Clear Rule For Burglers Or House Owners On The Island

[BigC]

just incase u wondered what u can or cannot do here are the words from a judge

“If someone breaks into your house it doesn’t matter if you are a foreigner or a Thai. If a criminal enters your property or your home you have the same rights to defend your life and property and can use whatever force is necessary to stop and detain the criminal, then notify the police. There does not need to be a wall around your house. No one is allowed to trespass on your property,” added Chief Judge Visit Sripibool who is also a world-renown author of 13 books.

http://pattaya-times.com/a7392-local-judges-to-explain-foreigners-rights-in-thailand

i meant to put this on the burglery post but i am in a hurry so i have to post it here first.

adios ............

[Daffy D]

Unlike the UK laws where you will be charged with GBH or worse if you so much as touch an intruder.

Some time ago I read about a case in the UK where the house owner struck a burglar, was a long time ago so I forget the details, not only was the householder charged with assault the burglar than sued for loss of earnings for the time he had to spend off work because of the assault.

Crazy or what

[BigC]

Unlike the UK laws where you will be charged with GBH or worse if you so much as touch an intruder.

Some time ago I read about a case in the UK where the house owner struck a burglar, was a long time ago so I forget the details, not only was the householder charged with assault the burglar than sued for loss of earnings for the time he had to spend off work because of the assault.

Crazy or what

Tony Martin. He shot someone who had repeatedly birgled his house in the back.

the police who previously had called many times said that the burgler was leaving and there was not need to shoot him as his life was not in danger.

They did not take the fact that taking someones possessions that they work for is taking money from the victims pocket which is taking away money for food which is threatening your life. specailly when the police were called many times and did nothing.

he got life. then pn appeal his sentence got reduced to manslaughter had to serve 5 years. the full 5 years becuase he showed no remorse.

he also had a bad time in jail because half the people in there are pikeys and he had shot one of them. also the pikey that sued was in jail i think but not sure during the time he sued the govement.

Yet in Texas a saw a news clip where someone was given a medal of bravery for shooting a burgler in his next door neibours house.

it is just commonsense. people brake into your house. the law is the last thing on your minde first thing u think about is family and possessions that u worked hard for.

yet in the U.K the police are not trained to think. they are likke robbots. the law becomes their consience and their bible.

for example if a husband and wife were coppers and the husband or wife were to do something wrong. maybe a minor thing. the other would nick the other one.

Maybe in Hendon then remove the brand of the person and put in a computer which is controlled by the P.M.

If so can i get this techonlogy for my misses and mistress

Edited August 5, 2011 by sbk

[carmine]

Baring in mind the amount of bufglaries on the island maybe we should have a special burglary topic pinned. Possibly we could have updates too on the 0.0001% of burglaries that are followed up (other than the "site visit" )

And what about a TV consolation prize once a month for the person thats been burgled the most times?

Those ideas aside, why should'nt someone be allowed to protect themselves and their possessions from burglars. I know really its my fault if i get burgled because if i was'nt here it would'nt have happened but i would have to protect myself due to the hollywood hospital prices.

[DanR]

Tony Martin. He shot someone who had repeatedly birgled his house in the back.

Exactly. He shot him in the back. The British law is that you can use reasonable force and, thankfully, shooting people in the back is not considered to be reasonable force.

Edited August 5, 2011 by sbk

[Rooo]

We will try & keep all posted with the result of the seminar on August 24th. Big C posted the link to the topic in his original post.

[womblejamie]

Tony Martin. He shot someone who had repeatedly birgled his house in the back.

Exactly. He shot him in the back. The British law is that you can use reasonable force and, thankfully, shooting people in the back is not considered to be reasonable force.

Shot him in the back, shot him in the chest, what's the difference? Although this was not the ideal outcome the 'kid' was trespassing, breaking and entering, committing burglary and might have knocked the old farmer on the head if he hadn't have come out with a gun!

[joe84330]

Tony Martin. He shot someone who had repeatedly birgled his house in the back.

Exactly. He shot him in the back. The British law is that you can use reasonable force and, thankfully, shooting people in the back is not considered to be reasonable force.

most sucker punches and cheap shots happen when they turn their back to give you the impression that they are disengaging.

not saying that's what happened in that burglary case, but hey you're in my house xxxxxxxxx and i sure as hell didn't invite you in here while i was sleeping. got what he deserved imo. darwin has a lot more awards to give out, it's unfortunate that countries like england try and shackle him, he should be handing them out faster.

