The strong debate on what you would call reasonable force to defend yourself with when you are being attacked and whether the law should be changed. Should you be allowed to kill someone if they are trying to kill you? Or should you do nothing and let the attacker get away?
If we don’t set a proper law, reasonable force could be anything up to murder like in 1999, the Norfolk famer, Tony Martin shot dead an intruder in his home. He was jailed for murder.
The uk law on self defence is that anyone can use ‘ reasonable ‘ force to protect themselves or others, or to carry out an arrest or to prevent crime. That’s why they should be changed because its very hard to judge what is reasonable and what is not.
Judging what counts as reasonable force is very tricky because each case is different, some more unreasonable than others as when Jerome Ersland, the pharmacist, who shot a 16 year old boy six times because he attempted an armed robbery on the pharmacy. This case goes beyond the supposed reasonable force because after he shot the boy the first time he was no longer a big threat and could of possibly revived.
When defending yourself, you would think shooting at someone would be classed as unreasonable force however there was this case where Andy and Tracey Ferrie were in bed when two burglars entered their home. Mr. Ferrie fired his (legally-held) shotgun at the men. The couple were arrested but then released without charge. The judge at the intruders’ trial believes “if you burgle a house in the country where the householder owns a legally held shotgun, that is the chance you take”.
When someone steps onto your property freely. They are completely under your control giving you the ability to do what ever to them within human rights and reason. How ever it’s a fundamental question of how far a person has to go to restrain the intruder/attacker because depending how much of a threat they are.
Even if they haven’t physically damaged you but...
Please join StudyMode to read the full document