A millionaire businessman who fought back against a knife-wielding burglar was jailed for two-and-a-half years yesterday. But his attacker has been spared prison.
Munir Hussain, 53, and his family were tied up and told to lie on the floor by career criminal Waled Salem, who burst into his home with two other masked men.
Mr Hussain escaped and attacked Salem with a metal pole and a cricket bat. But yesterday it was the businessman who was starting a prison sentence for his 'very violent revenge'.
Read more: Millionaire Munir Hussain who fought off a knife-wielding burglar is jailed (while the intruder is let off) | Mail Online
What do you all think: Is it reasonable to suspect that criminals such as this may return with a gun or do the same to another family if not stopped permanently? Is it a reasonable defense to claim emotion caused this man and his brother to chase the thief down and beat him senseless?
I know one thing, I'd defend my family and myself, but is this self defense?
Jailed for self defense?
Jailed for self defense?
“Those who can make you believe absurdities can make you commit atrocities,â€
Voltaire
I have only one thing to do and that's
Be the wave that I am and then
Sink back into the ocean
Fiona Apple
Voltaire
I have only one thing to do and that's
Be the wave that I am and then
Sink back into the ocean
Fiona Apple
Jailed for self defense?
It had nothing to do with self defence, it was retribution.
This is from the "full transcript of the remarks of Judge John Reddihough, who sentenced Munir and Tokeer Hussain to prison at Reading Crown Court yesterday". It's worth reading the entire transcript. It is clear that you pursued that invader of your home, Waled Salem, up the road outside and you were joined by others, including your brother and co-defendant Tokeer Hussain. Salem was apprehended and cornered in the front garden of ...[another house in Desborough Park Road] and brought to the ground.
Four men including, as the jury found, the two of you, armed with weapons then proceeded to carry out a dreadful, violent attack upon him when he was defenceless on the ground. That attack involved kicking and punching him, stamping upon him and striking him with weapons, including a hockey stick and a cricket bat.
The witness, Miranda McCloughlin, who was at the window immediately adjacent to where the attack was taking place pleaded with you and the two others to stop, telling you that you were going to kill the man on the ground. She was disregarded and the attack continued. She described you and the other two men involved as acting like a pack of animals.
It is purely fortuitous that the man Salem was not killed. As it was, he suffered a number of fractures, including a skull fracture, and brain damage, giving rise to permanent injury. It is somewhat ironic that by reason of the head injuries inflicted upon him he was unfit to plead and could not be sentenced to serve the very long period of imprisonment which would otherwise have been imposed upon him.
The prosecution rightly made it plain that there was no allegation against you, Munir Hussain, in respect of the force you used against Salem in defending your own home and family or of the force used by either of you in apprehending Salem. However, the attack which then occurred was totally unnecessary and amounted to a very violent revenge attack on a defenceless man.
Munir and Tokeer Hussain sentencing: Judge's remarks
People have legally killed their attackers in England in the past, when they've been defending themselves. This is a different issue entirely.
This is from the "full transcript of the remarks of Judge John Reddihough, who sentenced Munir and Tokeer Hussain to prison at Reading Crown Court yesterday". It's worth reading the entire transcript. It is clear that you pursued that invader of your home, Waled Salem, up the road outside and you were joined by others, including your brother and co-defendant Tokeer Hussain. Salem was apprehended and cornered in the front garden of ...[another house in Desborough Park Road] and brought to the ground.
Four men including, as the jury found, the two of you, armed with weapons then proceeded to carry out a dreadful, violent attack upon him when he was defenceless on the ground. That attack involved kicking and punching him, stamping upon him and striking him with weapons, including a hockey stick and a cricket bat.
The witness, Miranda McCloughlin, who was at the window immediately adjacent to where the attack was taking place pleaded with you and the two others to stop, telling you that you were going to kill the man on the ground. She was disregarded and the attack continued. She described you and the other two men involved as acting like a pack of animals.
It is purely fortuitous that the man Salem was not killed. As it was, he suffered a number of fractures, including a skull fracture, and brain damage, giving rise to permanent injury. It is somewhat ironic that by reason of the head injuries inflicted upon him he was unfit to plead and could not be sentenced to serve the very long period of imprisonment which would otherwise have been imposed upon him.
The prosecution rightly made it plain that there was no allegation against you, Munir Hussain, in respect of the force you used against Salem in defending your own home and family or of the force used by either of you in apprehending Salem. However, the attack which then occurred was totally unnecessary and amounted to a very violent revenge attack on a defenceless man.
Munir and Tokeer Hussain sentencing: Judge's remarks
People have legally killed their attackers in England in the past, when they've been defending themselves. This is a different issue entirely.
Nullius in verba ... ☎||||||||||| ... To Fate I sue, of other means bereft, the only refuge for the wretched left.
When flower power came along I stood for Human Rights, marched around for peace and freedom, had some nooky every night - we took it serious.
Who has a spare two minutes to play in this month's FG Trivia game! ... My other OS is Slackware.
When flower power came along I stood for Human Rights, marched around for peace and freedom, had some nooky every night - we took it serious.
Who has a spare two minutes to play in this month's FG Trivia game! ... My other OS is Slackware.
Jailed for self defense?
Do you think 30 and 39 months for Hussain and his brother are just sentences?
“Those who can make you believe absurdities can make you commit atrocities,â€
Voltaire
I have only one thing to do and that's
Be the wave that I am and then
Sink back into the ocean
Fiona Apple
Voltaire
I have only one thing to do and that's
Be the wave that I am and then
Sink back into the ocean
Fiona Apple
Jailed for self defense?
I'd release them tomorrow on the ground that they're no more a danger to the public than I am. What point is served in holding them in prison?
Nullius in verba ... ☎||||||||||| ... To Fate I sue, of other means bereft, the only refuge for the wretched left.
When flower power came along I stood for Human Rights, marched around for peace and freedom, had some nooky every night - we took it serious.
Who has a spare two minutes to play in this month's FG Trivia game! ... My other OS is Slackware.
When flower power came along I stood for Human Rights, marched around for peace and freedom, had some nooky every night - we took it serious.
Who has a spare two minutes to play in this month's FG Trivia game! ... My other OS is Slackware.
Jailed for self defense?
spot;1273180 wrote: I'd release them tomorrow on the ground that they're no more a danger to the public than I am. What point is served in holding them in prison?I'd agree but then isn't that taking precedence over any crime they've committed?
I guess I should ask if victim retribution is fair?
I guess I should ask if victim retribution is fair?
“Those who can make you believe absurdities can make you commit atrocities,â€
Voltaire
I have only one thing to do and that's
Be the wave that I am and then
Sink back into the ocean
Fiona Apple
Voltaire
I have only one thing to do and that's
Be the wave that I am and then
Sink back into the ocean
Fiona Apple
Jailed for self defense?
No form of retribution is fair whether it's exacted by the victim or by the court.
Releasing prisoners once they pose no more threat to the community than the average man on the street should be the essential cornerstone of the justice system.
Justice for Waled Salem ought to consist of his being awarded sufficient of the fortune of his assailants to compensate him for his injuries. Given the injuries I'd say that would be millions. That's a lot more practical, for someone with brain damage facing life as a paraplegic incapable of coherent thought, than having his assailants locked up for a year and a half.
Civil compensation, in my opinion, can provide absolutely everything that individuals or society as a whole attempts to get from "retributive" justice. Jail should be a protective measure with an incentive toward rehabilitation designed in at all levels, from the mission statement down to officers' pay.
Releasing prisoners once they pose no more threat to the community than the average man on the street should be the essential cornerstone of the justice system.