[DanR]

Shot him in the back, shot him in the chest, what's the difference? Although this was not the ideal outcome the 'kid' was trespassing, breaking and entering, committing burglary and might have knocked the old farmer on the head if he hadn't have come out with a gun!

Well, in fact the difference is not great: both are unreasonable force. And I'm glad to have lived in a country where this was the case.

most sucker punches and cheap shots happen when they turn their back to give you the impression that they are disengaging

Sure. I think I've got that SWAT Murder Techniques for Dummies book, too.

[BigC]

Tony Martin. He shot someone who had repeatedly birgled his house in the back.

Exactly. He shot him in the back. The British law is that you can use reasonable force and, thankfully, shooting people in the back is not considered to be reasonable force.

sorry but shooting in the back, or front or feet or anywhere. the bloke was a burgler and u r sticking up for him.

I would have done the same thing TWICE !

simple really if u do not want to get shot don't go into other peoples houses and steel stuff. it can't be that hard.

i had friends that are coppers in the U.K and they all agree that this case was discusting

thank god i chose to live in a country where u can detain a burgler by any means nececcary because i kid u not. if i got the better of a burlger i would take great please in tourching the person. till they would be begging me to shoot them. thats the kind of man i am

[joe84330]

i do get a laugh out of people sticking up for home intruders. strange bunch for sure.

[Daffy D]

As has been mentioned you can use "reasonable" force to protect yourself. But what is reasonable force? It seems that the other guy is always one step ahead, he punches you you can't flatten him with a baseball bat. He has a knife you can't shoot him.

What happened to your home being your castle? I believe anyone entering private property uninvited, specially with criminal intent should be prepared for whatever they encounter from the owner. Can't take the consequences don't do the crime.

Slightly off subject. There was a program about squatters the other day. People who just move into empty houses and live there rent free using the electricity and water and always trashing the place. Apparently squatting is a civil matter and the police have no powers to do anything about it.

To get back possession of his own house the home owner has to pay for the legal process to go through the courts to get rid of the squatters. The squatters because they are "homeless" and jobless can get free legal aid to argue their case which can take months.

When eventually they are evicted the just move onto the next "empty" house leaving a trashed house behind with no criminally charges or any sort compensation to the homeowner.

Guess castles are now just in fairy tails.

[BigC]

As has been mentioned you can use "reasonable" force to protect yourself. But what is reasonable force? It seems that the other guy is always one step ahead, he punches you you can't flatten him with a baseball bat. He has a knife you can't shoot him.

What happened to your home being your castle? I believe anyone entering private property uninvited, specially with criminal intent should be prepared for whatever they encounter from the owner. Can't take the consequences don't do the crime.

Slightly off subject. There was a program about squatters the other day. People who just move into empty houses and live there rent free using the electricity and water and always trashing the place. Apparently squatting is a civil matter and the police have no powers to do anything about it.

To get back possession of his own house the home owner has to pay for the legal process to go through the courts to get rid of the squatters. The squatters because they are "homeless" and jobless can get free legal aid to argue their case which can take months.

When eventually they are evicted the just move onto the next "empty" house leaving a trashed house behind with no criminally charges or any sort compensation to the homeowner.

Guess castles are now just in fairy tails.

yep as for your burglery thiory it is just commonsense. yet the police as i said are like robots. Sometime i have't a clue which side the U.K police are on.

i was in line waiting to give my driving liscence and inssurence because i had 7 days to preduce them because i was something like 5 mile an hr over the limited, anyway.

some bloke infront of me was reporting his house had been burgled.

the copper started having a go at the man. saying that he was stupid and no wonder he got burgled.

as i walked into the office the policeman did a rude jesture behinde his back.

then i go in. an he tells me not to worry. 3 points on my liscence is nothing and to go out and have fun. Now i have commited a crime. ( sorte of ). he is being polite to me yet the victim was treated how i should have been treated.

