Another Tony Martin?

[Michael Rolls]

good!
I really believe that the limp-wristed lefties who always come out of the woodwork in cases like this would rather see the householder killed or maimed than that any harm should come to the poor housebreaker, who probably had a disturbed childhood and now has mental health problems.

[Scrumpy]

There's a Go fund me site the farmer's son has set up, donations are already over £20k.  The public are really behind him.

Phew!! For a moment there I thought you were going to say there is a Go Fund me set up for Marcus Smith.. 
it wont surprise me to see one..  I am sure the press will find a sob story to print about him..

[Diasi]

One of the intruders has been charged with aggravated burglary.

A person is guilty of aggravated burglary if he commits any burglary and at the time has with him any firearm or imitation firearm, any weapon of offence, or any explosive; and for this purpose—

"firearm" includes an airgun or air pistol, and "imitation firearm" means anything which has the appearance of being a firearm, whether capable of being discharged or not; and

"weapon of offence" means any article made or adapted for use for causing injury to or incapacitating a person, or intended by the person having it with him for such use.

Which, basically, means they went prepared & intending to inflict physical violence on the occupants of the farm.

[Scrumpy]

I wouldn't hesitate to fire a crossbow at anyone who i thought could be threat to my family..  And I bet most parents would feel the same..
I certainly hope that I wouldn't just lay there and hope that they go away..
I would fire ... no time to ask questions.. 'Are you friend or foe' ?.. 'Are you going to hurt me or my family' ?
The questions can come later.. 
It is they who are up to no good.. not me..
I feel strongly about this topic..

ps.  Does the crossbow come in red.. ?

[muddy]

If you had children would you leave a crossbow , a potentially lethal weapon lying about handy enough to use in an unexpected intrusion ? 

[Scrumpy]

Of course i would not.. I would hope they would learn how dangerous it was.. 
 
I suppose I could get a catapult or a spud gun.. Wouldn't want to hurt those who break in.. It would upset their Mummy...

[Cassandra]

One of the intruders has been charged with aggravated burglary.

A person is guilty of aggravated burglary if he commits any burglary and at the time has with him any firearm or imitation firearm, any weapon of offence, or any explosive; and for this purpose—

"firearm" includes an airgun or air pistol, and "imitation firearm" means anything which has the appearance of being a firearm, whether capable of being discharged or not; and

"weapon of offence" means any article made or adapted for use for causing injury to or incapacitating a person, or intended by the person having it with him for such use.

Which, basically, means they went prepared & intending to inflict physical violence on the occupants of the farm.

Section 3(1) of the Criminal Law Act 1967 states that:

"any person may use such force as is reasonable in the circumstances in preventing a crime or in effecting or assisting in the lawful arrest of offenders or suspected offenders or of persons unlawfully at large."

Reasonable force can be adopted to "prevent a crime".

Also subsection 5, of Section 76 refers to intoxication (another case).

Of course all English Law is subsidiary to the Human Rights Act 1998, article 2 of which states that:

"Everyone's right to life shall be protected by law. No-one shall be deprived of his life intentionally save in the execution of a sentence of court following his conviction of a crime for which this penalty is provided by law."

"Deprivation of life shall not be regarded as inflicted in contravention of the Article when it results from the use of force which is no more than absolutely necessary:

a. In defence of any person from unlawful violence;

b. In order to effect a lawful arrest or to prevent the escape of a person lawfully detained;

c. In action lawfully taken for the purpose of quelling a riot or insurrection."

To sum up, in the case referred to if you arrive 'tooled up' to support an act of burglary, you would expect in some cases to be repelled by assisted physical restraint and judges would so instruct jurors to contain this fact within their judgement. Arguably a Farmer's shotgun is a physical repellant. However within all judgements is the facet of 'reasonable force'. In this instance is a farmer owning a shotgun for say wildlife protection and pest control, justified to express this instrument as an item of reasonable force in defence of his person and property when confronted with 'armed' intruders? Herein is the argument for breaching the HRA 1998, however I defended on many occasions where farmers were discharged for the utility of a shotgun in an act of self defence. The law needs clarity and in todays 'washy-wokey' clamour for criminal liberty, the plaudits for clearing up legitimate armed response will never be changed.

The ungodly can fully expect that in 'knocking off a farm' they may encounter an armed response as most farmers own shotguns. I have successfully argued that within this act they compel the farmer to  resort to shooting in response. Sometimes many intruders target their properties and even if only one is armed the farmer is justified in assuming all invaders are similarly equipped.

[muddy]

I am sure you are familiar with the Tony Martin case .
He was convicted of murder
A nervous older man living alone and targeted in the night by two burglars form the travelling community .
The only thing that got him out of a life sentence was public outrage .