Woman Kills Boyfriend By Sitting on Him

I don't feel they do though or at least they shouldn't be given any rights. I bet any of us would react the same in that gent's situation
 
Not sure what this cricket bat story is but over here you can only use deadly force when you are in imminent danger. If you chase a robber out of your home and shoot him on the street, that is murder. If you shoot him when he is in your house, that is self defense, and even then he must be holding a weapon or threatening you in some way.
 
The cricket bat incident occured when a thief was running away from a robbery and two guys chased after him and beat him to death with a cricket bat.

I think there is a fine line between self defence and just cold blooded murder. If you are threatened then by all means you should react to protect yourself. But you can't just chase after someone and beat them to death. Chase after them, catch them and make sure they face punishment through the justice system.
 
^^^^
That is Murder IMO. They were hunting= murder, they wern't been hunted = Self Defense.
 
That is murder, once the robber left, they were not in any danger, chasing and catching criminals is the police's responsibility.
 
I don't feel they do though or at least they shouldn't be given any rights. I bet any of us would react the same in that gent's situation

No, some of us have evolved beyond savagery. Everyone has rights, no exceptions.
 
So easy to say that Nigel, when you are sitting behind a computer when the adrenalin isn't pumping and your loved one's haven't been in danger.

For what must be the first time in PC history I find myself agreeing with you and not SS.:eek:
 
Evolution or rights? In terms of rights, everyone in the UK has a right to life, 'tis why we haven't had the death penalty for 50 odd years.

Evolution.

You have a point with not having the right to take life.

It's all well and good saying it's inexcusable etc. but unless you're in that position you can't say how you'd react. I'd like to say I wouldn't chase after him, but I can't know. |I'd be willing to say plenty of perfectly nice, polite and reasonable people would react in the same way.

What he did was wrong and it's right for him to be punished.
 
I think when you are forced to defend yourself with a gun, it shows more problems with your country, than it being self defence. People have used guns for self defence here, but it's pretty rare.

Self defence is fine. I think having to defend yourself with a gun is only applicable in certain countries, here, it doesn't apply. So you'd understand if us Brits don't get the concept. Armed robbery is pretty rare here, especially on homes.

Can't really say the country has issues, it's not like its that type of situation in every city. To be fair, when fists didn't work, they got knives, they then went and got pistols, they now just happened to have moved onto AK47's. They've got to get with the times as everyone increases security. It's also got alot to do with their tactics these days, as you'd be very lucky to survive a robbery in an upmarket area of Johannesburg. They basically take on a house like a small army, about 10 guys, 8 of which have assualt rifles and the rest with pistols, the game plan is then to mow anything that moves. Actually if you're able to successfully fend of any robbers with a handgun, they'd either be really crap at what they do, or you've gotta be Bruce Willis or Rambo. Remember, we cant only shoot at them once they've shot at us :sarcasm

Now the above is just housebraking, imagine them taking down a shopping mall or a cash in transit heist!
 
Yep, we had it as a subject for a film study in matric - AKA final year of school - I dunno which one you saw, but there are versions with about 4 different endings floating about. On the topic of that type of movie, ever seen Jerusalema?
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Top