View Full Version : So what do you do when your home is burgled?
Geezah
12-02-2004, 02:49 PM
This is a continuation of the following thread (http://www.militaryphotos.net/forums/viewtopic.php?t=30972&highlight=)
DR IAN STEPHEN
THE murder of John Monckton and the attack on his wife, Homeyra, during an apparent burglary in their London home has once again highlighted the true dangers and indeed the legal and moral dilemma members of the public face when they are confronted with intruders on their own property.
From a police perspective, the advice to potential victims of burglaries is unequivocal and clear-cut and you should never "have a go", so to speak, but for the victims of crime this is a very difficult thing to put into practice, especially when your natural instincts are to defend yourself, your family and your own property - the very pillars of your life that are being violated and potentially destroyed by criminals.
As a law-abiding individual confronted by an intruder in your home you face a catch-22. If you attack the burglar, or react in an "over the top" manner, as was recently illustrated in the case of Tony Martin who shot intruders in his Norfolk farmhouse, you will inevitably end up on the receiving end of a prison sentence that will far outstrip that imposed on the intruder in your own home. This situation has resulted in a lack of belief in the law among the public or rather a belief that the law isn’t exactly on your side when your home is broken into.
To this end it is perhaps important not to dwell on the situation involving Mr Martin because, regardless of the appeal procedure he successfully went through to secure his freedom, in many ways the law still points to his particular attack on the intruders who entered his home as a pre-meditated assault. He had previously been the victim of a number of burglaries within his home and as a result of this he was effectively prepared for further intrusion and reacted as such when his farmhouse was broken into again.
But what the Martin case does reflect is the general fear felt by the public over rising crime rates and the extent to which they will go to protect themselves. As the case involving Mr and Mrs Monckton shows those most at risk from aggravated burglary are the wealthy, individuals identified by criminals as prosperous professionals. However, at the other end of the scale, people living in inner cities and on council estates face a similar level of risk.
When individuals are confronted by intruders there are some actions they should follow. Direct contact should be avoided whenever possible. If unavoidable, the victim should adopt a state of active passivity. In most cases the best form of defence is always avoidance. If this isn’t possible, act passively, be careful what you say or do and give up valuables without a struggle. This allows the victim to take charge of the situation, without the intruder’s awareness, through subtle and non-confrontational means. People can cooperate but initiate nothing. By doing nothing there is no chance of inadvertently initiating violence by saying something such as "Please don’t hurt me".
In a situation involving housebreaking it is also important to remember that many common burglars are adolescents, most likely starting out on the first rung of the criminal ladder, and they are therefore ****e to lashing out if confronted and in the worst case scenarios killing out of panic and fear.
Sometimes the perpetrator of a burglary is even more terrified than the victim and in many cases when things go wrong it is the perpetrator of the crime who panics. Although they sometimes go equipped with weapons, in most cases they probably don’t intend to use them but in the heat of the moment, and the fear of either getting caught or attacked themselves, they use them. They don’t expect the person they are trying to hold up to retaliate or react. Mostly the knife is there simply for intimidation rather than intent to use it and they finish up killing somebody by accident rather than design.
This, of course, does not excuse their actions, but it is certainly worth taking on-board when you consider confronting an intruder. While saying this, in my own experience counselling victims of crime in recent years, there has also recently been a marked increase in the use or the threatened use of dangerous weapons in burglaries and common assaults. This, in itself, is a deeply worrying trend and, although not entirely excusing over-retaliation from homeowners, creates an understandable degree of sympathy for members of the public who lash out at intruders in their home. In truth it is an incredibly difficult situation to assess.
What is perhaps most important is dealing with the victims of the crime and helping them through the aftermath. As someone with wide experience of counselling the victims of violent robberies in their homes it is essential to remember the post-traumatic stress associated with such incidents.
The truth is aggravated burglary causes enormous stress as the victim’s home has been violated. This situation is magnified when the victims and their family have been threatened or assaulted and can lead to a whole range of post-traumatic stress disorders. Like the victims of rape and violent assault, members of the public who experience criminal intrusion in their home experience episodes and often show all the classic symptoms of post-traumatic stress like panic attacks, sleep disorders, flashbacks and social withdrawal.
Like other serious crimes the aftermath of a burglary can be the start of a process that continues to destroy the victim’s self-esteem and even relationships with their loved ones and more often than not reinforces their feelings of guilt and self-blame over the situation. The damage to the victim from the original crime can also be magnified by the court experience and, more likely in today’s society, the lack of support from local authorities and the police.
