Bangkok burglar picks the wrong house to rob as off duty cop shoots him dead

[The Deerhunter]

No, you can't just kill someone even if they are robbing your house.

There was a case in the UK some years back of a farmer who shot and killed a burglar. He ended up serving time for it as the defence said the burglar was running away from the property when he was shot.

Change that to...........Unfortunately, no, you can't just kill someone even if they are robbing your house!!!!

However, shooting DOWN on him from an upper window while he was still outside your house, so the first bullets at leas hit him probably in the upper back in not allowed in most cases, even many states of thew USA. One shot fired down near him would have caused him to think twice about coming there EVER again, or the cop could have strolled down stairs and arrested him. Police officers are trained in the gentle arts of arrest in Thailand, I presume. I once held 2 of 6 burglars at gunpoint til the cops go there in a moderately gun friendly western country. Two escaped, one was taking stuff out to the car and the sixth guy was the driver.

Edited March 25, 2016 by The Deerhunter

[fishhooks]

The complete and utter multitude of varying replies to this topic, many with similar advice or comment only goes to prove there is no right or wrong here.

The only valid real world answer is should you desire to commit a crime such as this, as a person of mature age, you must take a risk the outcome will possibly be fatal or you may sustain significant injury.

No matter how badly off the perpetrator may be, the risk in carrying out a crime which means someone is possibly going to lose money or valuables they have worked for however long to own, they have a right to protect same.

Obviously in very many cases similar to this, the actual party who is being wronged is the one who ends up badly injured or worse, just attempting to protect or regain what is rightfully theirs.

[mogo51]

'could face charges of killing with intent'

'riddled with bullets lying in a pool of blood' and 'I shot at him until he fell down"

now if someone is burglarizing your house, aren't you allowed to protect yourself & your property ???

also, riddled with bullets means many bullets were fired ..... not exactly 'I shot at him' ???

Well I am not sure of the definition of 'self defense' here or indeed what the law is relating to the protection of your property. However, the said Police Officer would ahve a bit of trouble rationalising that he shot the felon in self defense, given he was on the first floor and the offender was on the ground floor!

But whilst I think he did a good job, I am sure, the large broom will take care of this one.

[fishhooks]

Shoot him in the arm or something, he certainly won't be climbing any more walls, or clambering on any rooftops, or carrying any big bags of loot when he has bullet / shrapnel injuries on his limbs. The deceased from the story wasn't even in the house yet, and seemingly this copper didn't even shout anything, simply opened fire.

Culpable homicide a la oscar pistorius. But again as were in Thailand and he is in that morally skyhigh institution that is the RTP he won't even have to sweat it once it's been designated its space under the rug. I feel for the deceased's relatives for their loss

Firstly...No matter how proficient the owner with a weapon may be, the action at the time of the crime does not allow for going through a think-tank of possibilities to decide how accurate he needs to be in selecting an arm or leg.

The fact is there is a definite WRONG DOING here, where the person being wronged, on discovery of the criminal, may infact end up himself dead, as I'm sure happens in many cases such as this.

There is absolutely no place for discretion here.

No one has any right to enter the property of another and steal. The deceased's relatives surely have to understand, their family member was committing a crime and in doing so must take on-board the risks associated with same.

[dunroaming]

For an off duty police officer to act like this just illustates how unprofessional these morons really are. Didn't he realise that he had supposed to plant a knife on the body or better still a gun. After all he is a cop so should know how to manipuate a crime scene. Amateur time indeed. T.I.T.

[seedy]

Off Topic posts Removed. Topic is not USA, or South Africa, or England

Troll / Flaming / Derogatory posts Removed

[Benmart]

I find no humor in the pain, misery or death of any person.

Self-appointed judges and know-it-alls have one skimpy news article to support their juvenile and simplistic approach to a person's death at the hands of another.

Based on the past performance of the "police", this incident begs investigation by those better qualified than some armchair detectives and mystics.

[anotheruser]

So all the gun-nuts here think attempted burglary should be punished by death!

So what do you gun-nuts (yes you know who you are) think about drinking and driving? Death?

What do you gun-nuts think about driving a bike without helmet? Just a single shot in one knee-cap?

You gun-nuts, what about if they managed to break in? Killed and then hung? But most important they must be shot. At least one full magazine worth of bullets, or continue shooting until you cum in your underwear.

What if one of you gun-nuts have an unregistered gun? I guess you would pay from your own pocket so the person could register the gun.

One more thing to you gun-nuts, should we also execute the rich people here in Thailand for the same crimes?

This post is proof that you don't need a gun to be utterly nuts.

[fishhooks]

For an off duty police officer to act like this just illustates how unprofessional these morons really are. Didn't he realise that he had supposed to plant a knife on the body or better still a gun. After all he is a cop so should know how to manipuate a crime scene. Amateur time indeed. T.I.T.

With due respect, would you kindly re-post with more meaning.

It's late where I am and I may be somewhat slow on the uptake, but I've got no idea as to what you are stating!

[Dante99]

'could face charges of killing with intent'

'riddled with bullets lying in a pool of blood' and 'I shot at him until he fell down"

now if someone is burglarizing your house, aren't you allowed to protect yourself & your property ???

also, riddled with bullets means many bullets were fired ..... not exactly 'I shot at him' ???

