The Police clearly have no clue about whose side of the crime divide they are on.
Police say the arrest of an Otara liquor store owner should be a
reminder to others that using too much force to defend themselves or
their property will result in prosecution.
"The arrest serves as a reminder to all that taking the law into their own hand in some circumstances cannot be justified."
Perhaps the law should say that if someone enters your home or business and threatens your life, you should be permitted to shoot them dead, with full immunity from prosecution. The law is far too vague and it is clear that the police cannot be allowed any discretion in this matter.
Unless perhaps the shopkeeper was attacked with a blunt pencil, and responded by shooting the attacker and all his next of kin, I can't see how the police actions are justified. Apparently the attackers used a knife and managed to stab the shopkeeper. It needs to be very clearly stated that people who do this sort of thing risk losing there lives.
The law states that shop owners can use reasonable force to defend
themselves, any other person and/or their property. But Mr Pizzini said
those who chose to take the law into their own hands could face
"Those that clearly exceed that force can expect to be arrested and held to account in the criminal court."
The 'reasonable force' law should be removed and replaced with 'any force'. If the police are genuinely concerned about the loss of life of burglers, knife attackers and other low-life, then they could try responding to a 111 call a bit faster. The poor indian liquor store owner who may have survived his injuries had police not take 40 minutes to get to him would surely agree.
Sensible Sentencing Trust spokesman Garth McVicar said store keepers
were often placed in a position where they had to make on-the-spot
decisions and didn't have time for police to arrive.
about how much force was "reasonable" was vague and made it difficult
for shop owners who were trying to defend themselves in potentially
The law certainly needs to be clarified. Perhaps this might help.