The trauma can be dealt with in a number of ways with professional help, counselling to develop effective coping strategies and taking time off from stressful professional activities. People who fail to seek help often develop further psychological problems. Men especially are not good at accepting support, but some simple counselling immediately after an attack can substantially reduce the risk of long-term psychological problems.
• Dr Ian Stephen is an Honorary Lecturer (Forensic Psychology) at Glasgow Caledonian University and has worked in a number of prisons with long-term prisoners and young offenders. He was a consultant to forensic psychology television series Cracker.
The Scotsman (http://news.scotsman.com/uk.cfm?id=1377062004)
Werewolf01
12-02-2004, 04:05 PM
Yep. Every time gun control increases in a country the number of crimes commited with guns rises. For some reason, there are a lot of left wing politicians in this country who seem to ignore that fact simply because they do not like it.
A good friend of my grandmother's got divorced recently. One of her ex's friends tried to break into the house. He got halfway through the bathroom window and she hit him six times with 125 gr SJHPs from her S&W. The sheriff showed up, cleaned up the mess, aplogogized for the inconevnience and she went back to sleep...after she reloaded her Smith.
We have the most lax gun control in the country. We also have about the lowest crime rate. Old ladies (and everybody else) packing everywhere they go helps explain that statistic. ;)
Geezah
12-02-2004, 04:09 PM
Yep. Every time gun control increases in a country the number of crimes commited with guns rises. For some reason, there are a lot of left wing politicians in this country who seem to ignore that fact simply because they do not like it.
A good friend of my grandmother's got divorced recently. One of her ex's friends tried to break into the house. He got halfway through the bathroom window and she hit him six times with 125 gr SJHPs from her S&W. The sheriff showed up, cleaned up the mess, aplogogized for the inconevnience and she went back to sleep...after she reloaded her Smith.
We have the most lax gun control in the country. We also have about the lowest crime rate. Old ladies (and everybody else) packing everywhere they go helps explain that statistic. ;)
Texas?
Werewolf01
12-02-2004, 04:25 PM
Yep. Every time gun control increases in a country the number of crimes commited with guns rises. For some reason, there are a lot of left wing politicians in this country who seem to ignore that fact simply because they do not like it.
A good friend of my grandmother's got divorced recently. One of her ex's friends tried to break into the house. He got halfway through the bathroom window and she hit him six times with 125 gr SJHPs from her S&W. The sheriff showed up, cleaned up the mess, aplogogized for the inconevnience and she went back to sleep...after she reloaded her Smith.
We have the most lax gun control in the country. We also have about the lowest crime rate. Old ladies (and everybody else) packing everywhere they go helps explain that statistic. ;)
Texas?
Nope. You get two more guesses.
Geezah
12-02-2004, 04:42 PM
Yep. Every time gun control increases in a country the number of crimes commited with guns rises. For some reason, there are a lot of left wing politicians in this country who seem to ignore that fact simply because they do not like it.
A good friend of my grandmother's got divorced recently. One of her ex's friends tried to break into the house. He got halfway through the bathroom window and she hit him six times with 125 gr SJHPs from her S&W. The sheriff showed up, cleaned up the mess, aplogogized for the inconevnience and she went back to sleep...after she reloaded her Smith.
We have the most lax gun control in the country. We also have about the lowest crime rate. Old ladies (and everybody else) packing everywhere they go helps explain that statistic. ;)
Texas?
Nope. You get two more guesses.
Then it's Florida? ;)
Werewolf01
12-02-2004, 04:47 PM
One more guess.
Beowulf
12-02-2004, 04:52 PM
Vermont?
Werewolf01
12-02-2004, 04:55 PM
Both of you guys need to adjust your elevation. ;)
Geezah
12-02-2004, 04:58 PM
Tennessee?
Werewolf01
12-02-2004, 04:59 PM
Tennessee?
No prize for you. West Virginia ;)
Geezah
12-02-2004, 05:04 PM
Tennessee?
No prize for you. West Virginia ;)
"No soup for me" :P
You're one state over from me and Durandal.
Werewolf01
12-02-2004, 05:11 PM
Tennessee?
No prize for you. West Virginia ;)
"No soup for me" :P
You're one state over from me and Durandal.
Cool. Maybe we could get together and go shoot or swill beer or something.
Kentucky?
I plan on going to the big show down there in Feb.
Geezah
12-02-2004, 05:55 PM
Tennessee?
No prize for you. West Virginia ;)
"No soup for me" :P
You're one state over from me and Durandal.
Cool. Maybe we could get together and go shoot or swill beer or something.
Kentucky?
I plan on going to the big show down there in Feb.
