Jump to content

Builder jailed for a year for shooting two free jumpers


Baddbaz

Recommended Posts

Just heard this on Lbc . A builder in Horsham has been jailed for a year for shooting at what he thought was 2 burglars on a neighbours roof with an air rifle , .They turned out to be a couple of free jumpers trespassing on a neighbours roof. . Your thoughts guys .

Do you think a year is an over reaction ?

And do you think the free jumpers should be prosecuted for trespassing . ? As they seem to have got off Scott free apart from a couple of pellet wounds. .

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 86
  • Created
  • Last Reply

He's an utter *fruitcage*wit and a year is not nearly enough.
If you see someone burgling a house, you call the police and stay the *fruitcage* away unless there's a clear and present danger to innocents' lives.
- And even then you should *fruitcage* stay in your lane if you don't actually have the means and training required to intervene safely.

Of course they shouldn't be prosecuted - at BEST they could get a fine, but that is unlikely to happen, and I see no need for it either.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Ultimately we have to ask ourselves what is the value of human life? If someone breaks into my home with a bid to steal my property, I need to ask myself, is my property worth more than that persons life? The answer, in the moment, I would hope, is no! My property can be replaced, it should be insured. That person can not be replaced, and with my killing them I remove any chance they have of change.....

 

I'm not condoning theft or any other criminal activity, but we have a problem in society that life is given a very low street value.

 

I don't believe that people are inherently "scrotes", often times, we are a product of our environment and upbringing. Sure, we have a choice, but it's not always clear to those who perpetrate the crime that they do have a choice....life just isn't black and white, good and evil, even if the bible tries to paint it that way.

 

If someone is endangering another life, or, if in the scenario I started out with, the person breaking into my home threatens to harm my family, then all bets are off....I would have to respond with violence to counter the acts of an aggressor....in that case, I would consider the agressor to have committed suicide....live by the sword, die by the sword and all that.

 

But would I chose a TV over a human life.....no.

Link to post
Share on other sites
But would I chose a TV over a human life.....no.

 

Very true but nothing says don't do it again like a swift kick in the balls, tying them up with cable ties and calling the police. However even that is consider an act of assault on someone that is doing you wrong in the first place.

 

As for everyone has a chance, I can't agree entirely as thievry is often a career case and one that is very common among repeat offenders. Someone with say kleptomania is different as they often do it in broad daylight and admit they need help but (and this is coming from having family that have worked in the prison service for a number of years) some people just don't change and many of those that repeat offend are thieves due to the low risk in this country when you combine the fact that defending your property is considered wrong in a culture of suing each other and the penalties are sadly very lenient.

 

In regard to the original post I think that no a year isn't too much as other steps could have been taken first bar such a silly reaction but of course the free jumpers should be prosecuted too for trespass and be given the appropriate level of sentence for it. Both are in the wrong and both should face penalties for their actions simple as.

 

'FireKnife'

Link to post
Share on other sites

Dunno about you guys, but I work bloody hard for my belongings and I'll be damned if some scumbag who doesn't fancy working for his own stuff is gonna waltz into my home and take them without a severe beating.

 

After all, "he came right at me officer, I thought he was going to kill me"

Link to post
Share on other sites

Pkekyo-Nor's absolutely right, the builder's an imbecile. The general position in the law is that he can claim defence of property (even property that is not his own) only for actions that would be reasonable in light of the circumstances as he believed them to be. So, a court will generously accept his position that he thought his neighbour was being burgled, and then ask in light of that - is shooting at them with an air rifle a reasonable response?

 

Clearly not! Phone the police, go outside and bang bin lids together, phone your neighbour, whatever. Don't start shooting at people you haven't properly identified with a firearm inside what I assume were London suburban limits! As to the other two, I expect they'll get into trouble for trespassing, but that's a civil offence (i.e., not criminal, so they will be sued, not prosecuted) and is unlikely to amount to much.

 

I'm not condoning theft or any other criminal activity, but we have a problem in society that life is given a very low street value.

 

I definitely agree that it's not worth killing someone over some consumer goods. However, I think actually British society places quite a high value upon human life, which is why homeowners who kill invaders (e.g. Tony Martin) are prosecuted and convicted even when it's clear that the burglars' course of action was criminal from the start. You would struggle to find a court in the US or continental Europe that would convict a homeowner who killed burglars on his own property.

 

Very true but nothing says don't do it again like a swift kick in the balls, tying them up with cable ties and calling the police. However even that is consider an act of assault on someone that is doing you wrong in the first place.

