The right to fight back

[Gob]

This could be a huge vote winner for the Tories...

Homeowners and shopkeepers are to be given the right to protect themselves against burglars and robbers.

They will now be allowed to use reasonable force if they perceive a threat to their property. Previously they could act only when they feared for their lives.

The surprise proposal is a response to public outrage over cases such as that of Tony Martin, the Norfolk farmer who shot a burglar dead, and Munir Hussain, who chased and beat a man who had held his family at knifepoint.

The proposal comes after criticism over cases like those of Tony Martin, left, and Munir Hussain

It is one of a series of reforms unveiled by David Cameron in a sharp turn to the right on law and order. As well as more life sentences there will be tougher punishments for knife crime.

Liberal Democrats were quick to condemn the package, especially the pledge for mandatory life sentences for those committing very serious offences twice.

The Prime Minister finally scrapped controversial proposals to halve jail terms for offenders who enter early guilty pleas.

Other measures include:

A six-month mandatory sentence for adults who use a knife to threaten or intimidate;
Prisoners made to work while inside, with earnings used to compensate victims;
Tougher community sentences, with longer curfews, travel bans,confiscation of assets and £2,500 fines for non-compliance;
Plans for a criminal offence of squatting.

Mr Cameron and Justice Secretary Kenneth Clarke attempted to deny they were making a U-turn, insisting previous Coalition policies had merely been 'proposals'.

But in reality, yesterday's package marked not only a rowing back on sentence discounts following a public outcry, but a complete shift of tone and a bid to restore the Tories' reputation on law and order.

The Prime Minister's intervention was a crushing blow for both Mr Clarke and Deputy Prime Minister Nick Clegg, who chaired a Cabinet committee that signed off the reforms.

The father of murdered schoolboy Damilola Taylor welcomed the about-turn, but called for the Justice Secretary to be sacked.

Richard Taylor said: 'Ken Clarke does not know what is going on in the streets, he does not know what criminality is about.'

The 'weak thing to do', he claimed, was to keep 'ploughing on' even when it became clear there was a better way of doing things.

'Being strong is about being prepared to admit you didn't get everything right the first time, you are going to improve it and make it better,' Mr Cameron said.

'My mission is to make sure that families can feel safe in their homes and they can walk the streets freely and without fear. The public need to know that dangerous criminals will be locked up for a very long time.

'We want prisons to be places of punishment with a purpose, instead of prisoners setting in their cells. We will require them to work hard and reform themselves.'

The self-defence clause is likely be added to the sentencing bill over the next few months.

The error was made in a calculation and an updated impact assessment will be published alongside the justice bill.

Guidance to police, prosecutors and the courts will be revised to give clarity about when it is sensible to prosecute.

They have previously had to decide what constitutes excessive force by using legal precedent.

Amending the law in the way Mr Cameron suggests would make it clear that using force to defend property, as well as the person, is reasonable. Exactly what constitutes 'reasonable force' remains to be clarified.

With 23,000 violent crimes against householders every year, campaigners say the case for a change to legislation is growing ever stronger.

The tough sentencing rules would mean predatory violent and sexual attackers who carry out a second serious offence will face a mandatory life term.

The 'two strikes and you're out' policy, first proposed by Michael Howard in 1997, will mean the most dangerous criminals automatically receiving a life term after a second offence.

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article ... z1PxuaYps4

[BoSoxGal]

We have a very expansive right to self defense in Montana under our recently adopted justifiable use of force statute. The affirmative defense puts the burden on the State to prove that the defendant who used force in alleged self-defense did not have reasonable apprehension of fear. This is a very difficult burden to meet. There is no duty to retreat from a threat in Montana.

I have mixed feelings about the law, because in a few cases it seems to have allowed juries to excuse apparent excessive use of force in defense of self/others.

I do myself carry a concealed weapon, largely because of fears that arose in me while representing a seriously mentally ill client who began voicing very weird delusions about and threats toward me to me, my colleagues & local law enforcement with whom he had repeated contact.

[Gob]

I have mixed feelings about the law, because in a few cases it seems to have allowed juries to excuse apparent excessive use of force in defense of self/others.

The pendulum may have swung too far in the opposite direction, but for years in the UK it was a villains charter, and many innocent people defending themselves and their property were punished for it.