Sorry, I should have been more specific, one state from me and one state form Durandal ;)
I'm Ohio he's Kentucky and yes we need to go shoot, me and Durandal hooked up a few weeks ago, I took him to the Ohio Gun Collectors Assc meeting(big gun show) in Wilmongton and we went shooting afterwards, plus he's got a shoot planned for Dec 11th.
Are you up for it?
Also what big meet are you talking about in Feb, Knob creek?
Be wary of this article. It is a vast over-simplification.
The anser is simple - be reasonable. If you honestly believe the intruder will do you harm then you are good to go. If he is running out the door, let him. If he is coming down a dark hallway at you with something shiny in his hand then blaze away.
There are thousands of stories where someone mistakenly shoots the next-door neighbor and does not go to jail. It happens because the shooter acts reasonably. You don't have to be right, just reasonable.
Ask yourself this. Is it reasonable to chase a drug adict down the stree and beat hell out of him because he was in your house even if he did not steal anything? NO!
Is it reasponable to shoot a crazed drug addict in your house who menaces you? YES!
It ain't rocket science.
hank
California Joe
12-02-2004, 09:54 PM
Hank is the coolest. He's gonna handle my divorce. What?
Married???? I thought you were just livin in sin. Whatever . . .
I'll draw up the documents. Here's how I charge . . .
hank, esq.
Geezah
12-03-2004, 09:50 AM
Be wary of this article. It is a vast over-simplification.
The anser is simple - be reasonable. If you honestly believe the intruder will do you harm then you are good to go. If he is running out the door, let him. If he is coming down a dark hallway at you with something shiny in his hand then blaze away.
There are thousands of stories where someone mistakenly shoots the next-door neighbor and does not go to jail. It happens because the shooter acts reasonably. You don't have to be right, just reasonable.
Ask yourself this. Is it reasonable to chase a drug adict down the stree and beat hell out of him because he was in your house even if he did not steal anything? NO!
Is it reasponable to shoot a crazed drug addict in your house who menaces you? YES!
It ain't rocket science.
hank
I won't be chasing anyone down the street with my 12ga, all I'll be saying is that I feared for my life and the life of my family which includes my 2 Rotts, 1 Min Pin and 2 cats p-)
It's pretty cool to have an attorney giving free advice on this site.
Lethal force can be a tricky issue, one should be aware that the "judged by twelve rather than carried by six" is a cute saying but a vast over-simplification.
If you're judged to be wrong in a shooting the outlay of money, time, stress and loss of freedom (prison) may make one re-think that philosophy
hank, so if the guy running away turns and flips me the bird, can I shoot him then :D
NicNZ
12-03-2004, 09:45 PM
Well I was going to answer the topic question with "Act Reasonably" but I see that someone has beaten me to it. If a person exercises force to defend themselves or others and their community subsequently deems that they have acted unreasonably, then it can fairly be said that that person went too far. That is the whole point of the "reasonable person" test.
See my post in the other topic: http://www.militaryphotos.net/forums/viewtopic.php?p=605346#605346
It's pretty cool to have an attorney giving free advice on this site.
Lethal force can be a tricky issue, one should be aware that the "judged by twelve rather than carried by six" is a cute saying but a vast over-simplification.
If you're judged to be wrong in a shooting the outlay of money, time, stress and loss of freedom (prison) may make one re-think that philosophy
hank, so if the guy running away turns and flips me the bird, can I shoot him then :D
Hold up mr.x, I ain't giving advice. I'm simply correcting errors that I don't want anybody to rely on. half truths and BS like this is what will end up having some 13 year old go to jail cuz he thinkgs its "legal". None of this is advice, think of it as a debate. Admittedly one I will nearly always win.
Geezah, I think you get it. Don't shoot them on the way out and you're probably OK.
One other thing. There is no rule that it has to be 12 on a jury. Many states allow as few as 6. I think the Supreme Court has said 6 is as low as you can go.
hank
Warlord
12-04-2004, 08:01 AM
I'll go to the nearest police station and mention that I'm related to a big time politician or an Army or Police official.
A few days later I'll have my stuff back in my apartment with a sorry note.
Or the ones who did it will be found dead in the riverbank and my stuff will magically be recovered.
