Irish Election are pleased to announce our collection of Irish 
Promising to legislate for manslaughter?
Read more about: Crime, Fine Gael, Irish Election, Irish Politics, Law
Fine Gael yesterday announced its proposal to “shift balance in favour of homowners” in relation to intruders. What an appalling example of politicking and electioneering, to pander to the base fears of people.
FG to turn the tables on burglars with new Bill – O’Keeffe
Party will shift balance in favour of homeowners
Monday 26th June 2006Fine Gael will this week ask the Dáil to approve a new law which supports homeowners who are confronted with intruders.
Justice Spokesman Jim O’Keeffe TD has drafted the Criminal Law (Home Defence) Bill, which will:
• Remove any question of homeowners having to retreat if they come across an intruder;
• Prevent intruders from suing a homeowner who acts reasonably;
• Create the presumption that force used by a homeowner in defending his own home is acting reasonably, with the onus on the prosecution to show otherwise;
• Confine these protections only to actions taken within the home.Deputy O’Keeffe said: ‘The Bill is in line with the Constitution, which states that a person’s home is inviolable. It shifts the balance of the law in favour of the homeowner in a considered and reasonable way’.
“A person’s home should be a no-go area for intruders, but every week there are 500 burglaries, three quarters of them in private households. With headline crime rising year on year, homeowners everywhere are concerned about their own safety and that of their homes.
“Currently, homeowners who defend their home may have to explain in court why they did not retreat when confronted with an intruder. They can even be sued by that intruder. Homeowners who tackle an intruder also have to prove that their actions were reasonable. This Bill will deal with these issues and tilt the balance back in favour of the homeowner.
“This Bill contains a constructive, balanced and sensible set of proposals. I hope it will be supported when we debate it in the Dáil on Tuesday and Wednesday this week.”
1. The bill will not get through the Dáil. FG will thereby be able to “blame” the government parties/whoever for refusing to “side with homeowners” “against burglers”.
2. Existing laws already cover the enitre area: the proposal relates only to acts which occur within the home: the existing law suffices; and indeed, Conor Hanly (of NUI Galway law faculty) yesterday stated clearly that under existing laws, where an intruder is within a home, the issue of “retreat” does not arise for the homeowner, as they are already within their home. That is to say, there is nowhere to retreat.
Moreover, realistically, Garda and other prosecutors -if not a court itself, if it comes to that- will and do take this into consideration, and judge the homeowner’s actions in terms of what is “reasonable”.
3. This is a reaction by FG, carried over from the Nally case (originally with FG’s Higgins flying the Nally flag, and now with FG’s O’Keefe taking up the “issue”. All the while, Inda “I’ll make the criminals pay for their crimes” Kenny keeps schtum - since November last year and now).
Two things: (a) the Nally case did not involve an intruder into a home, it involved a tresspasser -on land outside the home- who was shot by Nally, Nally beating the tresspasser and reloading and pursuing the tresspasser, and Nally shooting again, fatally; and (b) the Nally case resulted in a conviction for manslaughter.
.
So, FG “proposed” a bill that was unlikely, and they know this, to be passed; which is unnecessary; which is seeking to capitalise on sympathy for a convicted killer; and which doesn’t even apply to the circumstances surrounding that killing.
Rubbish.
Well said. Also with the sueing part they are saying if you are in a house and something happens you. You are automatically guilty as you can’t sue. It is dreadfull legislation. Whats next the right to bear arms
I’m sorry you’re attacking FG in part because what it proposed can’t get through the Dail? Hey, why not ban the opposition from proposing bills at all, at all.
And last time I check the expressed opinion of a learned scholar had the legal weight of a gnat on a diet. If you can find a case where a judge has made a judgement that accords with Conor Hanly’s view then please post it and I’ll be happy to take that on board. In the meantime we’re stuck where we are.
Personally, if it was someone in my gaff then I’ll use what force is necessary to ensure they can’t present a threat to me and mine. And if it happen that is the business of my katana that they catch then good luck to them.
They are trying “to pander to the base fears of people”, are they? Last time I checked, doing what the vast majority of the population wants was called democracy. I agree that it won’t be passed, but hopefully the government will bring forward something similar. This will reduce burglaries - at the moment thieves have no fear because they know that the worst that can happen is a suspended sentence (read: nothing), whereas nobody will risk serious injury or death just to get a free DVD player.
see what will happen then is that the crooks will make sure that they are armed and will shoot first.
Simon, as we’ve seen recently many of the preps (apologies for the little Judge Dredd moment there) are getting armed for the slightest reason, like being refused entry to a party.
In a way makes you wonder if all the handguns that should have gone in decommissioning are really lying in concrete.