Comments on: Chris Grayling u-turns again, on home defence

By: jungle

jungle — Sat, 26 Dec 2009 11:11:11 +0000

Of course, he probably intended to do this all along, and probably did know what the law said – it’s not really an embarrassing climbdown at all.

The fact is that the result of this for potential right wing voters is:

1) They now believe (if they didn’t already) that the current law allows burglars to sue them for minor injuries caused by householders defending themselves (the fact it doesn’t was only pointed out in the Guardian).
2) They believe Chris Grayling has promised to fix this (his climbdown has not been widely reported) and Labour will continue to give the criminal “so-called human rights”…

Perfect.

By: john b

john b — Thu, 24 Dec 2009 23:49:18 +0000

“phoning your brother up *after you’ve subdued the assailant*”, that is. Had Hussain called his brother for help subduing the scrote and they’d brain-damaged him whilst either restraining or chasing him away, that would’ve been fine.

By: john b

john b — Thu, 24 Dec 2009 23:48:01 +0000

@6, the law recognises that phoning your brother up, getting him to come over, and *then* administering a punishment beating != “losing control in the heat of the moment”

By: soru

soru — Thu, 24 Dec 2009 16:41:03 +0000

which is legalise for saying that decent people can lose control in the heat of the moment

Surely if that was the case, then Mr Hussain would have been given a nominal sentence at most, not over half the maximum possible tariff for an assault of that severity.

Does he have an active appeal against the sentence? If not, then the law clearly needs to be changed in such a way that judges actually do interpret it that way.

By: Don

Don — Thu, 24 Dec 2009 16:18:31 +0000

Sunny,

How can you be on Grayling’s side when it is not even clear what side that is? Is the current law adequate? It seems to be, so Grayling was just grandstanding and was revealed as not understanding the current (quite simple) law.

By: ukliberty

ukliberty — Thu, 24 Dec 2009 13:53:48 +0000

I doubt any review would significantly depart from the current law wrt self defence. People shouldn't be chasing villains and beating them until they are brain damaged.

By: Sunny H

Sunny H — Thu, 24 Dec 2009 12:52:06 +0000

Hey, I’m on Chris Grayling’s side on this. Though the point about him not knowing the existing law looks undoubtedly correct.

By: Shatterface

Shatterface — Thu, 24 Dec 2009 12:41:25 +0000

So Greyling is pulling back from endorsing mob rule.

Meanwhile, it’s not only the Right who indulge in Tony Martin style vigilante fantasies:

‘I cannot guarantee that if I came back to my house and saw that being done to my family, I wouldn’t pull out a gun and mow that mofo down straight-away. As my mate said: ‘If you don’t want your ass kicked then don’t break into my house‘.’

http://www.pickledpolitics.com/archives/6986

Too many Michael Winner movies?

By: Liberal Conspiracy

Liberal Conspiracy — Thu, 24 Dec 2009 03:59:54 +0000

:: Chris Grayling u-turns again, on home defence http://bit.ly/4SCc92