Bike Thief Caught Red Handed

[benb]

Sure, what's your full name and address ? If you could let me know what valuables you have in the house that would be great, thanks.

Haha, good one.

 

[benb]

First, obviously you wouldn't leave any "defensive" object in place for the police to find and if anyone asks, well you simply dropped a box of nails and hadn't got around to picking them up yet.
Second, everybody has human rights however when a rational adult knowingly forces entry into anothers property they should be made aware that they have abandoned those rights. "Vigilante justice" [which, by the way I do not agree with either] does not apply, this is a case of someone defending his [or her] property and poss themselves ON that property while aprehending a criminal in the act. Once again it is a case of people accepting responsibility for thier actions, pleading "Oh poor me I've had a hard life" should be ignored, after all maybe the person they're stealing from had a "hard life" it's just that they got off their backsides and did something about it.
PS sorry for the rant but I feel untill we give rights to honest people and remove the rights of criminals our society is in a sick downward spiral.

I completely agree (and the law agrees too) that you are entitled to use proprtionate and reasonable force to defend you and your property.

What you are not entitled to do is to use more than the force required, and rightly so.

 

[rusky]

I completely agree (and the law agrees too) that you are entitled to use proprtionate and reasonable force to defend you and your property.

What you are not entitled to do is to use more than the force required, and rightly so.

The big problem here is what is reasonable by someone in the heat of the moment isn't reasonable when it's down to a jury to decide.

I'm all for people forfeiting certain human rights when they break the law.

 

[benb]

The big problem here is what is reasonable by someone in the heat of the moment isn't reasonable when it's down to a jury to decide.

I'm all for people forfeiting certain human rights when they break the law.

Yes, I agree, and I'm sure you'd have a good deal of sympathy if you perhaps went a bit too far because you feared for your life. What I don't think is acceptable in a civilised society is someone being given brain damage, put in a coma, or suffering other serious life-changing injuries - unless that was absolutely necessary.

 

[Mr Finch]

I have always had a serious dislike for Gosport. I was born there and lived there for 4years from 1997.

Getting out was the best thing I ever did and I really try not to go there if I can help it.

 

[Boris Bajic]

I too disapprove of violence, but I fell below my own standards once. I left my bicycle visible in the window of a corner shop when living in the East End in the early 90s. As I paid for some Cornettos, I saw the saddle start to move.

I ran out and caught a man trying to get on and ride off. I'm afraid I was quite inappropriately violent. There is no excuse. When I first grabbed him, he said "I'm drunk; I don't know what I'm doing". He clearly wasn't drunk but I was jolly cross, so I walloped him.

I kept walloping him and once he went down I kicked. I was pulled off him by a couple of guys from a local scrap yard, still in their welding masks. It was a surreal sight. When I got back to the shop, I was given the ice-creams without paying and the shopkeeper shook my hand (East End). The thief was clearly quite unwell and curled up near the gutter.

I'd headbutted him while trying to put him down, and I'd gashed my own forehead. To this day, the friends at my house when I got home are convinced I'd been the victim. The whole front of my tee-shirt was crimson and it was my own blood.

I saw the thief months later selling a bike at a near-by LBS. I just growled at him, but never used the LBS again.

Had I been apprehended at the time, I dare say the book would have been thrown at me and I would have deserved it. It was a nasty, vengeful assault. As it was, I just got lots of smiles and knowing nods around the neighbourhood for a while.

I am not a violent person and have rarely even made fists, let alone used them. I don't know why I did on that occasion. I think nothing was gained by my violence and no good was done by it. I got some free ice-creams, but they'd already started to melt...

 

[User16625]

Not if it was reasonable force in self defence

Reasonable force.....**** it. If someone is attacking you then they clearly are not bound by any law or any "reasonable force" so why should we be restricted by it?. Fight fire with fire I say. Theres nothing morally wrong with using overwhelming force in self defense and it will have the benefit of added deterrence to any future potential thieves or assailants. To the original poster - You should have grabbed a brick and threw it at the scumbags back as he was fleeing!

