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.

So what do you propose?

She had the gun legally and she legally had the right to defend herself.

Do you want to change either of those things?

Desperate, terrified people do crazy stuff, the law on self defence appears to recognise that.

I wonder if the OP will be back to clarify whether her problem is with the SYG law or with the 2nd Amendment? As they are different things.

I use guns quite regularly, they are no more nasty than any other tool/weapon and are very useful.

Qasi, you could if you had a really long sword

I think the story I posted illustrates the problem of the SYG law in the US when taken in the context of the gun laws.

The SYG law means that anyone on your property in the US can be legally killed in self defence. (My understanding of it anyway - happy to be corrected). It means that householders can shoot first and ask questions later - without any legal recriminations.

Guns being freely owned by households mean that innocent people knocking on a front door in the US can be shot dead- and that's apparently 'self defence'. Not a good thing imo.

I know that the right to bear arms is an incredibly important and historical part of the American Constitution. However, I don't think historically it was enshrined in this way so that people could shoot innocent visitors through the front door.

could you get a really long sword through a door?

if you were King arthur maybe!

And you have to actually enter someone's house in the US for the householder to be able to shoot you without recrimination. You could just be on his land.

What if he had his ear to the door and you stuck a knitting needle through the keyhole getting him or her in the balls?
Sorry I am feeling silly now, I will go and do something else.

From what I could ascertain the UK and the Florida law were pretty much the same, a jury would decide whether the force used was reasonable.

America is not going to change the Constitution. It is very much a part of who they are.

You have yourselves to thank for their keenness to bear arms.

You don't actually have to enter someone's house...

I don't think anyone's asked for America to change it's constitution well, not on this thread anyway. We have 'ourselves to thank'? Odd statement.

I was just pointing out that I doubt the forefathers of America had the 'right to blast burglars, or innocent visitors, through the front door' in mind when they wrote the 'right to bear arms' part.

It was added in part because the English were trying to disarm the patriots.

So what do you want? For Americans not tion have the right tuition bear arms or for them not to have the right to self defence?

Weird, for 'tion' and 'tuition' read 'to'.

What would I like?

I'd like to see fewer guns in the world - but I'm just an ole pacifist.

I agree with the op in that I sincerely hope the uk never goes down the same route as the US - either with SYG laws or with gun laws.

I love a lot about America, and a lot of American people - but I wouldn't like to live there because of the gun laws. I think the genie is out of the bottle as far as gun ownership is concerned - people get them because they feel they have to get them because everyone else has them.

Don't forget that a lot of Americans are against their gun laws too - it's not a US vs Brit issue. Plenty of Brits I know would love the Uk to introduce similar gun laws - but it's not for me.

Theodorakis, I don't recognise the picture of the UK you are painting...

shit education, negligent healthcare and no social control in some areas and rationed funds spent on an illegal war.

^^ this in particular seems way off the mark. Do you have anything other than anecdotal evidence of the above?

I don't believe you either when you state that you have been the victim of burglary 20 times in one year, as well as having a niece bitten by an HIV infected burglar, as well as having graffiti and a shitting woman on your doorstep.

Sounds as though you are making up stories to back up your side of the debate tbh.

Also, fwiw - the last mass terrorism was 5 years, 3 months and 9 days ago.... so not exactly years and years ago was it?

Sorry - 7 years, 3 months and nine days.... still not so long.

Jesus christ I lived in 2 of the roughest estates in WIGAN and didn't get all that crap...

I lived in the 'most burgled street in Britain' at one time.

I wasn't burgled

I wonder if the op will be back....blah blah.

Morloth i have been working a 12 hour day. Sorry I wasnt here to hang on your every sentence!

My stance is that I watched the panorama programme and thought the law reactionary and rather than reducing crime levels it has led to an increase.

Not all people are reasonable. Some people are aggressive and reactionary and much as we love to defend our material possessions. It is not worth killing someone for.

In the case of defending my family I believe that carrying guns escalates the crime from burglary to murder. The SYG law escalates this even further.

I have my opinion you clearly have yours. Please don't ever own a firearm morloth I think it could lead to trouble.

I do own firearms, have done since I was 18. Never shot a person, nor had an accident.

Can you explain to me the difference between the UK's self defence laws and the SYG law?

Look up the Tony Martin case Morloth. It may help you.

• sorry, posted without meaning to

...help you understand the different ways that people who act in self defence are treated in both countries.

Will do.

Bit the laws as set out on the cps website and on the Florida law website look very very similar.

There is no 'duty to retreat' under UK law, how does that differ from SYG?

Self defence, according to UK law, must be reasonable and proportionate. I don't know much about SYG so I don't know whether they word this in the same way, or how this would be interpreted in practice if they do.

The Tony Martin case seems like a good example because it's one of the most high-profile cases of self defence in the UK. If I remember correctly, he was a farmer who had been repeatedly burgled. He had a firearms licence. When he discovered two burglars on his property he chased them, shot one of them and he died. Martin was arrested and tried for murder, was convicted and sent to prison. He had claimed self defence but the prosecution sucessfully argued that because the burglar had been shot in the back, he wasn't defending himself, since the man must have been retreating at the time and therefore shooting him was unnecessary.

If I have understood the points made on this thread, and if they were correct, then under SYG Martin would not have been charged with murder. Under UK laws, though, the force he used was not reasonable or proportionate.

From what I can work out (just based on those two websites), the outcome would have been the same.

It is down to a jury to decide whether the force was reasonable in both countries.

So in the US he would have been charged with murder, argued self defence and then the jury would have been asked to decide, same as the UK.

I agree IvorHugh. I was thinking of the Tony Martin case earlier in the thread - I totally agree that what he did was murder. The burglars were unarmed and running away. There was no apparent risk to him - no argument for self defence.

There was some level of outrage in the UK about him being put in prison - but I imagine this was from the people that would support SYG type laws in the UK. I do not.

There is no equivalent to SYG in the UK - there is some discussion about what constitutes 'reasonable force' in self defence - but there is no defence in law for shooting burglars in the back who are running away.