[Rooo]

What does all this have to do with Samui Big C ? The topic is about the advise the Thai judges are going to give about foreigners rights in Thailand, not the state or activities of the police in the UK.

http://pattaya-times.com/a7392-local-judges-to-explain-foreigners-rights-in-thailand

[msg362]

Tony Martin. He shot someone who had repeatedly birgled his house in the back.

Exactly. He shot him in the back. The British law is that you can use reasonable force and, thankfully, shooting people in the back is not considered to be reasonable force.

Shot him in the back, shot him in the chest, what's the difference? Although this was not the ideal outcome the 'kid' was trespassing, breaking and entering, committing burglary and might have knocked the old farmer on the head if he hadn't have come out with a gun!

The back means he's running away and not a threat, the front means he might be

Try to work it out ,it's quite simple

Self defence ( with a 'c') means stopping someone assaulting you, not shooting someone trying to escape. Trespass in the UK is not considered a capital crime. We are reasonably civilised!

[womblejamie]

Tony Martin. He shot someone who had repeatedly birgled his house in the back.

Exactly. He shot him in the back. The British law is that you can use reasonable force and, thankfully, shooting people in the back is not considered to be reasonable force.

Shot him in the back, shot him in the chest, what's the difference? Although this was not the ideal outcome the 'kid' was trespassing, breaking and entering, committing burglary and might have knocked the old farmer on the head if he hadn't have come out with a gun!

The back means he's running away and not a threat, the front means he might be

Try to work it out ,it's quite simple

Self defence ( with a 'c') means stopping someone assaulting you, not shooting someone trying to escape. Trespass in the UK is not considered a capital crime. We are reasonably civilised!

Not sure what the 'with a c' comment is about but anyway...It is not 'simple' if someone came into your house to burglarise it and you caught them in the act and they turned their back, you'd automatically think they were running away? Maybe they were looking for a weapon to try and strike you with! So no the back does not confirm or deny he was running away. I'd like to think I'd shoot a little git who tried to rob my home.

[msg362]

Shot him in the back, shot him in the chest, what's the difference? Although this was not the ideal outcome the 'kid' was trespassing, breaking and entering, committing burglary and might have knocked the old farmer on the head if he hadn't have come out with a gun!

The back means he's running away and not a threat, the front means he might be

Try to work it out ,it's quite simple

Self defence ( with a 'c') means stopping someone assaulting you, not shooting someone trying to escape. Trespass in the UK is not considered a capital crime. We are reasonably civilised!

Not sure what the 'with a c' comment is about but anyway...It is not 'simple' if someone came into your house to burglarise it and you caught them in the act and they turned their back, you'd automatically think they were running away? Maybe they were looking for a weapon to try and strike you with! So no the back does not confirm or deny he was running away. I'd like to think I'd shoot a little git who tried to rob my home.

'C'c is because we Brits spell it like that. Those from our old colony, armed to the teeth spell it with a 's'. We from the UK don't carry guns as a rule and tend not to shoot each other. But fine do it and feel happy.

PS burglarise is a verb? Why not say 'rob'? much simpler ( it's old Anglo Saxon I think)

Edited August 1, 2011 by msg362

[parallaxtech]

Shoot him in the back and then turn him over and shoot him in the front. That way you can say he attacked you and you defended yourself (might want to put a knife in his right hand, also). They don't have CSI here so will probably say he drowned in your bathtub.

Edited August 1, 2011 by parallaxtech

[RickThai]

Tony Martin. He shot someone who had repeatedly birgled his house in the back.

Exactly. He shot him in the back. The British law is that you can use reasonable force and, thankfully, shooting people in the back is not considered to be reasonable force.

Shot him in the back, shot him in the chest, what's the difference? Although this was not the ideal outcome the 'kid' was trespassing, breaking and entering, committing burglary and might have knocked the old farmer on the head if he hadn't have come out with a gun!

The back means he's running away and not a threat, the front means he might be

Try to work it out ,it's quite simple

Self defence ( with a 'c') means stopping someone assaulting you, not shooting someone trying to escape. Trespass in the UK is not considered a capital crime. We are reasonably civilised!

