Should people have the legal right... (ENDS 10/7/11)

In that case, we can quite easily conclude this debate by saying that "reasonable force" is far too ambiguous to put a label on. There's also the fact that if you were to give someone a punch, it would be extremely difficult for the judge to rule whether it was reasonable or not, as they weren't aware of the situation. There's also the added complication that either party could lie, too.

In reply to your latter question: it depends on the individual as to what "they like" is. Some would throw them a punch, others would "politely ask them to leave". So yes, I do think it can fall under the category of reasonable force.

Personally i'd use any force to get them away.

Im not sure if the law still stands this way however apprently you cant strike first.. if you strike first it becomes assault.
And if this is still the case i find it pathetic, i wouldnt exactly wait for someone to make the first move, because you never know what they are carrying.

I wouldnt however use excessive force either (i dont fancy becoming a murderer, just yet ;)).

Therefore, yes i believe they should.

If someone is on your property without your consent and are a threat to your life then you should be able to defend your property. IF persuading them to move falls on deaf ears then I think force can be used, but as you said force can mean anything. Part of me thinks "beating them until nearly dead" is the wrong course of action, but each case is different as there is no evidence of who beat who and what happened during the events up to that conclusion.

I think if I was in the situation, I would call the police immediately. If I wasn't near a phone I would get my trusted metal pole out from under my bed and go downstairs and confront them. If they do not move or look as though they're heading for me I would probably throw stuff at them and prepare to beat them. They shouldn't be on the property and should be ready to accept the consequences of trepassing.

This debate happens so often and obviously is a very hard one to say.

The 'grey area' is of course where you draw the line at 'reasonable force', in my opinion were defending your own home which has your family currently residing in, it's very hard to draw a line a line at 'reasonable force' and there does need to be a lot more clear guidelines.

In my own opinion; if you break into someone's house and cause a 'realistic' threat to the life of any of there familly, there should be no limit on the force used to deal with them in this case.

In Georgia the law is that if anyone breaks into a home it is automaticly with the intention to do harm. I myself believe reasonable force is the use of anything to defend oneself or family from harm.

I knew someone many years ago whose father was in jail for punching a burgular and instantly killing them. How far can defending your home can one go? I do agree that we should be allowed to defend our homes, but where do we draw the line? At murder?

im pretty sure we have that right.... my step dad shot a guy who climbed through our window... nothing happened to him, seized gun. so im guessing we have that right.... o.o

Should people have the legal right to defend their homes from burglars using 'reasonable force'?

Imo, no. People do not have legal rights to defend their homes. But, people have legal rights to defend themselves or whoever they know. This is because the word 'burglar' says it all. According to the definition, burglar means robbers. Therefore, they unlawfully breaks into and enters another person's house to steal something. The objective of that is obviously, to steal something. So, burglars have no intention of harming you unless you are standing in his way. If they are trying to rob something from you, you should let him take it instead of hitting them or beating the crap out of them. How can someone kill burglars just to defend their objects? It is not right and if you are in the court, the probability of you to win the case is small. However, people do have legal rights when the burglars have intention to harm you. That will be considered as defending yourself.

Lastly, my answer is still no.

---------- Post added 05-07-2011 at 07:38 PM ----------

In addition to that, if you were to say when somebody trespasses your home, that doesn't mean you have legal rights to use reasonable force against them. Saying that they have legal rights is just like saying North Korea can bomb South Korea whenever South Korea trespassed their boundaries due to a slight misunderstood of boundaries.

---------- Post added 05-07-2011 at 07:40 PM ----------

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Vinnie:Safety

im pretty sure we have that right.... my step dad shot a guy who climbed through our window... nothing happened to him, seized gun. so im guessing we have that right.... o.o

---

Let me guess. The guy that your step dad shot is not dead, right? Well, if he is dead, your step dad won't face simple circumstances such as 'seizing the gun'

---------- Post added 05-07-2011 at 07:41 PM ----------

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Vinnie:Safety

im pretty sure we have that right.... my step dad shot a guy who climbed through our window... nothing happened to him, seized gun. so im guessing we have that right.... o.o

---

Let me guess. The guy that your step dad shot is not dead, right? Well, if he is dead, your step dad won't face simple circumstances such as 'seizing the gun'

I think you should go to the extent you need to to protect yourself, your loved ones and your possessions. Why should someone be allowed to break into your house and do as they please. If they are prepared to break in, they should take the consequences, whether that leaves them with a broken arm or them being killed. I'm sure if they are willing to break into your house, they would be the type of person to kill an intruder in their home.
I don't think you should straight up kill them though, do what you can to get them to leave or to keep them at your house or something till the police get there, but if they don't listen or are fighting back, then use as much force as needed.

You pay for the house, you should own the rights to what happens if a intruder comes on "your payed property"