Some stories really make you feel grateful...

[bozwell]

... to live in the U S of A. 

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/crime/9516776/Farm-tenant-arrested-after-burglars-shot-was-plagued-by-break-ins.html

The gist - a UK man shot a robber shot a robber during a break-in of the UK man's home.  The robber fled and called the police, who promptly arrested the UK man.    There were no fatalities in this incident, but judging by the related cases mentioned in the article, I wouldn't be surprised to see the tenant face formal charges and some form of punishment.

[Grendel]

... to live in the U S of A. 

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/crime/9516776/Farm-tenant-arrested-after-burglars-shot-was-plagued-by-break-ins.html

The gist - a UK man shot a robber shot a robber during a break-in of the UK man's home.  The robber fled and called the police, who promptly arrested the UK man.    There were no fatalities in this incident, but judging by the related cases mentioned in the article, I wouldn't be surprised to see the tenant face formal charges and some form of punishment.

I would. There were several assailants, all of whom have been charged with aggravated burglary, they face 14 to life. The fact that neither the homeowner nor his wife have yet been charged suggests it will go to the Director of Public Prosecutions for a decision which is quite possible, following recent pronouncements, to come back as justified self-defense.

So, how about waiting for a resolution before proclaiming how bad it is over there compared to here? After all, aren't we still waiting to hear about Mr Zimmerman in that gun loving state of Florida?

[ChasUK]

Actually, I can concur. Unless the man has fantastic mitigating circumstances, chances are he can face charges. If they fail then the burglar can sue directly. It's happened many times before in the UK. Not necessarily gun related retaliations. Unfortunately, the way the law stands in the UK is everyone has rights, even the burglar you find in your house. It's actually disgusting the way that stands.

[bozwell]

... to live in the U S of A. 

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/crime/9516776/Farm-tenant-arrested-after-burglars-shot-was-plagued-by-break-ins.html

The gist - a UK man shot a robber shot a robber during a break-in of the UK man's home.  The robber fled and called the police, who promptly arrested the UK man.    There were no fatalities in this incident, but judging by the related cases mentioned in the article, I wouldn't be surprised to see the tenant face formal charges and some form of punishment.

I would. There were several assailants, all of whom have been charged with aggravated burglary, they face 14 to life. The fact that neither the homeowner nor his wife have yet been charged suggests it will go to the Director of Public Prosecutions for a decision which is quite possible, following recent pronouncements, to come back as justified self-defense.

So, how about waiting for a resolution before proclaiming how bad it is over there compared to here? After all, aren't we still waiting to hear about Mr Zimmerman in that gun loving state of Florida?

This wouldn't be the first time a UK citizen would face charges for defending himself in his own home.  Several other examples are mentioned in that article, in fact.  This just acts as a reminder of the differences between UK law and US law on this subject.

As for GZ, the circumstances are not even remotely the same.  GZ didn't defend himself in his home, he pursued an unarmed man in his neighborhood and an altercation broke out on the street.  A better example would be the housewife who defended herself and her kids during a break-in in the middle of the night.  Last I heard, she wasn't arrested and no charges were pressed.

Edit: It goes without saying, but just to make it explicit, I'm not suggesting our legal system is perfect or trying to pick on any other country or group of people.  It's just that I've seen this situation and how it plays out previously in the UK, and I think it's a shame what UK citizens have to go through in these situations.  We set the bar pretty high when it comes self-defense in the US, but there's an underlying sense of fairness in how our law works (my own opinion).  I can't say the same when reading the UK news on this topic.

[Grendel]

Okay guys. How about this statement in the actual article:

The case prompted David Cameron to announce that home owners and shopkeepers would have the right to protect themselves against burglars and robbers.

Last year, Peter Flanagan, 59, who fatally stabbed a burglar armed with a machete at his home in Salford, Great Manchester, escaped prosecution after the Crown Prosecution Service ruled that he was acting in self defence.

The favorite 'Tony Martin' case that's always referenced in these incidents was totally different. Mr. Martin was indeed a victim of burglary, however, the subsequent mistake he made was in order to gain revenge on the burglar(s) he set up a scenario to encourage someone to break in, then shot them as they tried to escape. Neither in the UK or the US is that behavior either tolerated or considered 'self-defense'.

Given that both the tenant and his wife have been arrested, it suggests there may be more to the story than the simple: 'The man is believed to have grabbed a legally owned gun after they were disturbed by the break-in early yesterday. He is understood to have fired at the intruders who then fled the isolated house...before calling the police.'

Why arrest her, unless she played some part in the alleged 'break in'? Perhaps, after the previous burglaries, they decided to try the 'Tony Martin' approach?

In any event, there is yet no way of knowing the true story since this is simply a story cobbled together out of a police press release, so let's wait and see before deciding it's those silly British toffs and their nanny state messing with ordinary people again.

[bozwell]

In any event, there is yet no way of knowing the true story since this is simply a story cobbled together out of a police press release, so let's wait and see before deciding it's those silly British toffs and their nanny state messing with ordinary people again.

Your words, not mine. 

Also, the issue in Martin's case (since we're already off-topic) wasn't that he "setup" or "baited" the burglary, but rather that he in effect ambushed the burglars within his home, shooting down at them from the second floor (arguably in the dark from a concealed position) and the jury concluded that wasn't consistent with a man acting in defense of his life.  He may have expected to be burglarized at some point in the future because it's happened in the past (as might people who live in a "bad" neighborhood anywhere in the world), but he didn't invite them in or bait them to burglarize him.  His "problem" was he got the jump on them within his own home and acted with lethal force, rather than waiting on them to threaten him with lethal force.  Contrast that with states that have recognized the castle doctrine, and you'll see a pretty sharp delineation in the law.

