Man jailed for dead girl 'trolling' insults on FB,Youtube

[MrJonno]

No, burglary, particularly "hot" burglaries, or as some call them, "home invasions" when the residents are home are very, very common in the UK

Still would love to know where you get the data for that as there is absolutely no such crime, no records are kept by the police so anyone who makes up any data is basically lying out of their arse

[Robert_S]

No, burglary, particularly "hot" burglaries, or as some call them, "home invasions" when the residents are home are very, very common in the UK

Still would love to know where you get the data for that as there is absolutely no such crime, no records are kept by the police so anyone who makes up any data is basically lying out of their arse

So, aren't you suspicious that they don't keep records of that sort of thing?

[MrJonno]

If you can't see how that makes sense, maybe you should surround yourself with child rapists (does that mean children who rape or those who rape children?...no matter...gross either way you meant it) who are safe and comfortable for you to be around rather than gun owners (like many of those whom you pay to protect you). I think you can be confident that I, as a gun owner who thinks your reasoning disgusting (gun owners are worse than rapists to you?!?!), will not seek to become your neighbour. See - win/win!

I can ensure you I know of no one who has a legal gun, the only time I've ever seen a policeman with a gun is at an airport and everyone keeps a serious distance from them. They arent really there as a police role they anyway more as a paramilitary. I wouldnt trust a soldier with a gun either which is why we tend to keep them abroad where they are unlikely to shoot me.

Penalty for rape of an adult without aggrevating circumstances is 4-8 year olds, minimum penalty for possession of a firearm is 5 years (if you live long enough to be arrested) which pretty sums up attitude to gun ownership in the UK

[MrJonno]

No, burglary, particularly "hot" burglaries, or as some call them, "home invasions" when the residents are home are very, very common in the UK

Still would love to know where you get the data for that as there is absolutely no such crime, no records are kept by the police so anyone who makes up any data is basically lying out of their arse

So, aren't you suspicious that they don't keep records of that sort of thing?

Keep records of something that isnt a specific crime, no not really. If a criminal does something to the homeowner/renter then thats an additional crime which would be reported.

[JimC]

The term in Oz for burglary with violence is "aggravated burglary"... Just to complete the semantics...

They are not particularly common, and where they do occur, usually involve folks from the retail side of the drug trade ripping each other off with a little thuggery thrown in for the sheer fun of it...

My days in that trade (ie selling a few ounces of the green stuff) are 40 years behind me... In those days, I was far too menacing a figure to be trifled with...

[MrJonno]

The term in Oz for burglary with violence is "aggravated burglary"... Just to complete the semantics..

Is that definitely right as its different to the UK, the aggravated bit is going armed for violence even if no violence takes place. If there is violence that would just be charged as a seperate offence (with being in someone house an aggravating factor for sentencing)

[JimC]

The term in Oz for burglary with violence is "aggravated burglary"... Just to complete the semantics..

Is that definitely right as its different to the UK, the aggravated bit is going armed for violence even if no violence takes place. If there is violence that would just be charged as a seperate offence (with being in someone house an aggravating factor for sentencing)

Well that's my take from watching local cop shows, and seeing reports of Joyhnny X charged with aggravated burglary...

But what does a simple maths teacher know of these weighty legal issues?

[Robert_S]

So, legally in the UK there is no difference between assaulting someone on the street and forcing your way into their homes and assaulting them?

With attitudes like those, I'm surprised you don't get thuggish effing yobs burning down major portions of your cities.

[Pappa]

In the UK, a person is permitted to use "reasonable force" to defend themselves. "Reasonable" is defined as what a normal person would consider reasonable at the time. If your life is in imminent danger, reasonable force can include killing your assailant. If somebody comes into your house armed, and you had reasonable grounds to suspect they would attack you, a court would acquit you unless you continued to use force that was no longer reasonable (by say, stabbing a burglar 10 times in the chest). This applies to any situation where a person finds themself in threat of physical harm, out in the street or anywhere else. It's simply incorrect to say that people here can't defend themselves.