Justice for Waled Salem ought to consist of his being awarded sufficient of the fortune of his assailants to compensate him for his injuries. Given the injuries I'd say that would be millions. That's a lot more practical, for someone with brain damage facing life as a paraplegic incapable of coherent thought, than having his assailants locked up for a year and a half.
Civil compensation, in my opinion, can provide absolutely everything that individuals or society as a whole attempts to get from "retributive" justice. Jail should be a protective measure with an incentive toward rehabilitation designed in at all levels, from the mission statement down to officers' pay.
Nullius in verba ... ☎||||||||||| ... To Fate I sue, of other means bereft, the only refuge for the wretched left.
When flower power came along I stood for Human Rights, marched around for peace and freedom, had some nooky every night - we took it serious.
Who has a spare two minutes to play in this month's FG Trivia game! ... My other OS is Slackware.
When flower power came along I stood for Human Rights, marched around for peace and freedom, had some nooky every night - we took it serious.
Who has a spare two minutes to play in this month's FG Trivia game! ... My other OS is Slackware.
Jailed for self defense?
spot;1273192 wrote: No form of retribution is fair whether it's exacted by the victim or by the court.
Releasing prisoners once they pose no more threat to the community than the average man on the street should be the essential cornerstone of the justice system.
Justice for Waled Salem ought to consist of his being awarded sufficient of the fortune of his assailants to compensate him for his injuries. Given the injuries I'd say that would be millions. That's a lot more practical, for someone with brain damage facing life as a paraplegic incapable of coherent thought, than having his assailants locked up for a year and a half.
Civil compensation, in my opinion, can provide absolutely everything that individuals or society as a whole attempts to get from "retributive" justice. Jail should be a protective measure with an incentive toward rehabilitation designed in at all levels, from the mission statement down to officers' pay.What then do you think Hussain should have done once freed and Salem fled?
Releasing prisoners once they pose no more threat to the community than the average man on the street should be the essential cornerstone of the justice system.
Justice for Waled Salem ought to consist of his being awarded sufficient of the fortune of his assailants to compensate him for his injuries. Given the injuries I'd say that would be millions. That's a lot more practical, for someone with brain damage facing life as a paraplegic incapable of coherent thought, than having his assailants locked up for a year and a half.
Civil compensation, in my opinion, can provide absolutely everything that individuals or society as a whole attempts to get from "retributive" justice. Jail should be a protective measure with an incentive toward rehabilitation designed in at all levels, from the mission statement down to officers' pay.What then do you think Hussain should have done once freed and Salem fled?
“Those who can make you believe absurdities can make you commit atrocities,â€
Voltaire
I have only one thing to do and that's
Be the wave that I am and then
Sink back into the ocean
Fiona Apple
Voltaire
I have only one thing to do and that's
Be the wave that I am and then
Sink back into the ocean
Fiona Apple
Jailed for self defense?
I'd not single Mr Hussain out, I'd put the same onus on all the people there at the time. Inform the police immediately. By all means make hot pursuit (the old Hue And Cry) if those present and those they can summon are capable. By all means, if that results in apprehending one of the attackers, arrest him and hand him over as soon as possible to the police. The extent to which force can be employed in all these stages is a matter of law. It obviously doesn't cover what actually happened.
Nullius in verba ... ☎||||||||||| ... To Fate I sue, of other means bereft, the only refuge for the wretched left.
When flower power came along I stood for Human Rights, marched around for peace and freedom, had some nooky every night - we took it serious.
Who has a spare two minutes to play in this month's FG Trivia game! ... My other OS is Slackware.
When flower power came along I stood for Human Rights, marched around for peace and freedom, had some nooky every night - we took it serious.
Who has a spare two minutes to play in this month's FG Trivia game! ... My other OS is Slackware.
Jailed for self defense?
he was jailed for beating the person half to death on the floor
self defence is just that to defend ones self when he was running away he was no threat when he was unconscious on the floor he was also no threat so self defence is no defence
self defence is just that to defend ones self when he was running away he was no threat when he was unconscious on the floor he was also no threat so self defence is no defence
"To be foolish and to recognize that one is foolish, is better than to be foolish and imagine that one is wise."
Jailed for self defense?
also bear in mind who made the decision as to the guilt
The jury was sure that you were involved and convicted you of this serious offence of causing grievous bodily harm with intent to cause such harm.
The daily mail is a right wing rag trying to portray the law as being on the side of criminals. Hence the inaccurate reporting.
In reality if you injure someone in self defence opr even kill them it will be a JURY of your peers who will decide if your action was reasonable not a judge.
The jury was sure that you were involved and convicted you of this serious offence of causing grievous bodily harm with intent to cause such harm.
The daily mail is a right wing rag trying to portray the law as being on the side of criminals. Hence the inaccurate reporting.
In reality if you injure someone in self defence opr even kill them it will be a JURY of your peers who will decide if your action was reasonable not a judge.
Jailed for self defense?
gmc;1273235 wrote: The daily mail is a right wing rag trying to portray the law as being on the side of criminals. Hence the inaccurate reporting. The alternative would be a declaration that anyone engaged in crime immediately became outlawed, and anyone doing anything to them was within their rights and not answerable to the law.
I don't remember any time in the history of England where outlawry happened instantly rather than by the declaration of a sheriff or court.
I don't remember any time in the history of England where outlawry happened instantly rather than by the declaration of a sheriff or court.
Nullius in verba ... ☎||||||||||| ... To Fate I sue, of other means bereft, the only refuge for the wretched left.
When flower power came along I stood for Human Rights, marched around for peace and freedom, had some nooky every night - we took it serious.
Who has a spare two minutes to play in this month's FG Trivia game! ... My other OS is Slackware.
When flower power came along I stood for Human Rights, marched around for peace and freedom, had some nooky every night - we took it serious.
Who has a spare two minutes to play in this month's FG Trivia game! ... My other OS is Slackware.
Jailed for self defense?
spot;1273180 wrote: I'd release them tomorrow on the ground that they're no more a danger to the public than I am. What point is served in holding them in prison?
No punishment for the crime they committed ?
No punishment for the crime they committed ?
I thought I knew more than this until I opened my mouth
Jailed for self defense?
Bruv;1273304 wrote: No punishment for the crime they committed ?Punish them by all means. Why does that imply jail?
http://www.forumgarden.com/forums/socie ... ost1273192
http://www.forumgarden.com/forums/socie ... ost1273192
Nullius in verba ... ☎||||||||||| ... To Fate I sue, of other means bereft, the only refuge for the wretched left.
When flower power came along I stood for Human Rights, marched around for peace and freedom, had some nooky every night - we took it serious.
Who has a spare two minutes to play in this month's FG Trivia game! ... My other OS is Slackware.
When flower power came along I stood for Human Rights, marched around for peace and freedom, had some nooky every night - we took it serious.
Who has a spare two minutes to play in this month's FG Trivia game! ... My other OS is Slackware.
Jailed for self defense?
How would you punish a millionaire ?
Curtail their freedom, sounds appropriate to me.
Curtail their freedom, sounds appropriate to me.
I thought I knew more than this until I opened my mouth
Jailed for self defense?
Bruv;1273314 wrote: How would you punish a millionaire ?
Curtail their freedom, sounds appropriate to me.
Perhaps that's why the jail population's so high and so few people get cured of criminal behaviour while they're in jail. Jail has to have a purpose. You'd call that purpose punishment?
Did you click my link? Do you not think recompense offers a practical expression of justice to the victim? How does jail do that?
I've no problem at all with curtailing the freedom of criminals, I'd just like to know what it's being curtailed to achieve.
