Legal Mumbo Jumbo

In a recent case in england, a man was jailed for 30 months after he and his brother chased down some knife wielding criminals who had invaded their home and assaulted his family members.  One of his sons escaped to sound the alarm and an uncle arrived to help chase down the thugs.  One of the home invaders was beaten with a cricket bat and left brain damaged. 

This case (and the case of Toronto grocer David Chen) raise the issue of how far one can go in protecting one's private property and family.

In both cases, legal scholars make arguments as the Judge in the england case made in his ruling:

"“It may be that some members of the public, or media commentators, will assert that the man Salem deserved what happened to him at the hands of you and the two others involved, and that you should not have been prosecuted and need not be punished," said the judge.


“However, if persons were permitted to take the law into their own hands and inflict their own instant and violent punishment on an apprehended offender rather than letting justice take its course, then the rule of law and our system of criminal justice, which are the hallmarks of a civilised society, would collapse.”

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/uk/crime/article6956044.ece

Indeed this judge would have us believe that the actions of this man would cause anarchy if left unpunished.  Why innocent people might resort to assaulting home invading criminals with shocking regularity.

This type of reasoning shows that too many legal scholars live in ivory towers separated from the real world.  In the real world, the police are far too slow in their reactions to do anything but collect evidence after the fact.  In the real world, there are significant deterrents to an outbreak of vigilantism.....such as fear and the fact that it is usually the criminals who are armed.

This is the kind of paper based reasoning that sees the wolves and the deer as equal under the law and subject to the same rights and limitations.  If a mother deer were to trample a wolf to defend her offspring, these judges would be calling for the shooting of that deer lest it lead to an outbreak of wolficide at the hands of these awful deer who did not know where "reasonable force" ends and "assault" begins.

If you know anyone who has walked down a street worried about being assaulted by a rogue shopkeeper or homeowner, then you should probably question the company that you keep.  If however you have ever worried about walking down a street worried about being assaulted by a criminal on the street, then you live in the real world.

One wonders where these judges live.