 

Like in this situation, the question is, is tying the burglars up and kicking them in the balls a reasonable response to them burgling you? Arguably, from the point of view of anyone who's ever been burgled (i.e., me) clearly yes, and I'll throw in some more kicks too. But a court would probably see that as false imprisonment; after all, society says that you want the burglars as far away from you as possible and to call the police, who will deal with it, not to attempt to detain them in your house. If you let them leave with your TV, then they're gone, and you're down a TV. If you attempt to stop them, the chances of someone getting hurt (which you wish to avoid) are much higher, so it seems less and less reasonable to attempt to do stop them.

 

In terms of the habitual criminal, I'm afraid I'm with FireKnife on this one. When I studied criminology the general consensus was that 90% of British crime was committed by a tiny, committed fraction of the population - life-long criminals who know the system and don't play by its rules. Society can't really cope with people who reject those conventions so utterly; shaming and hobbling someone with a conviction doesn't work if they and their social group don't see a conviction as shaming and don't expect ever to apply for a job where the conviction would be a problem. Whether or not (like Inq Eisenhorn says) those individuals are products of their environment, the undeniable truth is that it is better for society for them to be removed from it until they are rehabilitated.

Link to post
Share on other sites

This is the trouble with the law and its implementation nowadays . The sympathy always seems to go to the perpetrators rather than the victims . I also think both party's should have been prosecuted . This case sends out the message that it is ok to trespass on other people's property as long as you are not burgling it . So much for an englishmans house being his castle . Being a builder myself in the daytime I would love to see if any damage was done in the process of jumping across people's roofs , gutterings etc .

Where would the judge stand if they had fallen of the roof and damaged a person / themselves or someone's property .

Unfortuantly these two idiots will gain kudos amongst thieir friends whilst a hard working builder will be in prison . Away from his family . Not an ideal outcome by any stretch of the imagination .

As for the criminal anology , I can tell you having been on both sides of the fence that 99 % of people have commited a criminal act . The seriousness of that act is what defines a person as a criminal . Find me a guy or woman who works in an office , store etc that hasn't stolen a posted note pad , pen , tools even fuel from an employer, school , supermarket etc at some time in their lives . There at criminals who make it a career / lifestyle and others who do it out of neccesity or are opertunist . Some people avoid tax , all criminal acts . How high you stand in society depicts what is and is not acceptable behaviour . Even mps steal from the British public. ,

Link to post
Share on other sites

There was a case recently when a homeowner defended himself with an air rifle, he didn't go to jail because he called it, IE He said to the guy who broke into his house 'I'm armed, GTFO' (Paraphrased of course) and only after that warning, and the criminal persisted, did he shoot. Perfectly reasonable self/home defence.

 

This situation is quite different, the shooter this time apparently gave no warning, no opportunity for the "scrotes" to identify themselves, he just went ahead with shooting at them. A year is a reasonable sentence for using an air rifle like that without engaging brain first.

 

 

Course the free runners should be put to court for trespassing and for any damage they may have caused(Some free runners are quite the vandals, most aren't)

Link to post
Share on other sites

What I don't quite understand is how some folks will consider the use of airsoft guns, the very guns we use for weekend recreational fun as a means to deploy non-lethal force. If you think your life is in danger from some professional criminal or drug junkie, the last thing you want to do is annoy them with stinging bbs considering the possibility that they may be more adequately armed than you. It's like bringing a rubber knife in a knife fight.

Link to post
Share on other sites

This is the attitude that allows criminals to thrive in our societies

If a man is breaking into your home and threatening your property, itsa pretty sure bet that hed be willing to hurt you too if he finds you when he breaks and enters, and if somebody break into my house, they leave on a stretcher or a bodybag, I dont give two *fruitcage*s if hes down on his luck or just turning his life aroud, go get a *fruitcage* job and dont trespass on people properties, and no I dont wait for him to threaten me personally, hes in my house, THATS a threat, he gets the *suitcase* kicked out of him

Ultimately we have to ask ourselves what is the value of human life? If someone breaks into my home with a bid to steal my property, I need to ask myself, is my property worth more than that persons life? The answer, in the moment, I would hope, is no! My property can be replaced, it should be insured. That person can not be replaced, and with my killing them I remove any chance they have of change.....

 

I'm not condoning theft or any other criminal activity, but we have a problem in society that life is given a very low street value.

 

I don't believe that people are inherently "scrotes", often times, we are a product of our environment and upbringing. Sure, we have a choice, but it's not always clear to those who perpetrate the crime that they do have a choice....life just isn't black and white, good and evil, even if the bible tries to paint it that way.