Curtail their freedom, sounds appropriate to me.
Perhaps that's why the jail population's so high and so few people get cured of criminal behaviour while they're in jail. Jail has to have a purpose. You'd call that purpose punishment?
Did you click my link? Do you not think recompense offers a practical expression of justice to the victim? How does jail do that?
I've no problem at all with curtailing the freedom of criminals, I'd just like to know what it's being curtailed to achieve.
Nullius in verba ... ☎||||||||||| ... To Fate I sue, of other means bereft, the only refuge for the wretched left.
When flower power came along I stood for Human Rights, marched around for peace and freedom, had some nooky every night - we took it serious.
Who has a spare two minutes to play in this month's FG Trivia game! ... My other OS is Slackware.
When flower power came along I stood for Human Rights, marched around for peace and freedom, had some nooky every night - we took it serious.
Who has a spare two minutes to play in this month's FG Trivia game! ... My other OS is Slackware.
Jailed for self defense?
It's an interesting case. I think that self-defense is justified, but I'm not sure about allowing home owners to harm or kill anyone that breaks in (after they have been subdued). Because then, if a person wanted to kill someone, they could just club them in the head, drag them into their house, and say they broke in. It's a lot of power to put in the hands of someone, with no checks and balances, trusting only the person left standing.
Even if one person has a criminal record, who's to say the intruder isn't hired to do another job, then lured into the house to be finished off. Not that I think this happened in this case, but it opens a lot of avenues of potential abuse, if someone wants to abuse that power.
Even if one person has a criminal record, who's to say the intruder isn't hired to do another job, then lured into the house to be finished off. Not that I think this happened in this case, but it opens a lot of avenues of potential abuse, if someone wants to abuse that power.
-
fuzzywuzzy
- Posts: 6596
- Joined: Mon Feb 02, 2009 5:35 pm
Jailed for self defense?
sounds a bit ganglandish to me.......who cares!!! How much did he owe...the victim I mean.
Jailed for self defense?
spot;1273321 wrote: Perhaps that's why the jail population's so high and so few people get cured of criminal behaviour while they're in jail. Jail has to have a purpose. You'd call that purpose punishment?
Did you click my link? Do you not think recompense offers a practical expression of justice to the victim? How does jail do that?
I've no problem at all with curtailing the freedom of criminals, I'd just like to know what it's being curtailed to achieve.
The purpose of jail seems to be the point of disagreement.
I agree that jail itself should not be a punishment but a tool for segregation from society. I'm not convinced that's what the majority of society thinks it is. If jail is a punishment then we are assuming that segregating criminals into isolated time spent solely with other criminals is going to somehow repair the problem. That seems implausible.
If jail is not a punishment, then it is currently a hollow machine. There is no rehabilitation or counseling taking place. That seems to be a good indication as to why criminals rarely become productive citizens upon release.
It amazes me that what seems obvious has gone without remedy for so long. My only guess is that the need for revenge and punishment is a stronger urge in society than the need for peace.
Did you click my link? Do you not think recompense offers a practical expression of justice to the victim? How does jail do that?
I've no problem at all with curtailing the freedom of criminals, I'd just like to know what it's being curtailed to achieve.
The purpose of jail seems to be the point of disagreement.
I agree that jail itself should not be a punishment but a tool for segregation from society. I'm not convinced that's what the majority of society thinks it is. If jail is a punishment then we are assuming that segregating criminals into isolated time spent solely with other criminals is going to somehow repair the problem. That seems implausible.
If jail is not a punishment, then it is currently a hollow machine. There is no rehabilitation or counseling taking place. That seems to be a good indication as to why criminals rarely become productive citizens upon release.
It amazes me that what seems obvious has gone without remedy for so long. My only guess is that the need for revenge and punishment is a stronger urge in society than the need for peace.
Jailed for self defense?
koan;1273414 wrote: The purpose of jail seems to be the point of disagreement.
I agree that jail itself should not be a punishment but a tool for segregation from society. I'm not convinced that's what the majority of society thinks it is. If jail is a punishment then we are assuming that segregating criminals into isolated time spent solely with other criminals is going to somehow repair the problem. That seems implausible.
If jail is not a punishment, then it is currently a hollow machine. There is no rehabilitation or counseling taking place. That seems to be a good indication as to why criminals rarely become productive citizens upon release.
It amazes me that what seems obvious has gone without remedy for so long. My only guess is that the need for revenge and punishment is a stronger urge in society than the need for peace.
Actually no it's not. The whole basis of common law is a community sitting down and deciding what is fair, the jury system is predicated on the assumption that a group of peers are the best people to dispassionately judge whether the action taken by someone was reasonable in the circumstances and it's up to the accuser to prove the guilt or otherwise. For historical reasons in the UK The crown used to be the layer down of law but the jury was brought BACK as a curb to the use of arbitrary power by the authorities. The first thing any government does that wants to rule without people questioning them is take away the freedom from arbitrary arrest and take away the right to trial. That was the basis of the greek and roman republics, people got together to make rules and everybody had an equal say. Danelaw brought in the concept of blood money-a fine was paid for killing someone rather than sparking endless rounds of revenge inspired killing. Even the italian mafia had a system to stop blood feuds.
The need for revenge and punishment is not a stronger urge than the need for peace. An aye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth with the aim of punishing the transgressor for his sin is an import from the middle east. Our culture is more one of lets sit down and arbitrate this dispute decide the guilt or otherwise and then decide the punishment with all having a say in the matter and not fight unless we really have to. There's always been a constant to an fro between those who want punishment regardless and those who look deeper for the reasons and want longer term solutions. We're also also incredibly violent when finally provoked which is usually a shock to a criminal when they pick the wrong victim.
But there is a difference between giving someone damage while acting in self defence and smashing someone's head with a club when they are helpless-which the jury recognised. The odds are if it had been a chance blow in self defence he would have been found not guilty. Despite the daily mail reporting very few people have actually been found guilty of murder or assault while acting in self defence by a jury. If they have there are usually other factors at play.
I agree that jail itself should not be a punishment but a tool for segregation from society. I'm not convinced that's what the majority of society thinks it is. If jail is a punishment then we are assuming that segregating criminals into isolated time spent solely with other criminals is going to somehow repair the problem. That seems implausible.
If jail is not a punishment, then it is currently a hollow machine. There is no rehabilitation or counseling taking place. That seems to be a good indication as to why criminals rarely become productive citizens upon release.
It amazes me that what seems obvious has gone without remedy for so long. My only guess is that the need for revenge and punishment is a stronger urge in society than the need for peace.
Actually no it's not. The whole basis of common law is a community sitting down and deciding what is fair, the jury system is predicated on the assumption that a group of peers are the best people to dispassionately judge whether the action taken by someone was reasonable in the circumstances and it's up to the accuser to prove the guilt or otherwise. For historical reasons in the UK The crown used to be the layer down of law but the jury was brought BACK as a curb to the use of arbitrary power by the authorities. The first thing any government does that wants to rule without people questioning them is take away the freedom from arbitrary arrest and take away the right to trial. That was the basis of the greek and roman republics, people got together to make rules and everybody had an equal say. Danelaw brought in the concept of blood money-a fine was paid for killing someone rather than sparking endless rounds of revenge inspired killing. Even the italian mafia had a system to stop blood feuds.