I'm much more of a mind that if you break into my house and threaten my wife or child with a knife, then to be "excessive" my response would have to verge on, on actually be, murder.

[BoSoxGal]

One case here that resulted in no prosecution involved a guy who shot a bigger coworker who had punched him on the job at WalMart:

http://m.billingsgazette.com/mobile-tou ... 002e0.html

That article includes a good discussion of the 'castle doctrine' legislation, which obviously applies outside the home here in Montana.

More recently the State tried a guy twice, resulting in two hung juries, who had shot his 'friend' through a closed and locked front door, killing him. The two had been drinking and partying all night, eventually got into an argument, which resulted in the shooter getting the worst of the hits. He kicked his friend out, the friend came back knocking to apologize (according to a witness present at the scene) but the shooter claimed he had reasonable apprehension of bodily injury so he blew the guy away through the closed & locked front door rather than dialing 911 and awaiting arrival of LE to handle the alleged threat.

That is a case where I think excessive force was used. Ditto shooting your coworker in the head in response to one punch. But I would admittedly err on the side of trying to avoid the taking of another life, or risk thereof.

[dales]

I do myself carry a concealed weapon, largely because of fears that arose in me while representing a seriously mentally ill client who began voicing very weird delusions about and threats toward me to me, my colleagues & local law enforcement with whom he had repeated contact.

CCW permits are near IMPOSSIBLE to obtain in CA unless one is a high-level politician or has connections. I trust Montana is a little more reasonable.

[BoSoxGal]

It's a 'shall issue' standard here.

http://www.doj.mt.gov/enforcement/crimi ... eapons.asp

[Gob]

This is the sort of issue it was meant to address BSG.

A shopkeeper has been fined £250 and given a criminal record because he fought back when he was attacked by shoplifters.

Jacob Smyth chased three youths out of his hardware shop in Penzance, Cornwall, when he was set upon. When he was kicked in the groin by one of the hooded youths who had stolen cans of spray paint Mr Smyth hit back.

Police issued fixed penalty tickets to the shoplifters but charged Mr Smyth and a colleague with assault.

Yesterday he pleaded guilty to assault at Truro Magistrates’ Court. He claimed after the hearing that he had been advised to plead guilty because otherwise he could have faced a six month prison sentence.

The court was told that Mr Smyth, a father of three, caught the youths stealing the spray cans in October last year. Two of them turned on him and he was kicked in his groin just weeks after a vasectomy operation. He retaliated and punched 18-year-old Craig Spiller to the ground.

Paul Gallagher, defending, said: “The court can only imagine what they intended to do with that spray paint. He could see the cans poking out of their pockets. He leant forward to get them and at that stage he was set upon.

“He did punch one of them to get him off. In the heat of the moment he kicked him once or twice. Initially he was acting in self defence. Frustration at the situation took over. The lads were interviewed and given fixed penalty notices by police but unfortunately for Mr Smyth ended up in court today.

“He was the one who was trying to do the right thing and get his stolen property back.”

Julian Herbert, prosecuting, said the “aggravating factor” of the case was shop staff “taking the law into their own hands”. Fining Mr Smyth £250 and ordering him to pay £43 costs, Angy Haslam, chairman of the magistrates, said: “The act was aggravated by the fact you kicked the victim on the ground. We feel it has been mitigated because you acted in self defence.”

Speaking outside court, Mr Smyth said: “I did nothing wrong. I was getting a good beating from this lad. I had no choice but to defend myself.

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/u ... 008072.ece

[Liberty1]

It's a 'shall issue' standard here.

Same in New Mexico. I actually went through the training, qualification and finger printing for CCW, but I never sent in the documentation. I misplaced my birth certificate for a couple of months and then just let the time slip by.

[Gob]

A bungling knife-wielding robber was sent running from an off-licence after the owner's dog bit him three times in the groin.

Eve Watson was confronted with the would-be thief, who demanded she open the till at the Bargain Booze off-licence in Torquay, Devon.



But Mrs Watson fought off the robber with the help of her Staffordshire Bull Terrier Cane, who sent him fleeing by clamping his jaws on to the man's crotch.

The terrier sank his jaws into his groin at least three times, while fearless Mrs Watson fought the man off with a craft knife.

