home column latest column archive website design contact

Smoking the Bandit

After spending much of 2005 toying with a number of key moral issues that deeply concern me, I have decided that a change of occupation is on the cards. Initially I will start my new job in the evenings leaving me free to continue working at College during the day, however if things take off I will be able to retire from the world of 9am starts forever. I plan to become a thief, more specifically a burglar, and simply help myself to other people's property while they are out, and eventually (when I become more confident and/or competent) while they sleep. I realise this is a most extraordinary declaration to make, however the more I look into it, the more tempting a prospect it becomes. I will spend my evenings helping myself to anything that takes my fancy, knowing that I have the full protection of the law, and in the unlikely event that I am prosecuted, I will go to prison for a short period where I can get some handy tips from fellow felons to improve my technique.

On 12 th January this year the Government released a statement saying it wouldn't be reviewing the laws on how much force a person is allowed to use to defend their home against an intruder, in spite of the fact that the people of this alleged democracy have been campaigning for change since long before the Tony Martin case in 1999. I concede that the actions of Mr. Martin were somewhat extreme, however let us not forget that he was repeatedly burgled for several years, which must surely drive a person to the brink of madness. His case merely highlighted the fact that an Englishman's home is no longer his castle; it is a 24 hour drop-in centre for swag merchants.

The current law states that 'a person is allowed to use reasonable force against intruders' to protect his/her home. At first this statement appears rather vague and indecisive; however after deeper analysis the true meaning becomes apparent. Assuming you interrupt a burglar while he/she is stealing your personal property from your private home (and that they are unarmed) you may slap them sharply across the face, tell them you are most upset at what has occurred, and watch while they run away down the garden path, shouting after them to mind the step as you don't want them to fall over lest they sue you for personal injury claims. In the meantime you are left to decide whether to claim for the broken window/door on your house insurance, resulting in a rising premium the following year and a loss of your no-claims-bonus, or to pay for it out of the money you have worked hard to earn. When the Police finally arrive sometime in the following autumn you will barely even remember what the startled face of your intruder looked like, and so nothing will be done.

If the burglar is armed the situation becomes slightly more critical, as you are entitled to act in self defence as long as it is not pre-meditated. Hence if the burglar stabs you, you may instinctively reach for the bread knife and prod them back, but don't pick up a knife until you know they are armed or else you will be the criminal. If the burglar decides to shoot you or a member of your family, then by all means return fire assuming you happen to have a gun lying around at the time (not that many of us do) or else lie still while they relieve you of your property. Don't struggle or try phone the Police, as it is unlikely they will have a car in the area anyway unless you happen to live near a speed trap.

There is a simple theory which states 'if the burglar wasn't in your home, they wouldn't get hurt', which passes all responsibility to the thief in the event of any injury incurred while robbing your home. Does a person who deliberately breaks into another person's home deserve the protection of the law? This is the key question. Every day on the news there are stories of people being attacked and beaten up by burglars, not to mention tragic cases like that of Robert Symons, a school teacher and family man who was stabbed and killed by a burglar while defending his home (and two young daughters) just last year.

Granted we don't want to create a gun problem like the one which exists in America , where people store military weapons in the lounge and wait excitedly for sight of the first yokel to set foot on the lawn, just so they can blow him to pieces without even having to stretch out of the armchair. On the other hand something must be done; if the Government and the Police aren't protecting the common man, who is?

In this country we have witnessed the emergence of private companies like the local firm Lingwood Security who patrol premises (mainly businesses) to keep them secure, added to this many expensive housing developments are now equipped with magnetic gates and 24 hour guards to keep non-residents out, so there is obviously an intrinsic problem in our society. The trouble is that not everyone can afford to pay for protection, and so they must live in fear; not just the fear of being robbed, but the fear of coming face to face with a burglar and not knowing what is deemed a 'reasonable' way of getting rid of them.

© Ben Yates | Contact | My Facebook  | Valid HTML | Valid CSS