Short answer NO YOUR NOT, well in civilised countries anyway. You can only kill someone if you have a genuine fear you life is in danger, the courts would also take into account whether you could flee e.g he's coming in a window and you could reasonably escape danger by going through the front door.

The USA may not be considered civilised but many places there you can blow them away as soon as they enter your home. No need to evaluate if your life is in danger, that would entail determining what wheapons they may have and what their hand to hand combat skills are compared to yours which would be unreasonable requirements.

[sugarcane24]

Shoot him in the arm or something, he certainly won't be climbing any more walls, or clambering on any rooftops, or carrying any big bags of loot when he has bullet / shrapnel injuries on his limbs. The deceased from the story wasn't even in the house yet, and seemingly this copper didn't even shout anything, simply opened fire.

Culpable homicide a la oscar pistorius. But again as were in Thailand and he is in that morally skyhigh institution that is the RTP he won't even have to sweat it once it's been designated its space under the rug. I feel for the deceased's relatives for their loss

Look at it from the bright side: the would-be thief was liberated from his miserable life in the Kingdom of Thailand by this policeman's response to his attempted burglary. .

[HappyinNE]

'could face charges of killing with intent'

'riddled with bullets lying in a pool of blood' and 'I shot at him until he fell down"

now if someone is burglarizing your house, aren't you allowed to protect yourself & your property ???

also, riddled with bullets means many bullets were fired ..... not exactly 'I shot at him' ???

Short answer NO YOUR NOT, well in civilised countries anyway. You can only kill someone if you have a genuine fear you life is in danger, the courts would also take into account whether you could flee e.g he's coming in a window and you could reasonably escape danger by going through the front door.

It seems that we have a bit of a difference in defining civilized countries. As a former US resident I believe that the idea that you have to run from someone if you have the ability to stop him is wrong. I recognize that it has changed from when I was told by a judge to shoot someone who was harassing my wife as soon as he was inside the gate. The only caution was to get the right one. Clearly I think that the level of civilization in the US has decreased by a lot in the past. It is on the way to being not civilized.

[Bluespunk]

"You do not respond to a mosquito bite with a hammer."

PLO Lumumba

[Kabula]

I hope there is a followup to this report.

Should be real interesting how the Police will handle this matter.

[Happy Grumpy]

Great news - well done to the cop

As for "riddled with bullets" an old instructor of mine when ask how many times one should shot at a person replied "until your gun is empty son"

You forgot the 'Yeeee Haaaaaa' he said at the end.

[Brer Fox]

Why do I get the impression this JUNIOR policeman enjoyed doing what he did?

[Time Traveller]

You can't just shoot and kill someone for climbing over your wall with the intention of robbing you. That crime doesn't fit the punishment. Point the gun, tell him to freeze and let the on duty police deal with him.

Bring on the Tea Party and the Dads with guns and beautiful daughters brigade.

Maybe you should tell your criminals buddies not to break into houses and then they won't get hurt. The guy got what he deserved. Fwiw, it might have been murder not robbery that was on his mind either way he should not have been breaking into someone's house

[citzofwrld]

Great news - well done to the cop

As for "riddled with bullets" an old instructor of mine when ask how many times one should shot at a person replied "until your gun is empty son"

Must be a AMERICAN. They're like that, over pretty much everything, especially cops.

[Time Traveller]

This would not fly in the USA. You have to be in fear of losing your life and the person must be inside your home in the process of trying to kill you. Cop or no cop. I own many guns and this is why there are laws to stop this kind of B.S. I am not defending the crook. But you can't just shoot someone because you think he is breaking in your window. Could have been anything going on.

Sorry but you're wrong. Castle doctrine protects homeowners. There is absolutely no reason why anyone should be breaking into a home except for the purposes to comit a felony.

[Yunla]

Your home is not just a building, it is your sanctuary, where your family should sleep peacefully and have happy safe dreams.

Damage caused by home invaders is not limited to theft, or even injury caused to the owners during the invasion. Home invaders leave a permanent sense of insecurity, they leave unhappy memories for the children and adults too. It is especially traumatising for senior citizens, who are often too frail to defend themselves. They often become so frightened they stop going outside, and just sit peering nervously out of the window, in what are supposed to be their golden retirement years.

I think homes should be defended with whatever force a person wants to use. Intruders have the option of not being intruders in the first place. After that, they are fair game, in my humble opinion.

[siamcrut]

somnumna

[peergin]

I was told several times, by several people, during my long years in Thailand that one could lawfully shoot someone as soon as he had entered your garden DURING THE HOURS OF DARKNESS. However, this was not permitted during daylight. Is this not the case (anymore)?

Edited March 25, 2016 by peergin

[anotheruser]

'could face charges of killing with intent'

'riddled with bullets lying in a pool of blood' and 'I shot at him until he fell down"

now if someone is burglarizing your house, aren't you allowed to protect yourself & your property ???

also, riddled with bullets means many bullets were fired ..... not exactly 'I shot at him' ???

