A businessman who fought off knife-wielding thugs after his family were threatened has been jailed for 30 months.
The case prompted renewed debate over the level of force that house-holders can use against raiders.
Munir Hussain, chairman of the Asian Business Council, was praised by a judge for his “courage” in defending his wife and three children from an attack — but then jailed for the violence of his response. One of his attackers was spared a jail sentence.
I don't know about you, but I find those opening paragraphs a bit misleading. Maybe that's why FatWhiteMan used this case as an example of how bad things are in England.
Actually, what happened is Mr. Hussain, quite courageously, got the intruders to flee the house. Then he and his brother and some other neighbors gave chase, caught one of them and beat him nearly to death with bats and metal pipes. The attacker who "was spared a jail sentence" is the one who'd had his brains bashed in and was incapable of going to court.
This is something which although very understandable, has nothing to do with protecting one's family or defending one's property. This is a case of taking the law into one's own hands and meting out justice, vigilante-style. The prosecution called it a "revenge attack."
Another thing illustrated by this case is one of the major problems with people arming themselves for home defense. In a dangerous situation when facing what could be lethal threat it is next to impossible to react properly. What Mr. Hussain did was a grievous departure from what is acceptable, but imagine how many lesser examples there are, especially the ones in which the gun owner shoots prematurely or unnecessarily. These dreadful examples must far outnumber the clean legitimate ones. It's plain common sense.
Don't miss Laci's comments here.
What's your opinion? Please leave a comment.