

[English]

In my opinion, there is a lot of hysteria related to crime in the UK. Especially in the media. Yes crime here is high, but the vast majority of it is petty criminality, such as breaking into cars and vandalism. It's extremely unlikely you would be murdered, even in the most dodgy of inner city neighbourhoods. As for burglary, burglars in the UK are rarely armed and the vast majority run off when confronted. I have heard some of the reports in the US about the lawless nature of British society. Take it from me, it's absolute rubbish. I don't know why they perpetuate this sort of utter nonsense. The worst thing about the UK is public drunkeness, which admittedly is pretty prevalent. However that has more to do with our insufferably grim climate than any tendency for anti-social behavior. Most nations in Northerly latitudes have similar problems with alcohol abuse.

[Tory]

English, I thought you were moving to Canada.

[English]

English, I thought you were moving to Canada.

I am. Takes bloody ages. The main reason I left for a while was due to all the ultra-partisan idiots on both sides, although I had hoped to be in Canada by now I must admit.