To think the 'stand your ground' law in America is horrendous.

[Loveweekends10]

I hope we never adopt that law which has led to an 8% increase in homicides in some American states.

Seeing as the gun laws in the US and UK are poles apart, why would you worry that the law is coming to you?

Has Zimmerman been cleared for murder under the Stand Your Ground Laws then?

A burglar's life is not worth more to me than my home and family. You break into someone's home you take the chance they will use extreme force.

Moral of the story is don't break into people's houses.

What are we talking about? Are we talking specifically about Trayvon Martin or are we speaking about the laws in general?

From what I have read the Stand Your Ground law would not be applicable in the Trayvon Martin case.

And please don't comment on the Trayvon Martin case when you so obviously know nothing about the other side of the story. Zimmerman reported that Martin attacked him first and was on top of him, beating him and slammimg his head into the ground. He shot him in self defence. Zimmerman had a deep gash on the back of his head and TWO eye witnesses have testified that they saw Zimmerman on his back on the ground and Martin punching him.

I will accept that there are conflicting reports on this case. But a lot of the above is either disputed on incorrect. Stating as a fact that "he shot him in self defence" certainly is. That is for the jury to decide.

The Trayvon Martin case has been massive and controversial in the US and I don't really think that without reading the endless press coverage and various statements etc we should comment.

I do however think that the gun laws in the US are horrendous. I don't know if anyone saw Question Time the other week where based on the shootings in Manchester it was suggested arming police. I was very pleased to see that across all the political parties there was agreement that this would not be suitable for our country. Yes you can quite easily, well not as easy as walking into a shop, but you can quite easily get a gun in the UK but I'm so pleased we live in a society where it is mainly part of the undercurrent, particularly in cities, and not the mainstream and not every bloody house has a gun.

I remember when I was in NYC last year, and there was a story how a father had fatally shot his son on the premise he believed him to be a burglar entering his neighbours house. He only later discovered he had murdered his son. Even if it hadn't been his son, it would have been someone else's who had unnecessarily died.

If, as a society we value possessions and money over life then I think we are fundamentally wrong. By all means protect your family but to kill over possessions is sickening.

The following is also in dispute

"His crime was being black and teenaged and therefore looking like trouble. The laws helped create a culture where George Zimmerman immediately resorted to violence to 'protect' property that wasn't in any danger."

"Has main crime seems to be not walking fast enough for a rainy night. "

As I said above, not exactly a great example to use as a debate on the stand your ground law or use of force in self-defence in general as nobody will agree on what the premises are for the debate.
There's witnesses who place Trayvon on top of Zimmerman as an agressor which could justify the use of fatal force in self-defence if those circumstances are true.
There are other reports which paint Zimmerman as the sole agressor, in which case it's hard to think of any scenario which would justify the use of fatal force.

However to try and claim that one side has been verified and the other disproved, or to base an argument on either as being representative of what occurred that night seems misleading to me when nobody yet knows the facts.

To clarify, obviously I wasn't there so don't know what happened.

But the reason he originally wasn't charged is because the police decided Zimmerman had acted legally under Stand Your Ground. Cue outrage and Jesse Jackson and Pres Obama getting involved and Zimmerman was re-arrested.

Of course no-one should be shot for merely walking through a gated community. My point is merely that that is not an accurate picture of Zimmerman's defence.

See I think the idea that the police should not have guns and only criminals should is bloody stupid.

But here is the thing. I am NOT a UK citizen, I don't get to tell the UK how to arrange it's laws.

I get the tell the Australian government what I want. America has the laws it wants. If the majority of the people do not want this law then it is their job to get up and do something about it.

Morloth, I know it must seem baffling.

I think burglary is not just about " things", it is about someone coming into your house with force, possibly willing to kill the occupants and their children if they need to ( they are not exactly reasonable law abiding citizens, those burglars, are they? And often high on drugs so you can t even reason with them).

Having your house burgled is very traumatic, the ONE place where you should be able to feel safe. To have this violated is a massive blow, emotionally, psychologically, I mean, sod the posessions, it is scary to think people could just walk in and take and ruin what they like.

You don t feel safe in your own house. I have once spent a night in the dark by my front door, when burglars were roaming through the building ( when we lived in South America), that was the fucking longest night of my life. It took ages for the police to come. I thought, if they try my door: I must protect my children. If I would have had aroper weapon, I would have used it. As it was, I just baricaded the door with my sofa. Like I say, sod posessions, it is about something much bigger than that.

Talk to some people who have been burgled and see what they say

I know people who have been robbed. Hell where I grew up I knew plenty of people who were doing the robbing.

Must be terrifying, and burglers take the risk that people will react violently in their terror.

Once again, the best way to not get killed robbing someone's house is to not rob their house. Very simple, I manage it everyday.

I live in Canada and some people are surprised to find out that we have more guns per capita than the US. A hell of a lot less shootings here. The rule here is that you have to store the gun locked and the ammo separately which means that you would be much better off calling 911 than bothering to unlock everything and shoot someone.

