Is it ok to kill an intruder?

Let's be practical here - in Australia, and most likely in most other Western countries, once someone breaks into your private property, THERE IS NO LAW. What I mean by this is that the law no longer provides you with any protection - that's the reality. If you simply subdue the individual in question, the legal system will let him back out on the street in very short time with a pat on the head and a "naughty boy" wagging finger, so he can come and finish off what he started any time he feels like it. If you INJURE the individual in the process of protecting yourself and your property and/or in the act of subduing him, then you've just legally transferred all your worldly possessions to him on a silver platter. You will be sued for everything you have and a lot more besides, and probably thrown into prison as well. The ONLY course of action left open by the "law" to an innocent citizen whose private property is invaded is to kill the intruder - period. And circumstances permitting, dispose of any and all evidence that the intruder was ever there, but failing that, take steps to ensure that it is self-evident that the intruder was killed in self-defence. This isn't a matter of "taking the law into your own hands". It's a case of INTRODUCING law and order where in actuality there IS none.

I think that this farmer did what he had to do. The burgerler was younger, who is to say that he would not have recovered enough to kill the old man. Or that if he had not killed him the old man would have been sued by the burgerler and his family for injuries etc. We live in a sue happy world where a theif has and can sue someone for injuries even though they caused the incident.

If I shot someone and they were disabled I would have called 911 I wouldn't have beaten them and then shot again. Is what you call over kill. He could have tied the guys feet and hands if he had disabled him. Over kill...but I don't know really what I do if I had itruders before. Maybe the man was so scared that he did what he thought was right. I don't think people really think at the time it is happening it a reaction...good or bad it happens

yeh i think its perfectly ok to kill an intruder!:D if someone breaks into my house i am definetly gonna protect my family! if klling him is wat it takes to stop him then so be it!

I don't believe it's necessary to shoot to kill, just make the intruder very incapacitate, (ex tazers)

If someone is trying to hurt my family, friends, or myself, I will shoot to kill. Guilt won't be an issue, even if I do end up in jail. That intruder had it in his mind to harm, and I'm not going to let him run loose in the world if I can stop it.

You bet you should. Anyone who threatens you and threatens the your safety and the safety of your family on your property should suffer the consequences of such an action. You should have the right to defend your own home.

If there is a fear for your life, yes, I think one should be able to shot an intruder. But there is a line there. If intruder is clearly no longer a threat and on the ground, one would have no reason to beat and shoot the inturder again. That is when the police should be involved and hopefully justice would then be served.

In my country, we just try our best to tie him up and call the police.

no it is not right

For the shooting at the intruder on my property, I totally agree with you. But, for the killing them, I don't. Intruding my property without my permission is against the law, I have the right the protect my property and shoot the intruder. But, that should be the whole story. If he/she fired back, or he/she still intended to hurt me again, I had to kill them. But, if they already had been disabled, I don't think shooting them again to kill them is a right action to take. He/she was already disabled, and we should call the police, and had him/her arrested, and let the jury judge them and let the law punish them, not us. Just for that incident, I think the farm owner passed the line, and he should be punished by the law.

I think it's ok to defend yourself. If you have reason to believe the person is going to assault you then you have to do what you need to protect your own life and safety. I don't think you should be able to kill people just for trespassing.

depend upon situation. If u think that he/she is a danger for y'r life then u can kill the intruder. but be very carefull

probably shoot, but once you already got him, theres no good reason for killing an intruder. killing a defenseless intruder is no longer self-defense but murder. it would be a lot better to turn him over to the authorities and let him suffer the consequences rather than take the law into your own hands

The old man should get a MEDAL for getting rid of a Traveller

I would not say the term "kill" because it's so wrong to kill but to distangled or disable would be appropriate.It's better that you could disable the person to get some proof that he had done the crime.Shooting them again is not proper but handling them to the police for the investigation would help save ourselves.

i would think everyone has the right to protect him and his property. so just do it!

I think you should be able to do whatever is necessary to stop the intruder. I personally do not have a problem with someone killing an intruder, because it's YOUR house and YOUR property and you need to protect YOUR safety and the safety of your family. I think it would be silly to say that it's wrong to kill an intruder, because you need to do whatever is possible to take care of yourself.

Whether it's an intruder, killer, rapist, whatever... killing someone is a SIN.

i myself dont think its ok to kill an intruder but i do think it is ok to maybe shoot him in the foot/leg so that he wont die but will be unable to walk