Herrmannek
12-04-2004, 09:13 AM
I hate that "act reasonably" "be calm and ****"... wtf is wrong with you people... ****hole who entered my house without asking don't need to "act resonably" why the hell should I? I have clear right to react as unresonably as I can if fukker make mistake of his life and tried to rob my house...If I would have gun I would pack all mags into him before I would stop and because I can't have gun I'll need to chop guy into pieces with my undeer-pillow hatchet.....hough
perdurabo
12-04-2004, 09:44 AM
I hate that "act reasonably" "be calm and ****"... wtf is wrong with you people... ****hole who entered my house without asking don't need to "act resonably" why the hell should I? I have clear right to react as unresonably as I can if fukker make mistake of his life and tried to rob my house...If I would have gun I would pack all mags into him before I would stop and because I can't have gun I'll need to chop guy into pieces with my undeer-pillow hatchet.....hough
yup sadly we live in pinko-commie-euro-pussie-land where murders have more rights than their victims
i have under my bed my saber because i can't have 12ga shootgun stupid laws fuzkin commies :(
I hate that "act reasonably" "be calm and ****"... wtf is wrong with you people... ****hole who entered my house without asking don't need to "act resonably" why the hell should I? I have clear right to react as unresonably as I can if fukker make mistake of his life and tried to rob my house...If I would have gun I would pack all mags into him before I would stop and because I can't have gun I'll need to chop guy into pieces with my undeer-pillow hatchet.....hough
Reasonable does not mean calm. It means in proportion. If someone comes at you with a gun, shoot back. If someone tries to punch you, punch back. You can be wilder than a wort doctor, but just act proportionately.
For example, cutting someone into pieces for trying to steal your plasm television is disproportional. Therefore would likely not be legal.
Its really a simple concept. Obviously it is much too complicated for many on this site.
Maybe I should put my phone number on here so you guys can call me when you need an attorney. Because from these threads it looks like everyone here is ready to "off" the neighbor if he comes over after dark to borrow sugar and accidentally walks in your front door.
hank
Herrmannek
12-04-2004, 10:09 AM
I hate that "act reasonably" "be calm and ****"... wtf is wrong with you people... ****hole who entered my house without asking don't need to "act resonably" why the hell should I? I have clear right to react as unresonably as I can if fukker make mistake of his life and tried to rob my house...If I would have gun I would pack all mags into him before I would stop and because I can't have gun I'll need to chop guy into pieces with my undeer-pillow hatchet.....hough
Reasonable does not mean calm. It means in proportion. If someone comes at you with a gun, shoot back. If someone tries to punch you, punch back. You can be wilder than a wort doctor, but just act proportionately.
For example, cutting someone into pieces for trying to steal your plasm television is disproportional. Therefore would likely not be legal.
Its really a simple concept. Obviously it is much too complicated for many on this site.
Maybe I should put my phone number on here so you guys can call me when you need an attorney. Because from these threads it looks like everyone here is ready to "off" the neighbor if he comes over after dark to borrow sugar and accidentally walks in your front door.
hank
OK.. but why the hell I need to react? When he will shot or punch me it will be to late for me... If somone at least hypoteticaly is threat to my life and gives me good reason for that hypothesis by breaking law i will threat him as lifethreating threat and ACT with full available means because knowledge that means wern't enough will be learned together with my cooling corpse...
perdurabo
12-04-2004, 10:46 AM
I hate that "act reasonably" "be calm and ****"... wtf is wrong with you people... ****hole who entered my house without asking don't need to "act resonably" why the hell should I? I have clear right to react as unresonably as I can if fukker make mistake of his life and tried to rob my house...If I would have gun I would pack all mags into him before I would stop and because I can't have gun I'll need to chop guy into pieces with my undeer-pillow hatchet.....hough
Reasonable does not mean calm. It means in proportion. If someone comes at you with a gun, shoot back. If someone tries to punch you, punch back. You can be wilder than a wort doctor, but just act proportionately.
For example, cutting someone into pieces for trying to steal your plasm television is disproportional. Therefore would likely not be legal.
Its really a simple concept. Obviously it is much too complicated for many on this site.
Maybe I should put my phone number on here so you guys can call me when you need an attorney. Because from these threads it looks like everyone here is ready to "off" the neighbor if he comes over after dark to borrow sugar and accidentally walks in your front door.
hank
so how will you recognize if hes in your home for your TVset and not for your family? maybe ask him politely "sir are you here for my bigass plasma televisor? yes? thank you please proceed to living room. You drink coffe or tea?..." ? :lol:
I hate that "act reasonably" "be calm and ****"... wtf is wrong with you people... ****hole who entered my house without asking don't need to "act resonably" why the hell should I? I have clear right to react as unresonably as I can if fukker make mistake of his life and tried to rob my house...If I would have gun I would pack all mags into him before I would stop and because I can't have gun I'll need to chop guy into pieces with my undeer-pillow hatchet.....hough
Reasonable does not mean calm. It means in proportion. If someone comes at you with a gun, shoot back. If someone tries to punch you, punch back. You can be wilder than a wort doctor, but just act proportionately.