The need for revenge and punishment is not a stronger urge than the need for peace. An aye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth with the aim of punishing the transgressor for his sin is an import from the middle east. Our culture is more one of lets sit down and arbitrate this dispute decide the guilt or otherwise and then decide the punishment with all having a say in the matter and not fight unless we really have to. There's always been a constant to an fro between those who want punishment regardless and those who look deeper for the reasons and want longer term solutions. We're also also incredibly violent when finally provoked which is usually a shock to a criminal when they pick the wrong victim.
But there is a difference between giving someone damage while acting in self defence and smashing someone's head with a club when they are helpless-which the jury recognised. The odds are if it had been a chance blow in self defence he would have been found not guilty. Despite the daily mail reporting very few people have actually been found guilty of murder or assault while acting in self defence by a jury. If they have there are usually other factors at play.
Jailed for self defense?
spot;1273321 wrote: Perhaps that's why the jail population's so high and so few people get cured of criminal behaviour while they're in jail. Jail has to have a purpose. You'd call that purpose punishment?
Did you click my link? Do you not think recompense offers a practical expression of justice to the victim? How does jail do that?
I've no problem at all with curtailing the freedom of criminals, I'd just like to know what it's being curtailed to achieve.
Yes I did click your link.
How can a few pounds recompense for brain damage ?
How does a few pounds, punish a millionaire ?
I thought justice demanded a punishment that hurts the criminal, how should we punish a millionaire other than something that he cannot buy himself out of ?
Did you click my link? Do you not think recompense offers a practical expression of justice to the victim? How does jail do that?
I've no problem at all with curtailing the freedom of criminals, I'd just like to know what it's being curtailed to achieve.
Yes I did click your link.
How can a few pounds recompense for brain damage ?
How does a few pounds, punish a millionaire ?
I thought justice demanded a punishment that hurts the criminal, how should we punish a millionaire other than something that he cannot buy himself out of ?
I thought I knew more than this until I opened my mouth
Jailed for self defense?
Bruv;1273433 wrote: Yes I did click your link.
How can a few pounds recompense for brain damage ?
How does a few pounds, punish a millionaire ?
I thought justice demanded a punishment that hurts the criminal, how should we punish a millionaire other than something that he cannot buy himself out of ?Perhaps along with what Spot suggests, have the guy give every penny he makes for the next 10 years to charity. If he owns a business, give nice wage increases to his employees and the rest to charity. I like the concept.
How can a few pounds recompense for brain damage ?
How does a few pounds, punish a millionaire ?
I thought justice demanded a punishment that hurts the criminal, how should we punish a millionaire other than something that he cannot buy himself out of ?Perhaps along with what Spot suggests, have the guy give every penny he makes for the next 10 years to charity. If he owns a business, give nice wage increases to his employees and the rest to charity. I like the concept.
“Those who can make you believe absurdities can make you commit atrocities,â€
Voltaire
I have only one thing to do and that's
Be the wave that I am and then
Sink back into the ocean
Fiona Apple
Voltaire
I have only one thing to do and that's
Be the wave that I am and then
Sink back into the ocean
Fiona Apple
Jailed for self defense?
Bruv;1273433 wrote: Yes I did click your link.
How can a few pounds recompense for brain damage ?
How does a few pounds, punish a millionaire ?
I thought justice demanded a punishment that hurts the criminal, how should we punish a millionaire other than something that he cannot buy himself out of ?
What I wrote in that linked post wasJustice for Waled Salem ought to consist of his being awarded sufficient of the fortune of his assailants to compensate him for his injuries. Given the injuries I'd say that would be millions. That's a lot more practical, for someone with brain damage facing life as a paraplegic incapable of coherent thought, than having his assailants locked up for a year and a half.
Where does "a few pounds" come from? I explicitly said millions. I'm not discussing a fine, I'm discussing adequate compensation for a lifetime's debility.
How can a few pounds recompense for brain damage ?
How does a few pounds, punish a millionaire ?
I thought justice demanded a punishment that hurts the criminal, how should we punish a millionaire other than something that he cannot buy himself out of ?
What I wrote in that linked post wasJustice for Waled Salem ought to consist of his being awarded sufficient of the fortune of his assailants to compensate him for his injuries. Given the injuries I'd say that would be millions. That's a lot more practical, for someone with brain damage facing life as a paraplegic incapable of coherent thought, than having his assailants locked up for a year and a half.
Where does "a few pounds" come from? I explicitly said millions. I'm not discussing a fine, I'm discussing adequate compensation for a lifetime's debility.
Nullius in verba ... ☎||||||||||| ... To Fate I sue, of other means bereft, the only refuge for the wretched left.
When flower power came along I stood for Human Rights, marched around for peace and freedom, had some nooky every night - we took it serious.
Who has a spare two minutes to play in this month's FG Trivia game! ... My other OS is Slackware.
When flower power came along I stood for Human Rights, marched around for peace and freedom, had some nooky every night - we took it serious.
Who has a spare two minutes to play in this month's FG Trivia game! ... My other OS is Slackware.
Jailed for self defense?
I hear Bruv asking where societies recompense is?
“Those who can make you believe absurdities can make you commit atrocities,â€
Voltaire
I have only one thing to do and that's
Be the wave that I am and then
Sink back into the ocean
Fiona Apple
Voltaire
I have only one thing to do and that's
Be the wave that I am and then
Sink back into the ocean
Fiona Apple
Jailed for self defense?
Ahso!;1273452 wrote: I hear Bruv asking where societies recompense is?
Society wasn't harmed. Waled Salem was harmed.
If society needs an expression of its disapproval, Munir Hussain and his brother were found guilty.
It all comes down to asking what the function of a jail term is.
Society wasn't harmed. Waled Salem was harmed.
If society needs an expression of its disapproval, Munir Hussain and his brother were found guilty.
It all comes down to asking what the function of a jail term is.
Nullius in verba ... ☎||||||||||| ... To Fate I sue, of other means bereft, the only refuge for the wretched left.
When flower power came along I stood for Human Rights, marched around for peace and freedom, had some nooky every night - we took it serious.
Who has a spare two minutes to play in this month's FG Trivia game! ... My other OS is Slackware.
When flower power came along I stood for Human Rights, marched around for peace and freedom, had some nooky every night - we took it serious.
Who has a spare two minutes to play in this month's FG Trivia game! ... My other OS is Slackware.
Jailed for self defense?
spot;1273454 wrote: Society wasn't harmed. Waled Salem was harmed.
If society needs an expression of its disapproval, Munir Hussain and his brother were found guilty.
It all comes down to asking what the function of a jail term is.I think many people believe that by a person recompensing society for bad behavior is their reward for good behavior?
If society needs an expression of its disapproval, Munir Hussain and his brother were found guilty.
It all comes down to asking what the function of a jail term is.I think many people believe that by a person recompensing society for bad behavior is their reward for good behavior?
“Those who can make you believe absurdities can make you commit atrocities,â€
Voltaire
I have only one thing to do and that's
Be the wave that I am and then
Sink back into the ocean
Fiona Apple
Voltaire
I have only one thing to do and that's
Be the wave that I am and then
Sink back into the ocean
Fiona Apple
Jailed for self defense?
Ahso!;1273468 wrote: I think many people believe that by a person recompensing society for bad behavior is their reward for good behavior?
By spending time unproductively in a jail, becoming a worse person in the process? It seems an unlikely point of view to me.
By spending time unproductively in a jail, becoming a worse person in the process? It seems an unlikely point of view to me.
Nullius in verba ... ☎||||||||||| ... To Fate I sue, of other means bereft, the only refuge for the wretched left.
When flower power came along I stood for Human Rights, marched around for peace and freedom, had some nooky every night - we took it serious.
Who has a spare two minutes to play in this month's FG Trivia game! ... My other OS is Slackware.