In any event, I hope the charges are dropped unless the facts deviate from what we know now.  Again, you shouldn't read this as me bashing the UK, British people, the Economist publication, Jaguar cars, James Bond, or anything else with a UK affiliation.  I merely posted this as an information bit and gave a brief predication (my own opinion) as to what may happen given previous UK self-defense situations.  Of course, I may be completely wrong, and you're welcome to your own predictions.

[armoredman]

No, by all means, bash Jaguars. My late stepfather, a career mechanic, always said if you buy a Jag, buy two - one to drive, while the other is in the shop.
I read self defense stories from around the world and around the United States and am always happy I live in a state that has excellent self defense laws, and we should be changing another one for the better in November.
Lets see how this one plays out - I didn't really catch on to the wife being arrested too, wonder what the whole story is.

[skipper]

Apparently the homeowner did not shoot the robber good enough. And the robber ran to call the police?

[armoredman]

I'm not certain what loads are available for purchase, 00 Buck may not be widely circulated, and he may only have birdshot. Don't know.

[skipper]

Hehe, may have met "The Judge" with #8.

[siddy]

 Grateful, you should be. It's well known that in Europe we aren't permitted to defend ourselves against the parasites that pray on the general public. The law where I live states that a victim can only defend oneself with the equal amount of force to that of the attacker, or the victim becomes the attacker in the eyes of the law. I guess that means you have to get shot before you can shoot back !!

 

[skipper]

Siddy, it is too sad the Europeans allowed their rights to be taken by the government. We have a constant effort over here to retain our gun rights. If we pro-gun advocates slack up at all we will be in the same predicament as you.

[Grendel]

Step right up for your portions of crow:

No charges for couple who shot burglars

The couple arrested for opening fire on intruders who targeted their isolated cottage will not face charges, the Crown Prosecution Service announced last night.

Andy and Tracey Ferrie had been held on suspicion of grievous bodily harm after dialling 999 to report that they had discharged a shotgun when a four-man gang broke in to their home in the middle of the night.

The couple spent almost three days and nights in custody until they were released on bail late on Tuesday night.

Yesterday, hours after two men appeared in court charged with burglary in connection with the raid on the Ferries? 200-year-old cottage, prosecutors said it was ?clear? the couple ?did what they believed was necessary to protect themselves, and their home, from intruders?.

The decision was greeted as a victory for common sense by friends and relatives.

Mrs Ferrie?s mother, Hazel Towell, and her husband, John, called for a change in the law to give greater protection to property owners who defended their homes from intruders.

Mr Towell, 62, said: ?It is terrifying, what happened to them.

?What else could they have done? I feel so overjoyed the charges have been dropped.

?Her mother has the weight off her shoulders.

?This is the way forward. Police should have common sense.?

When asked about the people who raided his stepdaughter?s home, Mr Towell had previously told the Daily Mail he would have ?blown their bloody heads off?.

Judith Walker, chief crown prosecutor for CPS East Midlands, said the department had advised Leicestershire Police to release Mr and Mrs Ferrie from their bail.

[Hayfield123]

Step right up for your portions of crow:

No charges for couple who shot burglars

The couple arrested for opening fire on intruders who targeted their isolated cottage will not face charges, the Crown Prosecution Service announced last night.

Andy and Tracey Ferrie had been held on suspicion of grievous bodily harm after dialling 999 to report that they had discharged a shotgun when a four-man gang broke in to their home in the middle of the night.

The couple spent almost three days and nights in custody until they were released on bail late on Tuesday night.

Yesterday, hours after two men appeared in court charged with burglary in connection with the raid on the Ferries? 200-year-old cottage, prosecutors said it was ?clear? the couple ?did what they believed was necessary to protect themselves, and their home, from intruders?.

The decision was greeted as a victory for common sense by friends and relatives.

Mrs Ferrie?s mother, Hazel Towell, and her husband, John, called for a change in the law to give greater protection to property owners who defended their homes from intruders.

Mr Towell, 62, said: ?It is terrifying, what happened to them.

?What else could they have done? I feel so overjoyed the charges have been dropped.

?Her mother has the weight off her shoulders.

?This is the way forward. Police should have common sense.?

When asked about the people who raided his stepdaughter?s home, Mr Towell had previously told the Daily Mail he would have ?blown their bloody heads off?.

Judith Walker, chief crown prosecutor for CPS East Midlands, said the department had advised Leicestershire Police to release Mr and Mrs Ferrie from their bail.

My opinion of this event . . . with decent laws, the couple would never have been charged to begin with.   I am glad I live in West Virginia . . . in identical circumstances, the only news story would have been about the burglars breaking in, being shot, and being arrested.  People should not have to hope their prosecuter or judge exercises common sense . . . their right to defend themselves should not depend on the mood of the prosecuter on a particular day.

[Grendel]

The quote from the father in the story was a tad misleading. They weren't ever charged. They were in custody for questioning. The reports were sent to the CPS and they were released without charge. I don't know what that has to do with the mood of the prosecutor, but it's clear that the investigation found they were justified in defending themselves and so they were released. Are you suggesting that the cops shouldn't have done a thorough investigation and just taken the couples' word for what happened?