With that sort of civic attitude I imagine your crime rate is soaring. A few years ago in Louisana (a state in the USA), car jackings were becoming commonplace. Often the carjackers would shoot and kill the car's passengers just to increase odds of not being caught. After a rash of such killings, a law was quickly passed that allowed car occupants to use deadly force to tharwt attempted carjackings. After a few would-be carjackers were killed, the "sport" of carjacking dropped off to almost none.

A similar thing happened in Florida (another state in the USA) were rental cars were being targeted. Once again, a law that very liberally allowed people to have and use guns in defense of attempted carjackings, stopped that type of robbery in its tracks.

Criminals are very savy as to what they can get away with from a legal standpoint, and they also know that an armed victim, supported by liberal 'self-defense laws, is not something they want to deal with.

These are facts, look them up.

Armed and ready.

RickThai

[womblejamie]

msg362

Good I'm glad you can spell and know the difference between American and British English. Yes, WE from the UK don't carry guns you're quite correct and I never mentioned it would be a 'happy' occasion.

Why do you feel the need to correct my use of verbs, retired English teacher or just retired?

While we're on the subject of correcting things just something I thought I should point out before heading to bed.

Try to work it out ,it's quite simple (you may want to consider moving your comma)

Self defence ( with a 'c') means stopping (you may want to consider moving the bracket next to the 'with' instead of a space away)

( it's old Anglo Saxon I think) (again with that bracket thing)

Speak to you tomorrow I'm sure, goodnight msg362.

[BigC]

What does all this have to do with Samui Big C ? The topic is about the advise the Thai judges are going to give about foreigners rights in Thailand, not the state or activities of the police in the UK.

http://pattaya-times.com/a7392-local-judges-to-explain-foreigners-rights-in-thailand

sorry i am getting drawn into U.K policies. some people are pushing my buttons. All it has to do with samui is the reason why i chose to live here than the not so great anymore england due to English traitors and robots. If these people had their way in Thailand then the world would be 1 giant prison.

The comments about the U.K people being civilized by not shoot our burglers. must be a joke as it seems like we have invited them in to our houses as a guest to nick our stuff and we should respect their so called him rights. yet the same people also show respect for the U.S where u r alloud to punish your enemy burglers.#

now i muts make noise grrrrrrrrrr!!!!!

[BigC]

anyway my thiory is. If u show your gun to an enemy in your house. then u had better use it. cause guarenteed. if that burgler gets away. he'll come back with a gun next time.

Guns are very serious. They are used in attacks and defense. now most countries understand this. It is not rocket science.

What the U.K did was invent the gun. Then took it away from us. What is the murder rate back home. Pretty high.

Where as here in Thailand which they base their laws similar to the U.S which is a new country and has learned feom old countries mistakes. they understand that if you have money and assets. then you are a bigger target. So if the law was that rich people are not alloud to protect their stuff. then the criminals have made their own lives very easy. they have less to lose.

they can burgle a house. get caught or get away but either way the law would swing in their favour.

out here the law is. do not dis-respect people and don't mess with peoples stuff. as they say out here.

UP 2 U. means up 2 u if u want to make problem for yourself.

As for shooting a burgler. 100 per cent. Even if his back is turned. like someone says that means nothing. In all forms of fire arm combat. when u r under fire. U run for cover. get a vantage point then rtn fire. If shooting in the back was wrong then half the worlds soliders would be tried for war crimes.

Sorry but someone comes in my house. Its a burgler. i am going to shoot. there might be more than one. so if there are then i hope that they run cause i would pop them also. if they shoot at me back then i know i have done the right thing. had i not had a gun or been asleep them me and my family might never wake up

[doingok]

anyway my thiory is. If u show your gun to an enemy in your house. then u had better use it. cause guarenteed. if that burgler gets away. he'll come back with a gun next time.

Guns are very serious. They are used in attacks and defense. now most countries understand this. It is not rocket science.

What the U.K did was invent the gun. Then took it away from us. What is the murder rate back home. Pretty high.

Where as here in Thailand which they base their laws similar to the U.S which is a new country and has learned feom old countries mistakes. they understand that if you have money and assets. then you are a bigger target. So if the law was that rich people are not alloud to protect their stuff. then the criminals have made their own lives very easy. they have less to lose.

they can burgle a house. get caught or get away but either way the law would swing in their favour.

out here the law is. do not dis-respect people and don't mess with peoples stuff. as they say out here.