When flower power came along I stood for Human Rights, marched around for peace and freedom, had some nooky every night - we took it serious.
Who has a spare two minutes to play in this month's FG Trivia game! ... My other OS is Slackware.
Jailed for self defense?
spot;1273469 wrote: By spending time unproductively in a jail, becoming a worse person in the process? It seems an unlikely point of view to me.Yea, I've never thought "time out" was an effective way to discipline kids no less adults.
“Those who can make you believe absurdities can make you commit atrocities,â€
Voltaire
I have only one thing to do and that's
Be the wave that I am and then
Sink back into the ocean
Fiona Apple
Voltaire
I have only one thing to do and that's
Be the wave that I am and then
Sink back into the ocean
Fiona Apple
Jailed for self defense?
I get what you are saying.
What if the assailant had not been a millionaire ?
Is there no place for prisons in your justice system, it could be said Hussain and his brother had harmed society by their actions, and society needs to exact some sort of penalty.
What if the assailant had not been a millionaire ?
Is there no place for prisons in your justice system, it could be said Hussain and his brother had harmed society by their actions, and society needs to exact some sort of penalty.
I thought I knew more than this until I opened my mouth
Jailed for self defense?
This is an interesting case in relation to the large number of supporters for vigilante action. What this person did is very much in line with suggestions made on FG in the past when discussing other criminals.
Where are the vigilantes now, to defend the Hussains?
Were they not just trying to protect society by removing a source of evil?
Where are the vigilantes now, to defend the Hussains?
Were they not just trying to protect society by removing a source of evil?
Jailed for self defense?
Bruv;1273472 wrote: I get what you are saying.
What if the assailant had not been a millionaire ?Then the assailant would remain indebted for a long time, at a guess. In the UK we have a system of compensation for criminal assault which pays out to the victim after conviction, perhaps the assailant would remain indebted to that Criminal Compensation Board until the compensation was fully repaid. I still think it's the responsibility of the victim's legal team to claim against the assailant though, despite the insurance system already existing here.
Bruv wrote: Is there no place for prisons in your justice systemI don't much like going round in circles. I've already said, I'd imprison every convicted lawbreaker and not release them until they pose no more of a threat of repeating the offence than the average man in the street poses of committing it.
The sole aim of imprisonment for their entire time in jail should be to reduce their risk of re-offending. Prison staff and prison managers should take responsibility for paroling prisoners back into society, and themselves be penalised financially for every failure after release.
Bruv wrote: it could be said Hussain and his brother had harmed society by their actions, and society needs to exact some sort of penalty.That, I suspect, is why prisons have in fact turned into such a populous total waste of time and money. It's an indefensible and destructive argument.
What if the assailant had not been a millionaire ?Then the assailant would remain indebted for a long time, at a guess. In the UK we have a system of compensation for criminal assault which pays out to the victim after conviction, perhaps the assailant would remain indebted to that Criminal Compensation Board until the compensation was fully repaid. I still think it's the responsibility of the victim's legal team to claim against the assailant though, despite the insurance system already existing here.
Bruv wrote: Is there no place for prisons in your justice systemI don't much like going round in circles. I've already said, I'd imprison every convicted lawbreaker and not release them until they pose no more of a threat of repeating the offence than the average man in the street poses of committing it.
The sole aim of imprisonment for their entire time in jail should be to reduce their risk of re-offending. Prison staff and prison managers should take responsibility for paroling prisoners back into society, and themselves be penalised financially for every failure after release.
Bruv wrote: it could be said Hussain and his brother had harmed society by their actions, and society needs to exact some sort of penalty.That, I suspect, is why prisons have in fact turned into such a populous total waste of time and money. It's an indefensible and destructive argument.
Nullius in verba ... ☎||||||||||| ... To Fate I sue, of other means bereft, the only refuge for the wretched left.
When flower power came along I stood for Human Rights, marched around for peace and freedom, had some nooky every night - we took it serious.
Who has a spare two minutes to play in this month's FG Trivia game! ... My other OS is Slackware.
When flower power came along I stood for Human Rights, marched around for peace and freedom, had some nooky every night - we took it serious.
Who has a spare two minutes to play in this month's FG Trivia game! ... My other OS is Slackware.
Jailed for self defense?
spot;1273485 wrote: Then the assailant would remain indebted for a long time, at a guess. In the UK we have a system of compensation for criminal assault which pays out to the victim after conviction, perhaps the assailant would remain indebted to that Criminal Compensation Board until the compensation was fully repaid. I still think it's the responsibility of the victim's legal team to claim against the assailant though, despite the insurance system already existing here.
I don't much like going round in circles. I've already said, I'd imprison every convicted lawbreaker and not release them until they pose no more of a threat of repeating the offence than the average man in the street poses of committing it.
The sole aim of imprisonment for their entire time in jail should be to reduce their risk of re-offending. Prison staff and prison managers should take responsibility for paroling prisoners back into society, and themselves be penalised financially for every failure after release.
That, I suspect, is why prisons have in fact turned into such a populous total waste of time and money. It's an indefensible and destructive argument.
I was happy to go along until your theory started to spring leaks and it is holed below the water line.
Prisons rightly or wrongly are there to punish first, and to rehabilitate if they can.
To imprison every convicted law breaker until they are no longer a threat, would see far more people incarcerated than now, unless of course your theory would have these law breakers paying compensation for their crime, while out on the streets.
To make jailers responsible for ex-prisoners behavior and to penalise them for failure to rehabilitate would find nobody being released.
To lower prison population, lock up young offenders sooner under a harsher regime for shorter periods, the short sharp shock.
I don't much like going round in circles. I've already said, I'd imprison every convicted lawbreaker and not release them until they pose no more of a threat of repeating the offence than the average man in the street poses of committing it.
The sole aim of imprisonment for their entire time in jail should be to reduce their risk of re-offending. Prison staff and prison managers should take responsibility for paroling prisoners back into society, and themselves be penalised financially for every failure after release.
That, I suspect, is why prisons have in fact turned into such a populous total waste of time and money. It's an indefensible and destructive argument.
I was happy to go along until your theory started to spring leaks and it is holed below the water line.
Prisons rightly or wrongly are there to punish first, and to rehabilitate if they can.
To imprison every convicted law breaker until they are no longer a threat, would see far more people incarcerated than now, unless of course your theory would have these law breakers paying compensation for their crime, while out on the streets.
To make jailers responsible for ex-prisoners behavior and to penalise them for failure to rehabilitate would find nobody being released.
To lower prison population, lock up young offenders sooner under a harsher regime for shorter periods, the short sharp shock.
I thought I knew more than this until I opened my mouth
Jailed for self defense?
Bruv;1273549 wrote: I was happy to go along until your theory started to spring leaks and it is holed below the water line.
Prisons rightly or wrongly are there to punish first, and to rehabilitate if they can.
To imprison every convicted law breaker until they are no longer a threat, would see far more people incarcerated than now, unless of course your theory would have these law breakers paying compensation for their crime, while out on the streets.
To make jailers responsible for ex-prisoners behavior and to penalise them for failure to rehabilitate would find nobody being released.
To lower prison population, lock up young offenders sooner under a harsher regime for shorter periods, the short sharp shock.
You really are full of certainties, aren't you.
Yes, I expect it would see far more people incarcerated than now, if the full current set of acts defined as illegal remained that way. The government, fortunately, is in a position to decriminalize most of what's currently illegal. That doesn't mean people can no longer be taken to court for them, it means that the State is no longer responsible for bringing it to court. I'd see a lot of what's currently criminal turned over to private dispute law and brought to court by the aggrieved party seeking personal satisfaction.
