02-01-2004, 05:33 PM
|
|
|
Boundary crossing deterrents(was tree cat damage)
(Nick Maclaren) wrote in message ...
In article ,
Steve Harris wrote:
In article ,
(Jaques d'Alltrades) wrote:
it is the duty of a citizen to try to apprehend someone in commission
of a serious crime *BY ANY MEANS AT HIS DISPOSAL*.
There is no such general legal duty. There very few situations where the
citizen is legally obliged to take an active part in crime fighting.
They are unlikely to occur in a garden.
And, in all cases, you are required to use only reasonable force,
according to the circumstances. If those burglars had gone tooled
up, Martin would never have been charged.
What the hanging, flogging and burglar-shooting brigade don't realise
is that the doctrine of reasonable force is primarily to protect the
innocent. If burglars know that they are likely to be shot at whim,
some will not do it and others will carry a gun and shoot first.
Those are, after all, the only rational behaviours.
Regards,
Nick Maclaren.
Of course. It is no accident that some one with a Cambridge University
email address like Nick is saying this. It is a classic example of the
hang 'em and flog 'em brigade being unable to see the broader picture
and having a mode of thinking which research has shown is associated
with poorer performance in intelligence tests. :-)
The concept of reasonable force is an essential one. The penalty for
burglary is NOT death.
Let me give you a few examples why someone might enter a house without
malicious intent.
They could be fleeing from an attacker.
They could be under the effect of drugs. (Most people on this group
will use a
recreational drug called alcohol.)
They could be a child or a retarded adult with a child's mind.
(For example a senile old person who lived in the house 60 years
before.)
The same thing applies to having dangerous items on a boundary. They
are blind as to the intent of the person crossing the boundary.
Several of the above would also apply there.
We don't want a situation like the "Merkins" have where there is a
"right to arm bears" :-) That just leads to more innocent people
getting shot.
Neil Jones
http://www.butterflyguy.com
|