For example, cutting someone into pieces for trying to steal your plasm television is disproportional. Therefore would likely not be legal.
Its really a simple concept. Obviously it is much too complicated for many on this site.
Maybe I should put my phone number on here so you guys can call me when you need an attorney. Because from these threads it looks like everyone here is ready to "off" the neighbor if he comes over after dark to borrow sugar and accidentally walks in your front door.
hank
OK.. but why the hell I need to react? When he will shot or punch me it will be to late for me... If somone at least hypoteticaly is threat to my life and gives me good reason for that hypothesis by breaking law i will threat him as lifethreating threat and ACT with full available means because knowledge that means wern't enough will be learned together with my cooling corpse...
Maybe there is a translation issues here. If he is close enough to punch you then you can reasonably feel threatened. If he has a gun, you'd be a fool not to shoot. The point that I have made is that mere presence or the act of stealing your TV, with nothing more, does not justify shooting a thief.
Obviously if you reasonably feel threatened then you are OK under TX law, or any other. The difference is that you've been saying you are going to shoot anyone you fined in your house even if they are not threatening you. That will land you in jail, maybe.
hank
Herrmannek
12-04-2004, 11:12 AM
Nothing lost in translation. I just like simple rules that work flawlessly...If he is far he still can have gun or just waits for good moment to hurt me or whatever...Actualy noone including me can't tell he is real threat or not until he will hurt anybody but thats too late IMHO, in other words everyone nonasked breaking into my living room at 2 am is from definition lifethreat... Only way he can prove he isn't is by runnig away before I'll kill him or even beter by not breaking into my house without asking in middle of the night at first.. Plain and simple... Idea of symetric reaction is plain stupid, if somone want risk his life to save bulglers life its okey, but don't ask under threat of jail to risk my life because of somone who blew away my "limited-trust" to him by breaking in...
"BULGULAR IS PERSON WHO HAVE TO PROVE HE ISN"T THREAT TO ME NOT I"
best methods to make formal prof :
1. Don't break in!!!
2. Run away before I'll kill you!!!
2RHPZ
12-07-2004, 12:06 PM
I hate that "act reasonably" "be calm and ****"... wtf is wrong with you people... ****hole who entered my house without asking don't need to "act resonably" why the hell should I? I have clear right to react as unresonably as I can if fukker make mistake of his life and tried to rob my house...If I would have gun I would pack all mags into him before I would stop and because I can't have gun I'll need to chop guy into pieces with my undeer-pillow hatchet.....hough
Reasonable does not mean calm. It means in proportion. If someone comes at you with a gun, shoot back. If someone tries to punch you, punch back. You can be wilder than a wort doctor, but just act proportionately.
For example, cutting someone into pieces for trying to steal your plasm television is disproportional. Therefore would likely not be legal.
Its really a simple concept. Obviously it is much too complicated for many on this site.
Maybe I should put my phone number on here so you guys can call me when you need an attorney. Because from these threads it looks like everyone here is ready to "off" the neighbor if he comes over after dark to borrow sugar and accidentally walks in your front door.
hank
Herrmannek is right! I agree with him. Anyone who is uninvited at nite in my house will meet my P226 immediately. It´s according to the law in my country. BTW, maximum distance between me and any of my pistols is on the reach. Anytime during a day and nite! p-)
For example, cutting someone into pieces for trying to steal your plasm television is disproportional.
Sorry, strange logic ...
I'd say assess the threat.. See if the person is in a position to do harm. If possible call the police, but use the 12 gauge method as a last resort.
[SAB]Grey
12-07-2004, 12:33 PM
So just to clarify, are we killing intruders to protect family members or our stuff?
limey
12-19-2004, 07:07 PM
I'll be glad when the UK allow burglary victims to act unreasonably.
Burglary is rampant in the UK, and victims like Tony Martin are living a life of fear. Criminals know they only have a 10% chance of being caught, not to mention short/soft sentences.
The point is - the burgular made the CHOICE to invade someones home, and the victim doesn't have a choice. It's down to the old flight or fight response. If the Americans are right, that fear of getting shot cuts crime, then hopefully a theif will think twice if they fear homeowners will fight back.
My home was burgled this year, not to mention cars being stolen and vandalism over a number of years. If I had seen the guy climbing out of my broken window as I arrived home I would have practised wheelspins on his head. I call that reasonable.
One more point - when he was convicted, he was also convicted of carrying an offensive weapon, and resisting arrest. But what if I'd had seen him and let him go. I don't know if I could live with myself if the next house he robbed, he'd killed some old couple, or a young family.
As always IMHO
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.1.10 Copyright © 2012 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.