What would be left would be what people really do think of as criminal in a moral sense, as opposed to just being illegal while having no aspect of immorality about it. It's those criminals and no other that need rehabilitation. Whether they stay in jail a week or a lifetime makes no difference to me, what matters is whether they cease to be more of a risk to the general public than the average man on the street presents.
What matters most, in reducing the numbers in jail, is a police system prosecuting all crime in a timely and effective manner. At the moment they're an inept bunch of washout failures in that regard.
Prisons rightly or wrongly are there to punish first, and to rehabilitate if they can.
To imprison every convicted law breaker until they are no longer a threat, would see far more people incarcerated than now, unless of course your theory would have these law breakers paying compensation for their crime, while out on the streets.
To make jailers responsible for ex-prisoners behavior and to penalise them for failure to rehabilitate would find nobody being released.
To lower prison population, lock up young offenders sooner under a harsher regime for shorter periods, the short sharp shock.
You really are full of certainties, aren't you.
Yes, I expect it would see far more people incarcerated than now, if the full current set of acts defined as illegal remained that way. The government, fortunately, is in a position to decriminalize most of what's currently illegal. That doesn't mean people can no longer be taken to court for them, it means that the State is no longer responsible for bringing it to court. I'd see a lot of what's currently criminal turned over to private dispute law and brought to court by the aggrieved party seeking personal satisfaction.
What would be left would be what people really do think of as criminal in a moral sense, as opposed to just being illegal while having no aspect of immorality about it. It's those criminals and no other that need rehabilitation. Whether they stay in jail a week or a lifetime makes no difference to me, what matters is whether they cease to be more of a risk to the general public than the average man on the street presents.
What matters most, in reducing the numbers in jail, is a police system prosecuting all crime in a timely and effective manner. At the moment they're an inept bunch of washout failures in that regard.
Nullius in verba ... ☎||||||||||| ... To Fate I sue, of other means bereft, the only refuge for the wretched left.
When flower power came along I stood for Human Rights, marched around for peace and freedom, had some nooky every night - we took it serious.
Who has a spare two minutes to play in this month's FG Trivia game! ... My other OS is Slackware.
When flower power came along I stood for Human Rights, marched around for peace and freedom, had some nooky every night - we took it serious.
Who has a spare two minutes to play in this month's FG Trivia game! ... My other OS is Slackware.
Jailed for self defense?
Ahso!;1273178 wrote: Do you think 30 and 39 months for Hussain and his brother are just sentences?
Based on the story as read, nope. If I'd been on the jury I would have awarded them court costs.
Also based on where the story is from, I'd guess there are facts not in evidence here.:rolleyes:
Based on the story as read, nope. If I'd been on the jury I would have awarded them court costs.
Also based on where the story is from, I'd guess there are facts not in evidence here.:rolleyes:
I expressly forbid the use of any of my posts anywhere outside of FG (with the exception of the incredibly witty 'get a room already' )posted recently.
Folks who'd like to copy my intellectual work should expect to pay me for it.:-6
Folks who'd like to copy my intellectual work should expect to pay me for it.:-6
Jailed for self defense?
Bruv;1273549 wrote: I was happy to go along until your theory started to spring leaks and it is holed below the water line.
Prisons rightly or wrongly are there to punish first, and to rehabilitate if they can.
To imprison every convicted law breaker until they are no longer a threat, would see far more people incarcerated than now, unless of course your theory would have these law breakers paying compensation for their crime, while out on the streets.
To make jailers responsible for ex-prisoners behavior and to penalise them for failure to rehabilitate would find nobody being released.
To lower prison population, lock up young offenders sooner under a harsher regime for shorter periods, the short sharp shock.
Been there done that doesn't work that's why we did away with borstals and the like and are constantly trying to find ways to cut down on recidivism. Refornm works but you need to put in the resources to do it-if you see prosons as only to punish you don't do that and just perpetuate the cycle. Just throwing people in to jail with no attempt to help them change doesn't solve the problem of crime, not letting them get in to normal society means they have no option but a life of crime. Doesn't mean you are soft on crime if you think like that it h=just shows you realise hitting people all the time doesn't actually work. It's a debate that's been going on for a very long time.
Given the very real harm our politicians and the bankers have done to society I would think more of the daily mail if they campaigned to have some of them deprived of their assets and thrown in jail for a very long time. Instead we get all our ills are due to, teenage mothers, immigration, benefit scroungers and thieving low lives. A lot of people face a new year unemployed and with a real sense of despair and anger about the future and those responsible get away with it. No wonder people feel alienated and don't give a **** about society in general.
The daily mail is a right wing newspaper where accurate reporting is not really it's purpose.
Prisons rightly or wrongly are there to punish first, and to rehabilitate if they can.
To imprison every convicted law breaker until they are no longer a threat, would see far more people incarcerated than now, unless of course your theory would have these law breakers paying compensation for their crime, while out on the streets.
To make jailers responsible for ex-prisoners behavior and to penalise them for failure to rehabilitate would find nobody being released.
To lower prison population, lock up young offenders sooner under a harsher regime for shorter periods, the short sharp shock.
Been there done that doesn't work that's why we did away with borstals and the like and are constantly trying to find ways to cut down on recidivism. Refornm works but you need to put in the resources to do it-if you see prosons as only to punish you don't do that and just perpetuate the cycle. Just throwing people in to jail with no attempt to help them change doesn't solve the problem of crime, not letting them get in to normal society means they have no option but a life of crime. Doesn't mean you are soft on crime if you think like that it h=just shows you realise hitting people all the time doesn't actually work. It's a debate that's been going on for a very long time.
Given the very real harm our politicians and the bankers have done to society I would think more of the daily mail if they campaigned to have some of them deprived of their assets and thrown in jail for a very long time. Instead we get all our ills are due to, teenage mothers, immigration, benefit scroungers and thieving low lives. A lot of people face a new year unemployed and with a real sense of despair and anger about the future and those responsible get away with it. No wonder people feel alienated and don't give a **** about society in general.
The daily mail is a right wing newspaper where accurate reporting is not really it's purpose.
Jailed for self defense?
[QUOTE=spot;1273556]You really are full of certainties, aren't you.
No more than you.
Yes, I expect it would see far more people incarcerated than now, if the full current set of acts defined as illegal remained that way. The government, fortunately, is in a position to decriminalize most of what's currently illegal. That doesn't mean people can no longer be taken to court for them, it means that the State is no longer responsible for bringing it to court. I'd see a lot of what's currently criminal turned over to private dispute law and brought to court by the aggrieved party seeking personal satisfaction.
What would be left would be what people really do think of as criminal in a moral sense, as opposed to just being illegal while having no aspect of immorality about it. It's those criminals and no other that need rehabilitation. Whether they stay in jail a week or a lifetime makes no difference to me, what matters is whether they cease to be more of a risk to the general public than the average man on the street presents.
You really want a total revamp of society and its morality, don't you ? In an ideal world, and with a magic wand that might work, but I was working with reality
What matters most, in reducing the numbers in jail, is a police system prosecuting all crime in a timely and effective manner. At the moment they're an inept bunch of washout failures in that regard.
That is basically what I said, without your eloquence. I don't believe it is the Police at fault, but the targets and other things demanded of them [/QUOTE]
No more than you.
Yes, I expect it would see far more people incarcerated than now, if the full current set of acts defined as illegal remained that way. The government, fortunately, is in a position to decriminalize most of what's currently illegal. That doesn't mean people can no longer be taken to court for them, it means that the State is no longer responsible for bringing it to court. I'd see a lot of what's currently criminal turned over to private dispute law and brought to court by the aggrieved party seeking personal satisfaction.