Short answer NO YOUR NOT, well in civilised countries anyway. You can only kill someone if you have a genuine fear you life is in danger, the courts would also take into account whether you could flee e.g he's coming in a window and you could reasonably escape danger by going through the front door.

The USA may not be considered civilised but many places there you can blow them away as soon as they enter your home. No need to evaluate if your life is in danger, that would entail determining what wheapons they may have and what their hand to hand combat skills are compared to yours which would be unreasonable requirements.

This discussion is meaningless unless somebody here knows what Thai laws are in regards to home invasion. Is it a "stand your ground" policy or what exactly is the law? People keep passing judgements based upon the laws back home and I have thus far not seen anybody that has information based upon Thai law. So my question is was the shooting justified under Thai law or is the shooter really at risk of criminal prosecution?

[connda]

You can't just shoot and kill someone for climbing over your wall with the intention of robbing you. That crime doesn't fit the punishment. Point the gun, tell him to freeze and let the on duty police deal with him.

Bring on the Tea Party and the Dads with guns and beautiful daughters brigade.

Nope. You're correct. That would get you arrested in many states that have 'Castle Doctrines' laws on their books. The burglar was outside the house attempting to get in. Obviously, if he was locked out, he then posed no immediate threat to those inside the house. That was a disproportionate use of force. Flip the lights on and start yelling that you're calling the police. An unarmed burglar isn't going to hang around. I'd say the shooter has a impending legal problem.

[Bluespunk]

You can't just shoot and kill someone for climbing over your wall with the intention of robbing you. That crime doesn't fit the punishment. Point the gun, tell him to freeze and let the on duty police deal with him.

Bring on the Tea Party and the Dads with guns and beautiful daughters brigade.

Nope. You're correct. That would get you arrested in many states that have 'Castle Doctrines' laws on their books. The burglar was outside the house attempting to get in. Obviously, if he was locked out, he then posed no immediate threat to those inside the house. That was a disproportionate use of force. Flip the lights on and start yelling that you're calling the police. An unarmed burglar isn't going to hang around. I'd say the shooter has a impending legal problem.

Good

[connda]

This would not fly in the USA. You have to be in fear of losing your life and the person must be inside your home in the process of trying to kill you. Cop or no cop. I own many guns and this is why there are laws to stop this kind of B.S. I am not defending the crook. But you can't just shoot someone because you think he is breaking in your window. Could have been anything going on.

Sorry but you're wrong. Castle doctrine protects homeowners. There is absolutely no reason why anyone should be breaking into a home except for the purposes to comit a felony.

The Castle Doctrine does protect the homeowners and those within the home, and the perp only needs to be inside of the house. The perp doesn't not have to be attempting to kill you. However, with that said, laws vary from state to state. If you are a gun owner who is defending your home, you better know that local laws.

In this particular case, the junior policeman probably didn't understand the Thai laws regarding the use of lethal force in defending one's life within their home. In Thailand, I'm pretty sure that the perp needs to have forced entry or entered uninvited, and be in the process of threatening your life or those within your home before you can act. Well, unless you're rich and well connected, then your can probably shoot them in the street and only be sentenced to community service which you can ignore.

[Nemesis7]

Life has no value here and the cop didn't had to shoot and kill but probably could have handed over to police on duty. in Thailand cops with guns thinks they can do just about anything, be it beating people using excessive force or simply shoot at people

[connda]

Warning shot, leg shot, whatever, one shot should be enough for a person allowed to own a fire arm and having trained its use.

You're very obviously not a gun owner, nor a person with self-defense training in the use of firearms. If I'm mistaken and you are a gun owner in your home country, I think you would be more of a danger to yourself and those around you. Get some training and then revisit your assertion.

[anotheruser]

This would not fly in the USA. You have to be in fear of losing your life and the person must be inside your home in the process of trying to kill you. Cop or no cop. I own many guns and this is why there are laws to stop this kind of B.S. I am not defending the crook. But you can't just shoot someone because you think he is breaking in your window. Could have been anything going on.

Sorry but you're wrong. Castle doctrine protects homeowners. There is absolutely no reason why anyone should be breaking into a home except for the purposes to comit a felony.

The Castle Doctrine does protect the homeowners and those within the home, and the perp only needs to be inside of the house. The perp doesn't not have to be attempting to kill you. However, with that said, laws vary from state to state. If you are a gun owner who is defending your home, you better know that local laws.

In this particular case, the junior policeman probably didn't understand the Thai laws regarding the use of lethal force in defending one's life within their home. In Thailand, I'm pretty sure that the perp needs to have forced entry or entered uninvited, and be in the process of threatening your life or those within your home before you can act. Well, unless you're rich and well connected, then your can probably shoot them in the street and only be sentenced to community service which you can ignore.

Sorry when I posted earlier I meant castle doctrine not stand your ground. Does anybody actually know the Thai law in this regard? Pretty sure doesn't mean so much.

[connda]

Good thing it was not a dog he shot or he might be in serious trouble

Vehicular manslaughter will get you a sentence of community service or no sentence at all. Shooting a dog will get you 14 months in prison. Shooting a person? Depends how rich you are. TIT.