The drama unfolded on Saturday afternoon when the offender, who Mrs Watson believes was not English, strolled in to the store and told her young assistant: 'I've got a knife. Open the till.'

Mrs Watson, 55, leapt to the defence of her colleague with the help of Cane, and soon scared him off.

Mrs Watson said: 'I told him he was having nothing and I grabbed him.

'My assistant was shouting and screaming by now. I then saw the craft knife and told him: 'So you want to play with knives do you?'

'We had a good old scrap and I think he cut his hand on the knife. Cane was jumping up and down and bit him at least three times where it really can hurt.

'I don't think he drew blood though - but it must have hurt. In the end he leapt over the counter and ran off.'


Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article ... z1QcXfqVkZ

[rubato]

Emotionally satisfying but of any practical benefit?

Little chance of it.

The "gun nut" right in the US feeds off of this kind of bullshit.

yrs,
rubato

[loCAtek]

Staffordshire Bull Terrier = Pitbull

Rock on! That's funnier than shit!

[Gob]

Staffordshire Bull Terrier = Pitbull

Rock on! That's funnier than shit!

What?

[The Hen]

Allow me:

One breed of dog = a totally different breed of dog.

Wow!

That is funnier than excrement.

[Gob]

Oh god, she really thinks a Staffy, the most cuddly and soft natured dog is in some way equivalent to a "pit bull"?

Although individual differences in personality exist, common traits exist throughout the Staffords. Due to its breeding, the modern dog is known for its character of indomitable courage, high intelligence, and tenacity. This, coupled with its affection for its friends, its off-duty quietness and trustworthy stability, make it a foremost all-purpose dog.

It has been said that "No breed is more loving with its family". It is the only breed to have the words 'totally reliable' in its breed standard. Furthermore, the Staffordshire Bull Terrier is one of only two breeds from over 190 recognized by the UK Kennel Club to have a mention of the breed's suitability with children.

The breed is naturally muscular and may appear intimidating; however, because of their natural fondness for people, most Staffords are temperamentally ill-suited for guard or attack-dog training. Staffordshire Bull Terrier puppies are very easy to house train

Back to the OP, before she takes this one off on one of her wild flights of stupidity..

Justice Secretary Ken Clarke has said a householder who knifes a burglar will not have committed a criminal offence under plans to clarify the law on self-defence in England.

He told the BBC people were entitled to use "whatever force necessary" to protect themselves and their homes.

David Cameron recently said the issue should be put "beyond doubt".

Labour said the law was "already clear" and the remarks were a "smokescreen" to hide confusion over sentencing changes.

Mr Clarke has come under attack over proposed changes to sentencing policy, but has denied making a series of U-turns on key elements amid pressure from Tory MPs and sections of the media.

He has said he is committed to axing indeterminate prison sentences, despite opposition from many Tory MPs.

He said indeterminate sentences - where prisoners can be held beyond their original release date if they still pose a danger to society - had been an "unmitigated disaster" since they had been introduced by Tony Blair and suggested an alternative to them would be in place within two years.

On people's rights to self-defence in their homes, Mr Clarke said there was "constant doubt" about the issue and the proposed legislation would make this "much clearer".

Under the terms of the 2008 Criminal Justice and Immigration Act, homeowners who use "reasonable force" to protect themselves against intruders should not be prosecuted, providing they use no more force than is absolutely necessary.
'Absolute right'

But the government is set to place people's right to defend their property, long present in common law, in statute law.

"It's quite obvious that people are entitled to use whatever force is necessary to protect themselves and their homes," Mr Clarke said.

We will make it quite clear you can hit the burglar with the poker if he's in the house and you have a perfect defence when you do so”

Asked about what this would mean in practice, he said: "If an old lady finds she's got an 18 year old burgling her house and she picks up a kitchen knife and sticks it in him she has not committed a criminal offence and we will make that clear."

He added: "We will make it quite clear you can hit the burglar with the poker if he's in the house and you have a perfect defence when you do so."

Mr Clarke said legal protection would not extend to anyone shooting a burglar in the back when they were fleeing or "getting their friends together to beat them up".

"We all know what we mean when we say a person has an absolute right to defend themselves and their home and reasonable force.

"Nobody should prosecute and nobody should ever convict anybody who takes those steps."

