Food for though: A single stab in self-defense that causes the attacker to bleed to death is not considered murder. However, if the victim were to continue stabbing multiple times (7 or more I think), the victim establishes premeditation, making it murder.
That's why I sleep with a big enough knife underneath my pillow so that it won't take more than one stab and gut.
That would be premediation. If you're actually planning to use lethal force on a thief that comes into your house, that is murder.
To be honest, I don't support these "Stand your ground" laws, for two main reasons.
1. It makes the victim judge, jury, and executioner. It could be easy to lure someone into your house and then shoot them dead. The thief receives the death penalty for what could have been a small crime.
I'm curious, Leaf. If you are committing armed robbery, and there's a policeman about, he will shoot you. If you're not looking at him, or he has some cover, he'll be kind enough to tell you to drop the weapon first. If you do anything besides that, I'm pretty sure it's standard procedure for them to shoot. Do you support this? If so, exactly how is it different from a normal person in an armed robbery shooting back?
Yes. But policemen are trained to make such decisions, and to not shoot an innocent person randomly. Civilians, on the other hand, are not. A policeman has to establish that the person has a gun and will use it before using lethal force. A civilian, under these laws, may shoot an unarmed and non attacking thief. There is a big difference.
I suppose this comes down to your view on capital punishment. I feel it is wrong due to potential miscarriages of justice (think Sean Hogson over here - released after 27 years in jail for a murder he didn't commit. What would have happened to him in America? Execution for a crime he didn't commit) as you can at least release and clear the name of someone who has been imprisoned falsely. However, even if you are a supporter of capital punishment, you cannot say that it should be used for all crimes. Breaking and entering shouldn't be punishable by death, and a civilian should not have the right to choose if a thief should be killed.
Summary: Self defence allowed, until it's clear that the assailant can no longer fight back/ chase you if you run (broken limb, on the floor, unconscious). If you continue to attack (eg kick in person's head, shoot them, strangle them on floor) then it's murder. An accidental killing in the first stage is manslaughter, and the evidence should be considered as to whether or not it constituted unreasonable self defence.
Author
Topic: Shooting dead thieves... Murder(Wrong)? or Right? (Read 11333 times)