 

If someone is endangering another life, or, if in the scenario I started out with, the person breaking into my home threatens to harm my family, then all bets are off....I would have to respond with violence to counter the acts of an aggressor....in that case, I would consider the agressor to have committed suicide....live by the sword, die by the sword and all that.

 

But would I chose a TV over a human life.....no.

Link to post
Share on other sites

What I don't quite understand is how some folks will consider the use of airsoft guns, the very guns we use for weekend recreational fun as a means to deploy non-lethal force. If you think your life is in danger from some professional criminal or drug junkie, the last thing you want to do is annoy them with stinging bbs considering the possibility that they may be more adequately armed than you. It's like bringing a rubber knife in a knife fight.

 

But don't they yell "out"? For shame if they don't.

 

This thing; sounds like he had other issues.

 

The shooting was in broad daylight of a group sitting on a roof. Sounds more like the scaffolding was an attractive nuisance and the shooter went Dirty Harry.

 

No use of force wheel in the world is going to connect the dots in a way that would justify his response.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Trespassing isn't a part of criminal law for the most part. It's a part of civil law and would be up to the owner of the property to try and take them to civil court. A rooftop wouldn't even fall under being found in an enclosed space under the vagrancy act. You could possibly be arrested under suspicion of burglary but apart from places that have by-laws, such as railways, you wouldn't normally be prosecuted for trespass. If asked to leave and they tell you to *fruitcage* off, then that's a different thing and falls under aggravated trespass which is a crime.

 

That's my understanding of things anyway.

Link to post
Share on other sites

What I don't quite understand is how some folks will consider the use of airsoft guns, the very guns we use for weekend recreational fun as a means to deploy non-lethal force. If you think your life is in danger from some professional criminal or drug junkie, the last thing you want to do is annoy them with stinging bbs considering the possibility that they may be more adequately armed than you. It's like bringing a rubber knife in a knife fight.

most of my guns can be used as very effective clubs, steel receivers and wood stocks FTW!

Link to post
Share on other sites

I think its more the case of the intruder being fooled into thinking that you have a real gun in your hands . !

Wouldn't want to rob just BB guns owners house , the intruders would be on the floor still laughing as the police arrive !

Can't even hit someone with one either as it would shatter into a hundred bits of bright orange plastic before you managed to hurt anyone with it .. Lol

You could always use a g3 with 800 quids worth of upgrades to scare the life out of them !

Link to post
Share on other sites

most of my guns can be used as very effective clubs, steel receivers and wood stocks FTW!

That's not gonna matter much if your would-be perpetrator is high on meth and has a .38 now would it?. Heroics and chest pounding aside, if you aren't prepared to deliver lethal force on your own (and I mean with the use of a proper weapon like a real gun) leave it to the people whose job is to deal with such situations then get into a panic room or get out of the house.

Link to post
Share on other sites

The builder needed what he got, if not longer. Using an air rifle? It's not likely to stop someone, wrong tool for the job and all that.

 

Also, it was pre-meditated I'm guessing, as he would have had to go and fetch said rifle. If he had lobbed a hammer at them he had close to hand, maybe a different outcome for him.

 

As for the nobheads legging it across a roof? Tossers. There's a time and a place for free running, and someone's roof isn't it. Tiles/slates etc break easily, damaging someone's house directly, and indirectly through water ingress. They aren't 'edgy' and 'cool', they are idiots who were lucky they didn't fall.

 

Everyone at this party was a *fruitcage*wit.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Having had people trespass in my family's garden (people on a fox hunt a number of years ago, I live in the countryside) our response was to tell them to *fruitcage* off in no uncertain terms, remember this was a guy on a horse who apparently wanted to bring a pack of dogs onto someone else's land. He complied, if he had not we would have called the police. We did not start taking pot shots at the guy with air rifles even though that would have been entirely possible and indeed, quite tempting. Shooting at people you haven't even identified with a potentially lethal weapon is incredibly stupid, more so in an urban environment when you have no clear idea of what or who is on the other side of your target.

Link to post
Share on other sites

The builder got what he deserved but if no criminal damage was done to the property, then the free runners are free to go. The builder sounds like a moron. If he had shouted and phoned the police, we wouldn't be talking about it, as the runners would have probably fled.

Link to post
Share on other sites

That's a matter of debate. As long as they don't use force to gain entry to your property, don't steal or damage anything, and leave when asked to do so, then there isn't much in the way of a crime that has been committed. The property owner could pursue it in a civil court but it would be a waste of time and money for no real gain.

 

That's my interpretation of the laws regarding trespass based upon the experiences of myself and many peoples know who have been on both sides of this issue.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use and the use of session cookies.