 

[benb]

Reasonable force.....**** it. If someone is attacking you then they clearly are not bound by any law or any "reasonable force" so why should we be restricted by it?. Fight fire with fire I say. Theres nothing morally wrong with using overwhelming force in self defense and it will have the benefit of added deterrence to any future potential thieves or assailants. To the original poster - You should have grabbed a brick and threw it at the scumbags back as he was fleeing!

Yes, there is.

What you're saying is that you should be allowed to kill someone who is on your property. That makes you as bad as the thief, and is not behaviour that we tolerate in a civilised society.

Defend yourself, and your property, restrain them and then let the proper authorities deal with it.

 

[Boondoggle]

I completely agree (and the law agrees too) that you are entitled to use proprtionate and reasonable force to defend you and your property.

What you are not entitled to do is to use more than the force required, and rightly so.

I confront someone in my property, he says he has a knife. It's a bit too dark to see for sure...........now he's advancing towards me.


What is the "required force" ?

 

[rusky]

How long is a piece of string?

 

[cd365]

Yes, there is.

What you're saying is that you should be allowed to kill someone who is on your property. That makes you as bad as the thief, and is not behaviour that we tolerate in a civilised society.

Defend yourself, and your property, restrain them and then let the proper authorities deal with it.

We are no longer in a civilised society! I would personally attack someone who had entered my property without my consent with as much venom as I could muster. I once had an intruder try to enter my house at dinnertime, my young children had gone into the kitchen to put their plates in the sink when they started screaming, I flew from the dining room to the kitchen for them to scream that their was a man in the house, he fled and jumped over a 6 foot fence with an 8 foot drop the other side I ran out the front of the house in hot pursuit, couldn't see him outside but knew he was hiding, realised I had no shoes on and that it was raining, went back in the house where the wife handed me a weapon and told me she had called the police, I put shoes on and went back outside to look, weapon in hand, and yes it was vigilante justice but he was getting what was coming to him, as far as I am concerned he had stepped out of society and I would step into his world and deal with it as such. He was lucky I didn't find him.

When the police turned up, they saw my weapon, I had left it on the stairs and started to tell me off saying I would be in trouble. I told them if I had caught him I would have seriously hurt him. One of the coppers told me to be careful in the future and the other continued to tell me off saying I would be in more trouble. Told him I would be prepared to stand in front of 12 peers and defend my actions.

These scumbags need dealing with, the law is letting victims down. I am not prepared to be a victim any more.

 

[Accy cyclist]

Then your friend is a violent thug, and no better than the thief.

Except no-one (except you) is suggesting that a home owner can't protect their home. Reasonable force is justified. A savage beating is not.

I'm not a fan of vigilante "justice".[/quote

Maybe a savage beating is over the top, but i'd "immobilise" the bastard in any way possible, till(if) the police arrived.I've worked hard in all kinds of weather, with all kinds of illnesses to pay for my bikes, and any other property. I wouldn't sit there asking the thief about his "deprived background" that's for sure. If they want a bike, work and pay for it like the rest of us have to do!

 

[User16625]

I confront someone in my property, he says he has a knife. It's a bit too dark to see for sure...........now he's advancing towards me.


What is the "required force" ?

A gun would be ideal. Grab a chair or something and smash him with it. Your life is in potential danger and you have every right to defend it. In this situation its not possible to call the police and wait for an officer to arrive and arrest the burglar because by that time he will have run off and probably left you for dead.

 

[classic33]

How long is a piece of string?

We've had this before. 25% of it its origional length.

 

[Boondoggle]

A gun would be ideal. Grab a chair or something and smash him with it. Your life is in potential danger and you have every right to defend it. In this situation its not possible to call the police and wait for an officer to arrive and arrest the burglar because by that time he will have run off and probably left you for dead.

Exactly how I feel. I have no intention of putting my own safety at risk for the safety of some chav in my own home. God help them.