2006-10-06 22:58:58 · 27 answers · asked by Little Mark 2 in Politics & Government ➔ Law & Ethics
Avoid shooting or striking at the back, it makes self defense more difficult to plead.
2006-10-07 01:59:03 · answer #1 · answered by Svartalf 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Here in the UK they've been manipulating the Laws surrounding trespassers.
U can use reasonable force 2 protect UR family/belongings.
But unreasonable force is not allowed.
Shame is we won't know it until we're faced with the situation as 2 whether UR prosecuted 4 killing the Burglar!
Last year a blind man, rightly so stabbed a burglar 2 death & did not face charges, thankfully.
But a man that chased the thief from his house & killed him in the street was prosecuted 4 using unreasonable force.
We will in a split second have 2 decide what is reasonable/unreasonable force.
I hope it never happens 2 me, I will fight 2 protect my family & stuff the consequences!
2006-10-07 06:08:04 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 1⤋
Current generally accepted practice of self defence:
If your life, or the life of others, is threatened with reasonable danger, then "go nuts," to the extent that the threat is removed. This is the law in Australia, but most other western nations follows the same law. If a guy broke into your property by mistake, you can ask them to leave. If they break into your property with intent to trespass, then obviously the request will be ignored. Then further effort should be placed into his removal without physical contact. If not, issue proper warnings to said person befor proceeding to "guide" him away from your property. If you believe he is a thief, declare your belief. Of course, if stealth is essential (i.e. middle of the night, man-in-black-hood, taking your wallet, etc), then you may disable the theif. However, once disabled, further physical battery can be considered to be assault, and death could result in the state charigng you with manslaughter.
2006-10-07 06:20:33 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 1⤋
Thank you for making me laugh.
You are allowed to defend yourself, but be careful, people have actually SUED the owner of the house they broke into and won. I would try shooting the person in a non-vital area if i really had to.
2006-10-07 06:06:46 · answer #4 · answered by melonhead 2 · 0⤊ 1⤋
It varies from state to state. This is considered a POLICE Power, and each state is allowed to make their own laws. In Michigan, a person has to feel that they are being physically threatened or their property is being destroyed, to engage in violence (and be considered self defense).
2006-10-07 06:03:31 · answer #5 · answered by lefty 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
It depends on the state. Too many variables according to the question.
If your life is in jeopardy, by all means you can shoot them, same as if your walking down the street.
2006-10-07 06:49:48 · answer #6 · answered by .45 Peacemaker 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I think in Texas we can shoot them if they are coming INTO our house, but if they are LEAVING you cannot, so pay attention to which direction the person is facing. Also, shoot to kill because if you only wound them THEY can sue YOU for assault! Please come back and tell us what state you are in, or if you are just collecting info from every state.
2006-10-07 07:33:05 · answer #7 · answered by ANGELa 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Not anymore in Australia! U used to be able to on self defence but nowadays u will be charged 4 assault, murder or whatever and self defence does not apply anymore! Stupid idea, every1 should be allowed 2 defend themselves.
2006-10-07 06:12:46 · answer #8 · answered by ozgirl 1 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Independent of everything, you got the moral obligation to defend yourself and your family, even against the law. Survival is the main law!
2006-10-07 06:25:59 · answer #9 · answered by Ledbird 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
We have the "make my day" law which allows you to use deadly force on your property if your feel you life is in danger. However, you need to check your own state laws.
2006-10-07 06:09:07 · answer #10 · answered by luveeduvee 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