I worked with a lot of ex-offenders in the UK and I think that people misunderstand the benefits of the Police not carrying guns (as well as private citizens). All the offender has to be is faster and fitter than the Police and they will get away. If caught, their sentence will be much shorter than if they had a gun. There may be some motivation to carry one (being hard, other criminals) but there is a lot of motivation not to. If we arm Police and private citizens there is every reason for the criminals to carry them and they have better access than we do.

The deal with police not having guns here is that some police have guns. If the situation requires it they can be brought in and often are.

Not carrying guns is really important, it prevents a premature escalation of violence and supports the message of policing with consent.

Arming police in the US hasn't seen a reduction in crime, violence or murders. There are however a hell of a lot more shootings than in the UK.

And just for the record, my house has been burgled. I have experienced multiple burglaries throughout the different properties I've lived in. 2 times having a confrontation with a burglar. Yes I was lucky in that those I encountered didn't attack me or seem violent but I think the situation might have changed had I been stood there with a gun. Mainly because if I had access to a gun through our societal laws those individuals would be more likely to have a gun and then its whoever is quicker or has the bigger balls. I completely understand protecting your family and yes I would of course use all resources available in that situation but just to protect my 'things' I wouldn't like the guilt of killing another person over things on my conscience. I would only want to do that if I had to and I think thats less likely to occur when there is less access to guns.

Yes, but by criminalising the ownership of guns you ensure that only criminals have weapons. Given your user name MrsTerryPratchett I am sure you have heard that before.

I think it is fine that the UK police don't carry guns, that is what the country wants, I think it is fine that US has a stand your ground law, that is what the country wants. The joys of democracy.

Gun laws in Oz, very similar to Canada I think.

It all has to be locked up seperately, we have guns in the house out at 'home' (outback), but I have no reason have one in the house here in the suburbs, if I did believe I had a reason I would have one - within the terms of the law of my country, that I agree with.

Morloth.

Are some people advocating the death sentence for burglary?

In many US jurisdictions, you have a duty to retreat while under attack. The stand-your-ground laws, where they exist, are meant to remove the duty to retreat requirement from certain locations. In a very large number of states, you have no duty to retreat while in your own home, for example.

AFAIK the concept of duty to retreat does not exist in UK jurisdictions - we use the concept of reasonable force in self-defence instead. So YABU because our legal system doesn't consider the right of self-defence in the same way.

Problems arise when it comes to what constitutes an attack or what places are exempted from the duty to retreat (e.g. public places), or what force you can use. So the legislation does need to be drafted pretty carefully, I think, and there may be questions over how these laws are interpreted in some cases. But the laws can differ quite a lot from state to state - it's not a blanket "shoot anyone you like" law - and the US does have a system for challenging unconstitutional laws and judicial decisions.

Public opinion on these types of laws is significantly different in the US because many people live in rural areas where they can't reasonably expect the police to get to them quickly in an emergency, and because there are high rates of gun ownership and use of guns in crime. Fewer people in the UK would be physically able to offer deadly force in self defence, I think, because they don't tend to own guns. You have to look at the overall picture.

Nah, I wouldn't actually want people executed by the state for burglery. I don't want the state executing anyone, hence why I don't lobby for the death penalty in my country.

However, you take your chances when you put people in desperate situations.

There was a case here years ago where some morons broke into a Samurai master's house to steal his swords, two of them were killed. Welcome to natural selection.

If someone is killed whilst robbing someone's home, then shrug, I don't care.

That doesn't make a huge amount of sense to me, to be honest.

OK.

I'm so glad I'm in the UK.

I'm obviously just so passive ...er peaceful ... non-murdering errrm, British. Yes, that's the word I'm looking for :)

A quick google of the self defence laws in my country appears to show them to be quite reasonable to me - so no need for change from my perspective. I will do what I deem necessary in any situation in any case without too much thought to whether it is legal or not. If it isn't then I expect to be held to my country's laws if necessary.

I am sure that if enough Americans feel this law is inappropriate, being a democracy they will make a bit of noise and get it changed.

If someone broke into my home I wouldn't particularly care less whether they got killed or not tbh. I'd just hit them as hard as I could with whatever came to hand.

That's good Sabrina, you have the laws you want.

As do the US by the looks of things - is there a large movement to have this law changed?

I expect, like most people, if my family were at immediate risk of harm I'd do whatever I could to protect them. I don't think I'd try and kill someone who was trying to nick our stuff.

You're very defensive though Morloth.

I absolutely agree that people can defend themselves in their own home if they feel at risk - the UK law supports this also. I think the US gun laws are something to be feared though. I prefer a home without a gun.

"Are some people advocating the death sentence for burglary? "

don't think anyones advocated state enforced execution for it yet no. Although burglary need not be solely a property based crime, it could also include someone trespassing to rape, kill or seriously assault.

What has been said by some however that they do support the notion that there should be no duty to retreat.
And what I said earlier was that I value my possessions greater than the life of a burglar and as such if I was put in a position by a burglar where the choice was allow them to take my stuff or kill them I'd choose kill them.
However this is very unlikely to ever happen as I value my life too much to take the risk, but if I heard of a burglar being killed where the force used was necessary to prevent them carrying out their crime then I would not wish to see the person who acted to protect their property prosecuted.