Saw this on AOL. I thought we lacked common sense here in the USA... :eek:

Millionaire Faces Jail For Attacking Intruder

A millionaire in the UK faces life in prison for attacking a robber who held him and his family at knife point, a story by the Telegraph.co.uk said.
Munir Hussain, 52, was found guilty of "inflicting grievous bodily harm with intent," for attacking Walid Salem, 56, one of three raiders who broke into his house and forced him, his wife and three children to lie on the floor with their hands behind their backs. At some point they were able to overtake Salem, and neighbors say they saw "several men" beating him with weapons including a cricket bat and a metal pole.
Salem was left with injuries including a fractured skull and bruising on the brain. In another twist, Salem could be eligible for criminal injury compensation, even though he recovered to commit other crimes.

Figures. :rolleyes:

Shows the world where living in today :rolleyes:

Stuff like this pisses me off. That's a big problem with what's wrong with America. The criminals become the "victims" and the victims become the criminals.

:mad:

Well, that is some trifling mess!

Stuff like this pisses me off. That's a big problem with what's wrong with America. The criminals become the "victims" and the victims become the criminals.

:mad:

This incident happened in the UK, not the US

It does seem like they went overboard in attacking him, though. What I think they should have done was disarm him and pin him down (if there were several men, as the article states, I'm sure they could have pinned him down easily.)

I don't see any need for them to beat him with a cricket bat or a metal pole.

Now obviously this man posed a threat and I think people should be able to defend themselves against intruders - but not in a way that is over-the-top or unnecessary. I don't think they needed to beat him to this extent.

It does seem like they went overboard in attacking him, though. What I think they should have done was disarm him and pin him down (if there were several men, as the article states, I'm sure they could have pinned him down easily.)

I don't see any need for them to beat him with a cricket bat or a metal pole.

Now obviously this man posed a threat and I think people should be able to defend themselves against intruders - but not in a way that is over-the-top or unnecessary. I don't think they needed to beat him to this extent.

I have to agree with you on this. You should be able to defend yourself
against an intruder, but you should not go over the line in doing so. I
think that criminal charges are appropriate in this case because he
went too far in defending himself.

I would have let it slide. The brazen idiot had the nerve to come into someone else's house. He wasn't exactly invited to a tea party. IMO, he asked for it. Don't go into places you are not invited. Too bad so sad. That is how I look at it.

It does seem like they went overboard in attacking him, though. What I think they should have done was disarm him and pin him down (if there were several men, as the article states, I'm sure they could have pinned him down easily.)

I don't see any need for them to beat him with a cricket bat or a metal pole.

Now obviously this man posed a threat and I think people should be able to defend themselves against intruders - but not in a way that is over-the-top or unnecessary. I don't think they needed to beat him to this extent.

When you're in a stressful situation like that, the "flight or fight" response usually kicks in and it's a little difficult to think rationally. This guy saw his wife and children in danger and did what he thought was necessary to keep them safe. How could he have known if this intruder was planning to murder him and his family or not? He did the right thing and should be commended for it. I'm not a parent, but I do work with children and if someone barged into the classroom and threatened my students, you can bet I'll be fighting them to the death.

People have the right to defend themselves, their loved ones, and their property. If some criminal gets seriously injured or killed while committing a crime, then it is 100% their fault.

I remember once reading about a guy who broke into someone's house, and ended up falling and landing on a knife I think it was, he ended up suing the homeowner and won-despite him being the idiot who was doing something he shouldn't have been doing

:mad:

When you're in a stressful situation like that, the "flight or fight" response usually kicks in and it's a little difficult to think rationally. This guy saw his wife and children in danger and did what he thought was necessary to keep them safe. How could he have known if this intruder was planning to murder him and his family or not? He did the right thing and should be commended for it. I'm not a parent, but I do work with children and if someone barged into the classroom and threatened my students, you can bet I'll be fighting them to the death.

People have the right to defend themselves, their loved ones, and their property. If some criminal gets seriously injured or killed while committing a crime, then it is 100% their fault.

I agree that people have the right to defend themselves/their property/their family. You're also right that it is very hard to think rationally in a situation such as this (I probably wouldn't.) I don't think that the people whose home was broken into should be punished very harshly, because the man had no right to be there, and they were victims in this situation.

I know very little about what exactly happened, so my conclusions may be completely wrong. It just seems to me, however, that the men may have gone overboard in beating the intruder.