KZN dad: Why I shot robber

Bond said:
But his life wasn't in immediate danger?
Click to expand...

Self defence can also be used when defending the lives of others...

He opened the door slightly and saw a man standing over his wife with a gun to her head. He locked the door and grabbed his firearm from the safe. He could hear more screams and then shots. From a bedroom window overlooking the front door, driveway and balcony, Maharaj fired shots at the robbers
Click to expand...

https://www.issafrica.org/pubs/CrimeQ/No.8/duPlessis.htm

In determining whether a crime victim acted reasonably, the courts judge each case on its own merits. Certainly, an owner who is confronted by a robber is not expected to abandon his property. He is entitled to protect it, and the court will consider all the circumstances2 when deciding whether the means of defending the property were reasonable.


This right to self-protection can provide a defence to a charge of assault or even, in some cases, murder. Our law allows you to defend yourself, another person, your property or the property of another against a current or imminent unlawful attack.3 When a person pleads private defence, his claim is that the injury he caused was, in the circumstances, lawful and permissible.
Click to expand...
 
He is in the poo. Can only shoot somebody if they are IN your house, in the driveway, you have troubles. He will be charged.
 
The sad thing here is that you're not even safe during the middle of the day on your front lawn with your entire family on a Sunday.

Daylight robbery as they call it.
 
Drifter said:
He is in the poo. Can only shoot somebody if they are IN your house, in the driveway, you have troubles. He will be charged.
Click to expand...

You can shoot someone anywhere if they are an immediate threat to either your life or someone else's life.

If the guy was running away, there would be problems. If he was planning on stealing a vehicle with a 94 year old woman in it, there wouldn't be.
 
Solarion said:
My response to the judge would be: You give me one good reason why I should NOT have shot him? :erm:
Click to expand...

Probably found that he hit one of the unarmed guys in the back while they were running away.

Though one though, I'm all for executing the lot of them but the law gets sticky about these things.
 
Robbers entered this guy's property, on their own will and now he will charged for defending himself and his family ? Why dosn't the court spend the resources in locating the other 3 criminals .. The logic is certainly flawed.
 
Sumio said:
Robbers entered this guy's property, on their own will and now he will charged for defending himself and his family ? Why dosn't the court spend the resources in locating the other 3 criminals .. The logic is certainly flawed.
Click to expand...

LOGIC !!

How dare you use that word in the present day South Africa.

Logic was banned when the ANC came to power.
 
durbandave said:
He should be given an award not a sentence of any sorts.

I am tired of criminals being protected so much by the law. The criminals knew the potential risks of robbing someone and this time they lost that battle.

Far as I am concerned he should have shot them all dead.
Click to expand...

Agree .
 
Armed robbery, coming into your place put you in a state of total dismay and trauma(not sure if my english is correct here). Leaving with your stuff that you worked fN hard for, infrigning you rights to privacy. Walking out with your stuff. When are you exactly out of danger, you don't know whether they'll come back for more. I say, armed robbery, if they're leaving you may kill. Sooner or later the next armed robbery won't go well and someone might be killed. I say this guy shouldn't be charged with murder. But ya, as for the logic thing...long gone. Criminals have more rights than law abiding citizens.
 
freddster said:
Armed robbery, coming into your place put you in a state of total dismay and trauma(not sure if my english is correct here). Leaving with your stuff that you worked fN hard for, infrigning you rights to privacy. Walking out with your stuff. When are you exactly out of danger, you don't know whether they'll come back for more. I say, armed robbery, if they're leaving you may kill. Sooner or later the next armed robbery won't go well and someone might be killed. I say this guy shouldn't be charged with murder. But ya, as for the logic thing...long gone. Criminals have more rights than law abiding citizens.
Click to expand...

Your right to privacy is not greater then that of someone's life. You cannot shoot an intruder that is leaving your property even if they are armed as there is no longer an attack or an attack is not imminent. Yes if an intruder comes in to your house with a firearm one can argue that your life is at threat and you can shoot to protect yourself and someone else, not property.

I take it you have not done a firearm competency as this is covered as part of the course material. As for charging the guy for murder, that is standard practice from the police but these charges usually get dropped upon police investigation and don't necessarily end up in court.

As for the article, I say good riddance to this alleged criminal scum. Great job by this guy protecting his family.
 
DarkImpact said:
Your right to privacy is not greater then that of someone's life. You cannot shoot an intruder that is leaving your property even if they are armed as there is no longer an attack or an attack is not imminent. Yes if an intruder comes in to your house with a firearm one can argue that your life is at threat and you can shoot to protect yourself and someone else, not property.

I take it you have not done a firearm competency as this is covered as part of the course material. As for charging the guy for murder, that is standard practice from the police but these charges usually get dropped upon police investigation and don't necessarily end up in court.

As for the article, I say good riddance to this alleged criminal scum. Great job by this guy protecting his family.
Click to expand...

I haven't, but the point is, even though they're walking,running away after causing this much trouble for someone you should have the right to kill them. It prevents them from going further and kill someone in the near future. People like this(guns or not) are dangerous and should be removed from society before things get out of hand.
 
freddster said:
I haven't, but the point is, even though they're walking,running away after causing this much trouble for someone you should have the right to kill them. It prevents them from going further and kill someone in the near future. People like this(guns or not) are dangerous and should be removed from society before things get out of hand.
Click to expand...

But see, now you've moved away from the right to protect yourself/family, and self appointed yourself as the justice system. That's not legal, constitutional, or even humane.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top
Sign up to the MyBroadband newsletter
X