What would be left would be what people really do think of as criminal in a moral sense, as opposed to just being illegal while having no aspect of immorality about it. It's those criminals and no other that need rehabilitation. Whether they stay in jail a week or a lifetime makes no difference to me, what matters is whether they cease to be more of a risk to the general public than the average man on the street presents.
You really want a total revamp of society and its morality, don't you ? In an ideal world, and with a magic wand that might work, but I was working with reality
What matters most, in reducing the numbers in jail, is a police system prosecuting all crime in a timely and effective manner. At the moment they're an inept bunch of washout failures in that regard.
That is basically what I said, without your eloquence. I don't believe it is the Police at fault, but the targets and other things demanded of them [/QUOTE]
I thought I knew more than this until I opened my mouth
Jailed for self defense?
Freed on appeal with a suspended sentence and several years reporting on probation.
BBC News - Jailed businessman Munir Hussain freed by court
Which is fair enough, he's no more likely to re-offend than I am to take a cricket bat to someone in the first place.
BBC News - Jailed businessman Munir Hussain freed by court
Which is fair enough, he's no more likely to re-offend than I am to take a cricket bat to someone in the first place.
Nullius in verba ... ☎||||||||||| ... To Fate I sue, of other means bereft, the only refuge for the wretched left.
When flower power came along I stood for Human Rights, marched around for peace and freedom, had some nooky every night - we took it serious.
Who has a spare two minutes to play in this month's FG Trivia game! ... My other OS is Slackware.
When flower power came along I stood for Human Rights, marched around for peace and freedom, had some nooky every night - we took it serious.
Who has a spare two minutes to play in this month's FG Trivia game! ... My other OS is Slackware.
Jailed for self defense?
Interesting! But what about justice being served? Nothing on the order of what you suggested?
“Those who can make you believe absurdities can make you commit atrocities,â€
Voltaire
I have only one thing to do and that's
Be the wave that I am and then
Sink back into the ocean
Fiona Apple
Voltaire
I have only one thing to do and that's
Be the wave that I am and then
Sink back into the ocean
Fiona Apple
Jailed for self defense?
In a cultured society the guilty verdict itself would be punishment. It's a disgrace. Munir Hussain and his brother will never hold their heads up in society for the rest of their lives after the court's statement, just as Jeffrey Archer can't. As for Waled Salem's recompense, Britain's social services will make sure he stays housed, fed and treated instead of dying in a gutter.
Nullius in verba ... ☎||||||||||| ... To Fate I sue, of other means bereft, the only refuge for the wretched left.
When flower power came along I stood for Human Rights, marched around for peace and freedom, had some nooky every night - we took it serious.
Who has a spare two minutes to play in this month's FG Trivia game! ... My other OS is Slackware.
When flower power came along I stood for Human Rights, marched around for peace and freedom, had some nooky every night - we took it serious.
Who has a spare two minutes to play in this month's FG Trivia game! ... My other OS is Slackware.
Jailed for self defense?
I should know better, but I'm still going to chime in. 
I think I know how the U.S. FG'ers feel about this - but let me ask all of our UK FG'ers:
Would you feel different about this story if:
1. Munir Hussain and his family entered the house and were caught off-guard by Waled Salem and two other home invaders. Bodily harm / death was threatened to the family members.
2. Munir ran into his bedroom, produced a gun, and fired on and killed one of the assailants.
Does the UK view this as self-defense or retaliation?
I think I know how the U.S. FG'ers feel about this - but let me ask all of our UK FG'ers:
Would you feel different about this story if:
1. Munir Hussain and his family entered the house and were caught off-guard by Waled Salem and two other home invaders. Bodily harm / death was threatened to the family members.
2. Munir ran into his bedroom, produced a gun, and fired on and killed one of the assailants.
Does the UK view this as self-defense or retaliation?
Please use the "contact us" button if you need to contact a ForumGarden admin.
Jailed for self defense?
spot;1283775 wrote: In a cultured society the guilty verdict itself would be punishment. It's a disgrace. Munir Hussain and his brother will never hold their heads up in society for the rest of their lives after the court's statement, just as Jeffrey Archer can't. As for Waled Salem's recompense, Britain's social services will make sure he stays housed, fed and treated instead of dying in a gutter.Seems rather unfair to the taxpayer, but maybe thats just my American reasoning.
“Those who can make you believe absurdities can make you commit atrocities,â€
Voltaire
I have only one thing to do and that's
Be the wave that I am and then
Sink back into the ocean
Fiona Apple
Voltaire
I have only one thing to do and that's
Be the wave that I am and then
Sink back into the ocean
Fiona Apple
Jailed for self defense?
When I read stories like this...it makes me believe that UK's sense of self defense is completely upside down.
Please use the "contact us" button if you need to contact a ForumGarden admin.
Jailed for self defense?
Tombstone;1283777 wrote: I should know better, but I'm still going to chime in.
I think I know how the U.S. FG'ers feel about this - but let me ask all of our UK FG'ers:
Would you feel different about this story if:
1. Munir Hussain and his family entered the house and were caught off-guard by Waled Salem and two other home invaders. Bodily harm / death was threatened to the family members.
2. Munir ran into his bedroom, produced a gun, and fired on and killed one of the assailants.
Does the UK view this as self-defense or retaliation?
"People have legally killed their attackers in England in the past, when they've been defending themselves. This is a different issue entirely."
He'd undoubtedly have to face trial but that's to determine the facts. Only a jury can do that in England in a case of that importance. With a Not Guilty verdict, which he'd get on the facts you've shown, he would leave court with no stain on his character. He might, on a separate matter, have to explain how he legally had a gun in his house.
If you'd like me to post examples from the past I can go and find them.
It's nice to see you dip a toe, too.
I think I know how the U.S. FG'ers feel about this - but let me ask all of our UK FG'ers:
Would you feel different about this story if:
1. Munir Hussain and his family entered the house and were caught off-guard by Waled Salem and two other home invaders. Bodily harm / death was threatened to the family members.
2. Munir ran into his bedroom, produced a gun, and fired on and killed one of the assailants.
Does the UK view this as self-defense or retaliation?
"People have legally killed their attackers in England in the past, when they've been defending themselves. This is a different issue entirely."
He'd undoubtedly have to face trial but that's to determine the facts. Only a jury can do that in England in a case of that importance. With a Not Guilty verdict, which he'd get on the facts you've shown, he would leave court with no stain on his character. He might, on a separate matter, have to explain how he legally had a gun in his house.
If you'd like me to post examples from the past I can go and find them.
It's nice to see you dip a toe, too.
Nullius in verba ... ☎||||||||||| ... To Fate I sue, of other means bereft, the only refuge for the wretched left.
When flower power came along I stood for Human Rights, marched around for peace and freedom, had some nooky every night - we took it serious.
Who has a spare two minutes to play in this month's FG Trivia game! ... My other OS is Slackware.
When flower power came along I stood for Human Rights, marched around for peace and freedom, had some nooky every night - we took it serious.
Who has a spare two minutes to play in this month's FG Trivia game! ... My other OS is Slackware.
Jailed for self defense?
spot;1283784 wrote: "People have legally killed their attackers in England in the past, when they've been defending themselves. This is a different issue entirely."
He'd undoubtedly have to face trial but that's to determine the facts. Only a jury can do that in England in a case of that importance. With a Not Guilty verdict, which he'd get on the facts you've shown, he would leave court with no stain on his character. He might, on a separate matter, have to explain how he legally had a gun in his house.
