10 replies to this topic

[Lottie]

Tony Blair has said he will consider changing the law to clarify how much force people can use against burglars in their own homes.  

The prime minister said he thought a change could be needed to send a "clear signal" the government was on the side of the "victim not the offender".

He pledged to consult on the issue with police, prosecutors and law officers.

But Tory leader Michael Howard accused Mr Blair of jumping on his party's "bandwagon" over the issue.

Currently householders are allowed to use "reasonable force" to defend themselves and their property against intruders.

But the Tories have unveiled plans to change the law with a private members' bill so householders would not face prosecution unless they used "grossly disproportionate" force in self defence.

Mr Blair told MPs: "In the light of recent concern, it is worth looking at whether we don't have to clarify the law so that we send a very, very clear signal to people that we are on the side of the victim not the offender."

But he added that even though the number of cases in which a person would be convicted after taking on a burglar in their own home was very small he would consult and bring forward proposals to tackle the issue.

Mr Howard said he was pleased the government had responded favourably, but accused Mr Blair of being "Mr Bandwagon".

'Perfectly sensibly'

To Labour jeers he said: "Once again where we lead, you follow."

He then pushed Mr Blair over why the lord chancellor had this week said the law did not need to be changed.

But Mr Blair countered that Home Secretary David Blunkett had said he was prepared  to review the law on this issue "a couple of months ago".

He told Mr Howard: "You only jumped on the bandwagon when you thought there was something in it.

"However, I would have thought we could deal with this perfectly sensibly."

But Mr Blair did acknowledge that the Law Commission had looked at the issue and reported that the law did not need to be altered.

The change of heart follows Metropolitan Police Commissioner Sir John Stevens' assertion that people should be allowed to use what force was necessary, without risking prosecution, when tackling intruders.

                                                                      

                                       Source

The prime minister said he thought a change could be needed to send a "clear signal" the government was on the side of the "victim not the offender".

How long has it taken to figure that one out... about time!

[Talon]

government was on the side of the "victim not the offender".

Could have surprised me.



If someone breaks into my house I have the right to assume he's their to kill me or my family and cut his/her head off with my katanas, and not worry about some namby-pamby PC loonatic trying to get me sent to prision for not giving him/her a cup of tea and helping them lift the tv into their van.

[Talon]

I just read that its been decided that Burglar's do indeed have the right to break into homes without the fear of injury


.... bollocks

[Lottie]

I just read that its been decided that Burglar's do indeed have the right to break into homes without the fear of injury


.... bollocks

Huh Where did you read this? Thats outrageous.
'They' will say next that its also only polite that Burglar is offered tea or coffee as well, biscuit and comfy chair optional.

[Talon]

I read it in 'the Sun'... which I'd like to point out that I in no way lower myself to buying or reading in a common basis, it was just lying on a table at work. But keep in mind a lot of what the Sun itself says is also bollocks.

[Lottie]

Hmmm...The Sun, this is why I haven't heard. I would take anything that rag says with a pinch of salt. As you already know of course.

[Talon]

But just so have some actual concrete news, here's a example of the scum we're dealing with;


Burglar targeted elderly victims  
A convicted burglar who struck at the homes of elderly people just hours after being freed from prison has been jailed for four years.
Tony Hendley, 39, of no fixed address, targeted four pensioners' homes in Derby on 29 April.

In one of the attacks he tricked his way into the home of an 82-year-old woman and searched the property while repeatedly demanding cash.

Hendley admitted the four burglaries when arrested shortly afterwards.

He first went to the house of an 87-year-old man in McKenzie Street and made off with just £5 after pretending to be from the gas board.

Small knife

He then moved on to the home of a 76-year-old woman in nearby Walk Street, Derby Crown Court was told.

He walked through the unlocked back door and took a digital clock and a radio.

Hendley then struck at an address in Cheviot Street, bluffing his way into the home of an 82-year-old woman by claiming to be a maintenance man.

He repeatedly demanded cash, then stayed and searched the property for 15 minutes, despite his terrified victim insisting she had no money.

Finally he targeted the nearby home of a 78-year-old but was forced to flee empty-handed when confronted by the woman's daughter.

Hendley, who had a small locking knife on him when he was arrested shortly afterwards, admitted four burglaries and possessing a bladed article.


http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/derbyshire/4059987.stm

[Lottie]

A convicted burglar who struck at the homes of elderly people just hours after being freed from prison has been jailed for four years.

Well what does one expect when scum like this only get 4 years which is not 4 years anyway! Its easy pickings and easy living for these nasty bastards.

I personally feel a 'loss of limb(s)' is a more appropriate punishment starting with the hands.

[Talon]

Nah, if they loss a limb they'll just claim benifits and steal from their victims that why. I'd just shoot them.

[Lottie]

Oh I agree...but I also forgot to add a rusty old saw and no entitlement to medical intervention.

[Talon]

ahhhh