Quote:
Originally Posted by Ken Moss
You make a good point but people have been campaigning in various ways for years. There was the case of Tony Martin in 2000 when he shot at intruders which really brought it back into the public consciousness and laws have been 'reviewed' very recently but it still falls more on the side of the intruder than the homeowner.
Until there is another high-profile case where a burglar gets better treatment than the homeowner the laws will remain the same. Sad, but true.
|
Most campaigns fall by the wayside because people expect things to change without really working for it. Or worse still, think that they don't have to work out the answers to the questions that are bound to come their way. A friend of mine successfully lobbied to keep a charity funded by his local council because when asked by the council "why should we fund a charity to take us to court?", he answered "because you keep losing the cases: if you'd have listened to them in the first place and done what they suggested you'd have saved thousands - and a lot of embarrassment!"
Tony Martin was a different situation: it's difficult to argue "reasonable force" or "self-defence" when shooting someone in the back. Kind of put his supporters on the back foot there.
Burglars are nothing to do with trespass: trespass doesn't involve breaking and entering. Burglary does and is therefore a criminal offence. Totally different in law.