If you'd like me to post examples from the past I can go and find them.
It's nice to see you dip a toe, too.
That's good to hear.
Yes, I dipped my toe and it did not come back bloody - yet!
He'd undoubtedly have to face trial but that's to determine the facts. Only a jury can do that in England in a case of that importance. With a Not Guilty verdict, which he'd get on the facts you've shown, he would leave court with no stain on his character. He might, on a separate matter, have to explain how he legally had a gun in his house.
If you'd like me to post examples from the past I can go and find them.
It's nice to see you dip a toe, too.
That's good to hear.
Yes, I dipped my toe and it did not come back bloody - yet!
Please use the "contact us" button if you need to contact a ForumGarden admin.
Jailed for self defense?
Tombstone;1283779 wrote: When I read stories like this...it makes me believe that UK's sense of self defense is completely upside down.It sounds to me like the police were cautioning the girl to be sure not to admit that she showed or intended the use of a weapon. Sound advice if you ask me.
Its true that the girl brandishing the weapon first may cause the incident to escalate to a kind of challenge had the youths been more willing to accept the challenge.
As for the example of the thread, theres a huge difference between being in the home at the time of the beating and running away. But I can tell you that for me, I'm not sure I'd be able to distinguish the difference at the time. I wonder if that would be a defense in the U.K..
Its true that the girl brandishing the weapon first may cause the incident to escalate to a kind of challenge had the youths been more willing to accept the challenge.
As for the example of the thread, theres a huge difference between being in the home at the time of the beating and running away. But I can tell you that for me, I'm not sure I'd be able to distinguish the difference at the time. I wonder if that would be a defense in the U.K..
“Those who can make you believe absurdities can make you commit atrocities,â€
Voltaire
I have only one thing to do and that's
Be the wave that I am and then
Sink back into the ocean
Fiona Apple
Voltaire
I have only one thing to do and that's
Be the wave that I am and then
Sink back into the ocean
Fiona Apple
Jailed for self defense?
Tombstone;1283779 wrote: When I read stories like this...it makes me believe that UK's sense of self defense is completely upside down.
That's self-publicism, not police idiocy. The police totally deny what she claims, and she's made a lot of headlines through claiming it.
There's no possible way that would have resulted in a conviction.
That's self-publicism, not police idiocy. The police totally deny what she claims, and she's made a lot of headlines through claiming it.
There's no possible way that would have resulted in a conviction.
Nullius in verba ... ☎||||||||||| ... To Fate I sue, of other means bereft, the only refuge for the wretched left.
When flower power came along I stood for Human Rights, marched around for peace and freedom, had some nooky every night - we took it serious.
Who has a spare two minutes to play in this month's FG Trivia game! ... My other OS is Slackware.
When flower power came along I stood for Human Rights, marched around for peace and freedom, had some nooky every night - we took it serious.
Who has a spare two minutes to play in this month's FG Trivia game! ... My other OS is Slackware.
Jailed for self defense?
Ahso!;1283786 wrote: It sounds to me like the police were cautioning the girl to be sure not to admit that she showed or intended the use of a weapon. Sound advice if you ask me.
Its true that the girl brandishing the weapon first may cause the incident to escalate to a kind of challenge had the youths been more willing to accept the challenge.
As for the example of the thread, theres a huge difference between being in the home at the time of the beating and running away. But I can tell you that for me, I'm not sure I'd be able to distinguish the difference at the time. I wonder if that would be a defense in the U.K..
In my view, the knife brandishing was a posture of defense. She was terrified. It was the right and perfect thing to do. Cretins tend to travel in packs nowadays - and they will *always prey on an easy subject. What she did was make it clear that she was armed and was not going to be the classic "easy" victim. This almost always deters an attack.
I've got a few stories that would curl your hair - all had happy endings because someone was able to exhibit defense tools that spun the table in their favor.
Its true that the girl brandishing the weapon first may cause the incident to escalate to a kind of challenge had the youths been more willing to accept the challenge.
As for the example of the thread, theres a huge difference between being in the home at the time of the beating and running away. But I can tell you that for me, I'm not sure I'd be able to distinguish the difference at the time. I wonder if that would be a defense in the U.K..
In my view, the knife brandishing was a posture of defense. She was terrified. It was the right and perfect thing to do. Cretins tend to travel in packs nowadays - and they will *always prey on an easy subject. What she did was make it clear that she was armed and was not going to be the classic "easy" victim. This almost always deters an attack.
I've got a few stories that would curl your hair - all had happy endings because someone was able to exhibit defense tools that spun the table in their favor.
Please use the "contact us" button if you need to contact a ForumGarden admin.
Jailed for self defense?
spot;1283788 wrote: That's self-publicism, not police idiocy. The police totally deny what she claims, and she's made a lot of headlines through claiming it.
There's no possible way that would have resulted in a conviction.
Again, that's very good to hear.
There's no possible way that would have resulted in a conviction.
Again, that's very good to hear.
Please use the "contact us" button if you need to contact a ForumGarden admin.
Jailed for self defense?
Tombstone;1283792 wrote: In my view, the knife brandishing was a posture of defense. She was terrified. It was the right and perfect thing to do. Cretins tend to travel in packs nowadays - and they will *always prey on an easy subject. What she did was make it clear that she was armed and was not going to be the classic "easy" victim. This almost always deters an attack.
I've got a few stories that would curl your hair - all had happy endings because someone was able to exhibit defense tools that spun the table in their favor.I could imagine that after showing the knife one of the youths pull out a gun and says "oh yeah?" Had they been there to do harm to this girl, waving a knife at the window would have done no good, the screaming I think is more of a deterrent than that.
If the story is accurate at all then I doubt these were more than a couple of mischiefs anyway that a dog may have frightened. Holding up a phone probably would have been the best thing to do in this case.
I've heard many of the tales of brandishing weapons and some may have saved lives or possessions and some may not have. All I have to say is: if you're going brandish any weapon you had better be ready and willing to use it, otherwise it could be more of a liability.
I've got a few stories that would curl your hair - all had happy endings because someone was able to exhibit defense tools that spun the table in their favor.I could imagine that after showing the knife one of the youths pull out a gun and says "oh yeah?" Had they been there to do harm to this girl, waving a knife at the window would have done no good, the screaming I think is more of a deterrent than that.
If the story is accurate at all then I doubt these were more than a couple of mischiefs anyway that a dog may have frightened. Holding up a phone probably would have been the best thing to do in this case.
I've heard many of the tales of brandishing weapons and some may have saved lives or possessions and some may not have. All I have to say is: if you're going brandish any weapon you had better be ready and willing to use it, otherwise it could be more of a liability.
“Those who can make you believe absurdities can make you commit atrocities,â€
Voltaire
I have only one thing to do and that's
Be the wave that I am and then
Sink back into the ocean
Fiona Apple
Voltaire
I have only one thing to do and that's
Be the wave that I am and then
Sink back into the ocean
Fiona Apple
Jailed for self defense?
Ahso!;1283795 wrote: All I have to say is: if you're going brandish any weapon you had better be ready and willing to use it, otherwise it could be more of a liability.
Absolutely!
Absolutely!
Please use the "contact us" button if you need to contact a ForumGarden admin.
Jailed for self defense?
In school, we always teach the kids that you are allowed to use the same level of violence directed at you to defend yourself... until you can extricate yourself from the situation. When you can get away, you are supposed to do just that.
If you knock an attacker out, then proceed to stomp his face for a while. You are now the aggressor.
If you knock an attacker out, then proceed to stomp his face for a while. You are now the aggressor.