[MrJonno]

So, legally in the UK there is no difference between assaulting someone on the street and forcing your way into their homes and assaulting them?

With attitudes like those, I'm surprised you don't get thuggish effing yobs burning down major portions of your cities.

Might be an aggravating factor in sentencing but I'm not aware that its a seperate offence

[MrJonno]

In the UK, a person is permitted to use "reasonable force" to defend themselves. "Reasonable" is defined as what a normal person would consider reasonable at the time. If your life is in imminent danger, reasonable force can include killing your assailant. If somebody comes into your house armed, and you had reasonable grounds to suspect they would attack you, a court would acquit you unless you continued to use force that was no longer reasonable (by say, stabbing a burglar 10 times in the chest). This applies to any situation where a person finds themself in threat of physical harm, out in the street or anywhere else. It's simply incorrect to say that people here can't defend themselves.

I'm not aware of a single case of a homeowner ever being charged for assaulting/killing a burgular in the UK that wouldnt have charged in the US. To not use reasonable force you would need to start tying up the burgular and setting him on fire. But if the police find a body in your house everyone nearby is going down the police station whether then end up being charged or not.

The most interest case in recent times was someone shooting a burgular in the back while running of outside, reloading and finishing him of on the floor. He got off very lightly with manslaughter and I doubt it would be any different in any US State

[Robert_S]

In the UK, a person is permitted to use "reasonable force" to defend themselves. "Reasonable" is defined as what a normal person would consider reasonable at the time. If your life is in imminent danger, reasonable force can include killing your assailant. If somebody comes into your house armed, and you had reasonable grounds to suspect they would attack you, a court would acquit you unless you continued to use force that was no longer reasonable (by say, stabbing a burglar 10 times in the chest). This applies to any situation where a person finds themself in threat of physical harm, out in the street or anywhere else. It's simply incorrect to say that people here can't defend themselves.

And actually here in Illinois I believe you are entitled to shoot at an invader all day long , but you have to stop after the first bullet hits.

[JimC]

In the UK, a person is permitted to use "reasonable force" to defend themselves. "Reasonable" is defined as what a normal person would consider reasonable at the time. If your life is in imminent danger, reasonable force can include killing your assailant. If somebody comes into your house armed, and you had reasonable grounds to suspect they would attack you, a court would acquit you unless you continued to use force that was no longer reasonable (by say, stabbing a burglar 10 times in the chest). This applies to any situation where a person finds themself in threat of physical harm, out in the street or anywhere else. It's simply incorrect to say that people here can't defend themselves.

And actually here in Illinois I believe you are entitled to shoot at an invader all day long , but you have to stop after the first bullet hits.

What an unfair penalty for being a good shot!

[Hermit]

The UK, unfortunately, is no longer a civilized society, it's a society of moral cowards that has surrendered it's liberty to the thugs and thievesand no longer deserves any sympathy when its people are victimized, injured or killed by their masters...the armed criminals of their society.

The no longer civilised society you refer to has a homicide rate of 1.28 per 100,000. The homicide rate of an equally uncivilised society I live in, Australia, is 1.3 per 100,000. You are right to be proud to live in the civilised USA where the homicide rate has dropped (yes, it has dropped) to 5.0 per 100,000. I feel so ashamed of our moral cowardice.

[Hermit]

In the UK, a person is permitted to use "reasonable force" to defend themselves. "Reasonable" is defined as what a normal person would consider reasonable at the time. If your life is in imminent danger, reasonable force can include killing your assailant. If somebody comes into your house armed, and you had reasonable grounds to suspect they would attack you, a court would acquit you unless you continued to use force that was no longer reasonable (by say, stabbing a burglar 10 times in the chest). This applies to any situation where a person finds themself in threat of physical harm, out in the street or anywhere else. It's simply incorrect to say that people here can't defend themselves.

And actually here in Illinois I believe you are entitled to shoot at an invader all day long , but you have to stop after the first bullet hits.

What an unfair penalty for being a good shot!

Onya.