[Escamsrasiush]

If there is money in it for them they will say yes.

Or am I just cynical.

[reaciciomarep]

Anyone is allowed to use maximum wanton force when dealing with Solicitors(lawyers - US). Do I have a Second?

I read that as maximum wonton force... had this mental image of lawyers being pelted with small dumplings

[Goooooblin]

It is true to say that:
Were is not for the lawyers, the world would be in better shape than it is today.

It is also true to say:

Were it not for the lawyers,


...It would be a hell of a lot worse than it is today....

[Konservir]

I read that as maximum wonton force... had this mental image of lawyers being pelted with small dumplings

I've changed my mind. I like this Sooo much more than my idea.

Can we dip the wontons in a hot gooey sauce?

[Dilangos]

I've changed my mind. I like this Sooo much more than my idea.

Can we dip the wontons in a hot gooey sauce?

Napalm?

[Nautilus]

No, it is reasonable force for the public. Minimum force for the Police, the Prison Service and Custom and Excise

Unfortunately, "reasonable" is not defined in law. What can be reasonable for one person can be extreme for another i.e people on a jury, the police etc.

Someone breaks into your house, pulls a knife on you you'd just better hope that the jury takes the fact that you smashed a old wooden curtain pole that just happened to be lying around straight on to his head causing a skull fracture as being "reasonable" force.

Someone breaking into my house and threatening my daughter will see a whole new definition of "reasonable" force.

There are a whole raft of tales here about burglars breaking into a house and being savaged by a pet or hit by the house owner and either suing the house owner or the the police arresting them. The view of most ordinary people here is that a burglar leaves their rights outside the house when they burgle it. The police and courts don't take that view. And don't ever defend yourself against a mugger, and never, ever help someone who is being mugged. The police will arrest you faster than you can say "aren't you going after the mugger?". You are easier to arrest and prosecute. The mugger will be difficult. Or am I just being cynical as well?

And all because the definition of "reasonable" is not strictly defined in law.

[gennnniiikk]

I've changed my mind. I like this Sooo much more than my idea.

Can we dip the wontons in a hot gooey sauce?

Noooooo! You'll get sued if they eat them as that may cause them to get fat and die of a heart attack. And it will be your fault! After all, it's McDonalds fault that people eat loads of burgers and get fat.

[Lorionasodi]

The view of most ordinary people here is that a burglar leaves their rights outside the house when they burgle it. The police and courts don't take that view. And don't ever defend yourself against a mugger, and never, ever help someone who is being mugged. The police will arrest you faster than you can say "aren't you going after the mugger?". You are easier to arrest and prosecute. The mugger will be difficult. Or am I just being cynical as well?

This is something i always wondered about, what you said is pretty much true when it comes to facing a burglar in your house in this country.

And all because the definition of "reasonable" is not strictly defined in law.

They say reasonable, as if all the people are budo saints or can reasonably react when faced with extreme situations. You're the one attacked but you have to be a "professional" about how you deal with the situation. Utter BS.

[tevyrefficy]

There are a whole raft of tales here about burglars breaking into a house and being savaged by a pet or hit by the house owner and either suing the house owner or the the police arresting them. The view of most ordinary people here is that a burglar leaves their rights outside the house when they burgle it. The police and courts don't take that view. And don't ever defend yourself against a mugger, and never, ever help someone who is being mugged. The police will arrest you faster than you can say "aren't you going after the mugger?". You are easier to arrest and prosecute. The mugger will be difficult. Or am I just being cynical as well?

And all because the definition of "reasonable" is not strictly defined in law.

There was this one story that my jujitsu sensei told me that made me laugh though. A 6ft5 docker-type had been watching this old japanese mans house and decided to break into it and rob him, hes an old man, what could he do? What he didnt realise was that he was something like a 6th dan in jujitsu, he broke his arm and nose easily and the guy ran off with nothing. The burgler then decided to sue this 5ft odd old man for asault and he just got laughed at. I cant confirm the story but I'd like to think its true

[economex]

There was a similar story of a guy suing a 16yr-old girl for assault. Turned out he had a conviction for attepted rape, and the year before it happened, the girl became an under-16 female judo champion.

Broken shoulder blade and some vertebrae damage, if I recall...

I could almost believe in god when I read about this stuff.

[GoblinGaga]

There was a similar story of a guy suing a 16yr-old girl for assault. Turned out he had a conviction for attepted rape, and the year before it happened, the girl became an under-16 female judo champion.

Broken shoulder blade and some vertebrae damage, if I recall...

I could almost believe in god when I read about this stuff.

Shame.............it wasn't more. I love it when you hear about some low life attacking what they think is a defenceless individual, only to have the tables turned on them. Seems like justice to me.

[mp3 free]

There was a similar story of a guy suing a 16yr-old girl for assault. Turned out he had a conviction for attepted rape, and the year before it happened, the girl became an under-16 female judo champion.

Broken shoulder blade and some vertebrae damage, if I recall...

I could almost believe in god when I read about this stuff.

Bravo. What a nutjob. Suing a 'victim' for something he brought on to himself. It's like someone suing a person he ran over with a car for a dent caused by him.
Think he would've gotten away with it if he didn't have conviction for attempted rape?

[Preegovesem]

Noooooo! You'll get sued if they eat them as that may cause them to get fat and die of a heart attack. And it will be your fault! After all, it's McDonalds fault that people eat loads of burgers and get fat.

I am used to things being my fault - I am a married man

[Knillagrarp]

I am used to things being my fault - I am a married man

I'm divorced - but it was probably my fault!

[VYholden]

I am sure from her perspective you were totally at fault.

Girls....good job job they're beautiful, clever and have boobs and bums otherwise we would ignore them. And be forever lost........

[cheapphenonline]

I am sure from her perspective you were totally at fault.

Girls....good job job they're beautiful, clever and have boobs and bums otherwise we would ignore them. And be forever lost........

You've obviously not seen some of my girlfriends! At least they qualified on the other two counts.

[iiilizium]

"It's like someone suing a person he ran over with a car for a dent caused by him."

Given the way some pedestrians act (myself included) I wouldn't mind seeing that. You can be charged with jaywalking here but I havn't heard of a single case since the bill was passed.

About the guy in the house with the sword. Is it just me or did he try and stop the guy as he was leaving, thereby trapping him? If, as the father said, the burgler had had a gun that could have ended up really bad.

[Matajic]

As an aside, Pete - you've got to learn how to click the 'quote' button...

[benderkoz]

As an aside, Pete - you've got to learn how to click the 'quote' button...

Trudat

On reflection about above guy, while I still think it was stupid to leave the burgler with no escape, that was pretty damn brave.

[highattainlet]

leaving[/I], thereby trapping him? If, as the father said, the burgler had had a gun that could have ended up really bad.

To repeat, Florida has a "castle doctrine", which means you are legally allowed to use whatever force you deem necessary to protect yourself and your property.

Given that they got the guy, it probably would have been better if the kid hadn't tried to stab him with the sword.

In a side note, ethically, I don't know how I'd feel if I killed someone, especially if there was another way open to defuse the situation. Of course, if they're out to get me (and who says they aren't?), all bets are off.