Re:Chris Grayling on Today.
It is not often I can simply repeat a blog post I wrote in January 2010 when Caroline Spelman said exactly the same thing as Grayling (very fishy) said today:
The law allows “reasonable force” to be used by householders, outlined here in elaborate detail by the Crown Prosecution Service. There was a lot of talk on Question Time last night about the word “reasonable” not being clear.
Codswallop. Claptrap. Hogwash. Tiddlyfart.
“Reasonable” is the most clearly defined and well established term in English law. Juries know instinctively what it means after a few moment’s explanation.
And now we come to the Conservative position as spelt out by Caroline Spelman on Question Time.
O-H M-Y G-O-O-D-N-E-S-S.
Pass the sickbag, Alice.
Spelman said that the Tories want to change the law so that householders are in the clear as long as they do not use “grossly disproportionate force”. I see. So that means that they can use force that is somewhere between “reasonable” and “grossly disproportionate”. So that means that they can use disproportionate force but they cannot use “grossly disproportionate force”.
It’s worth savouring that. The Tories say that they want householders to be able to use disproportionate force in warding off burglars (as long as it isn’t gross). Disproportionate force is by definition “unreasonable”. So the Tories want people to be able to use unreasonable force to fend off intruders. Unreasonable force. Brilliant. That’s force, as in NOT reasonable.