UP 2 U. means up 2 u if u want to make problem for yourself.

As for shooting a burgler. 100 per cent. Even if his back is turned. like someone says that means nothing. In all forms of fire arm combat. when u r under fire. U run for cover. get a vantage point then rtn fire. If shooting in the back was wrong then half the worlds soliders would be tried for war crimes.

Sorry but someone comes in my house. Its a burgler. i am going to shoot. there might be more than one. so if there are then i hope that they run cause i would pop them also. if they shoot at me back then i know i have done the right thing. had i not had a gun or been asleep them me and my family might never wake up

i would be the same without a doubt, i ended up in cell over night cause i kicked the sh.. out of someone in my home and would do it againlol

[rizla]

Exactly. He shot him in the back. The British law is that you can use reasonable force and, thankfully, shooting people in the back is not considered to be reasonable force.

So if someone breaks into the Queens Palace in the UK, and she uses unreasonable force on that said person...your Queen will get sent down....WOW.......cool

[endure]

Don't believe all you read in the papers. Our Liz is a karate black belt and Phil the Greek fights at Lumpini under an assumed name

[seedy]

I am from Canada, and during the start of the debate on gun control I heard a radio interview with Hank Williams Jr.

He was asked what he thought of gun control.

His reply -

"Putting two bullets in the same hole - that's Gun Control"

[carmine]

Shot him in the back, shot him in the chest, what's the difference? Although this was not the ideal outcome the 'kid' was trespassing, breaking and entering, committing burglary and might have knocked the old farmer on the head if he hadn't have come out with a gun!

Well, in fact the difference is not great: both are unreasonable force. And I'm glad to have lived in a country where this was the case.

most sucker punches and cheap shots happen when they turn their back to give you the impression that they are disengaging

Sure. I think I've got that SWAT Murder Techniques for Dummies book, too.

Either way, the burglar deserves what he gets. "Mr Burglar" should get off his lard arse and work for his possessions so he can afford to buy them like the rest of us have to. who cares what happens to those low lifes.

[carmine]

Tony Martin. He shot someone who had repeatedly birgled his house in the back.

Exactly. He shot him in the back. The British law is that you can use reasonable force and, thankfully, shooting people in the back is not considered to be reasonable force.

Well done Tony Martin. Totally reasonable. Sends a message, the right message. i bet the rest of the burglars mates would think twice about having another go.

[carmine]

Tony Martin. He shot someone who had repeatedly birgled his house in the back.

Exactly. He shot him in the back. The British law is that you can use reasonable force and, thankfully, shooting people in the back is not considered to be reasonable force.

Shot him in the back, shot him in the chest, what's the difference? Although this was not the ideal outcome the 'kid' was trespassing, breaking and entering, committing burglary and might have knocked the old farmer on the head if he hadn't have come out with a gun!

The back means he's running away and not a threat, the front means he might be

Try to work it out ,it's quite simple

Self defence ( with a 'c') means stopping someone assaulting you, not shooting someone trying to escape. Trespass in the UK is not considered a capital crime. We are reasonably civilised!

You sound like a drip. When for example someone is woken in the middle of the night by an intruder a mans first thought is for the protection of his family not whether or not the intruder is an immediate threat or not.

Top man that Tony Martin was. A fine example to everyone.

[BigC]

Shot him in the back, shot him in the chest, what's the difference? Although this was not the ideal outcome the 'kid' was trespassing, breaking and entering, committing burglary and might have knocked the old farmer on the head if he hadn't have come out with a gun!

Well, in fact the difference is not great: both are unreasonable force. And I'm glad to have lived in a country where this was the case.

most sucker punches and cheap shots happen when they turn their back to give you the impression that they are disengaging

Sure. I think I've got that SWAT Murder Techniques for Dummies book, too.

basically what u r saying thank god that england is a safe place to burgle someones house.

Anyway, At least with Thai laws they seem to have more sypmathy for the victims. Not saying the system is perfect here but it is better than the U.K. might be the same reason why i have abandoned my country :jap:

at for that cheap comment about "I think I've got that SWAT Murder Techniques for Dummies book, too." That comment just does not make any sense. unless the poster has already read that book. then maybe he/ she is the one who has that book

Edited August 2, 2011 by BigC