[loCAtek]

Breeds
[edit] American pit bull terrier
Main article: American Pit Bull Terrier
American pit bull terrier

The American pit bull terrier is the product of interbreeding between terriers and a breed of bulldogs to produce a dog that combined the gameness of the terrier with the strength and athleticism of the bulldog.[9] These dogs were initially bred in England, Ireland, and Scotland, and arrived in the United States with immigrants from these countries. In the United States, these dogs were used as catch dogs for semi-wild cattle and hogs, to hunt, to drive livestock, and as family companions[9]. Some have been selectively bred for their fighting prowess.[10] [11]

The United Kennel Club (UKC) was the first registry to recognize the American pit bull terrier.[12] UKC founder C. Z. Bennett assigned UKC registration number 1 to his own dog, "Bennett's Ring", as an American pit bull terrier in 1898.[9]

American pit bull terriers successfully fill the role of companion dog, police dog,[13][14] and therapy dog.[15] Terriers in general have a higher tendency towards dog aggression[16] and American pit bull terriers constitute the majority of dogs used for illegal dog fighting in the United States.[17] In addition, law enforcement organizations report these dogs are used for other nefarious purposes, such as guarding illegal narcotics operations,[18] use against the police,[19] and as weapons.[20]

The fighting reputation of pit bull-type dogs led the San Francisco Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals in 1996 to relabel pit bull terriers as "St. Francis terriers" (not associated with the "terrier" mascot of St. Francis College in New York) so that they might be more readily adopted;[21] 60 temperament-screened dogs were adopted until the program was halted after several of the newly adopted dogs killed cats.[22] The New York City Center for Animal Care and Control tried a similar approach in 2004 by relabeling their pit bull terriers as "New Yorkies", but dropped the idea in the face of overwhelming public opposition.[23][24]


[edit] American Staffordshire terrier
Main article: American Staffordshire Terrier
American Staffordshire terrier

The American Staffordshire terrier was the product of 19th century interbreeding between bulldogs and terriers that produced the "bull-and-terrier dog", "Half and Half", and at times "pit dog" or "pit bullterrier," the last named becoming the "Staffordshire bull terrier" in England. The bulldog of that time differed from the modern Bulldog, having a full muzzle and a long, tapering tail. There is some debate whether the White English terrier, the Black and Tan terrier, the Fox terrier or some combination thereof were used. These dogs began to find their way into America as early as 1870 where they became known as pit dog, pit bull terrier, later American bull terrier, and still later as Yankee terrier.[25] They were imported primarily, but not exclusively, for pit fighting.[26]

In 1936, they were accepted by the American Kennel Club (AKC) as "Staffordshire terriers". The name of the breed was revised effective January 1, 1972, to "American Staffordshire terrier" since breeders in the United States had developed a type which is heavier in weight than the Staffordshire bull terrier of England and the name was changed to distinguish them as separate breeds.[25]
[edit] Staffordshire bull terrier

[Gob]

Oh god...

[Rick]

I wanna play:

http://www.dogbreedinfo.com/americanstaffordshire.htm

In the nineteenth century in the English region of Staffordshire, crossing among the Bulldog and various terriers developed the muscular, active, combative Staffordshire Bullterrier. Brought to the United States, the breed was preferred by American breeders who increased its weight and gave it a more powerful head. Now recognized as a separate breed, the American Staffordshire is larger and heavier than his British cousin, the Staffordshire Bull Terrier. After dog fighting was banned in the United States in 1900, two strains of these dogs were developed, a show strain and a fighting dog strain. The show strain was labeled the American Staffordshire, while the fighting dog strain was labeled the American Pit Bull Terrier. The two are now being recognized as separate breeds. Today the American Pit Bull Terrier is being bred with the same gentle qualities as the American Staffordshire Terrier. They both make great pets with the right kind of owner. The American Staffordshire Terrier was recognized by the AKC in 1936. Some of the American Staffordshire Terriers talents are watchdog, guarding, police work, weight pulling and agility.

Anyhow back to fighting back...

[dales]

[The Hen]

He doesn't look anything like a dog, either Pit or Staffy.

[Sean]

Well I've got a golden cocker spaniel which (as any fule no) = rottweiler.

Do I win a prize?