Oops. I forgot the ;). That was a joke.
From a sign on the wal around a (fairly substantial) house around the Northamptonshire region:
"Gun traps are Illegal, So is burglary.
I've made my choice, no make yours ! "
I’ve no idea how serious the poster was, but isn’t that the general idea 
Walrus
You know, if the intruder does not survive and is somehow restricted from notifying anyone else before his final demise, and you can properly dispose of his remains (even if it involves driving a couple hundred miles into the forests of another state and burying his body with no identification deep in the dirt and leaving it there while you return to your nice quiet home), then I suppose that it could be possible to get away with it and even have a little fun in the process.
After all it aint a crime unless you get caught.
Legal disclaimer: this post is for informational or educational purposes only. the poster is not responsible for any actions taken by any readers. The information contained within this post may not be completely legal in your area, please consult with your local law enforcement authorities prior to conducting any of the aforementioned practices. Further, it is not recommended that any reader try this at home, it should only be performed by experienced professionals in a controlled invironment.
Enjoy,
While mantrapping is illegal in most every juristiction, there are some traps that you can get away with. Specifically, traps that do no harm, nor trap the victim. For example, we had a problem with trespass and vadalism. We built a trip-wire (using light fishing line) that trigered a flashbulb. No camera, just a flash bulb. OK, six flashbulbs, actually. We basically stripped the flash unit off a defunct camera, loaded one of those old flash stips that contained six individual bulbs (this was about 20 years ago, mind you), and rigged a switch between the unit and the tripwire.
One morning we went out and found the unit had discharged during the night. I guess the vandals thought their picture had been taken, 'cause they never came back, which was the whole point of the trap in the first place.
Just to clarify: If I’m in my house as someone smashes the window and climbs through, is it likely that I’ll get away with blasting him with a shotgun? (That is, I pull the trigger myself, and am in the house at the time; I can see how it wouldn’t apply if no human beings were at home.)
ToadSpittle,
You must be able to prove a fear of death or serious bodily injury. If the perp is still only climbing through the window, that would be fairly difficult to do. If the perp is unarmed, that would be nearly impossible to do.
Unfortunately, it is true, thanks to those “bleeding hearts” that in America, the criminals always have more rights than the victims or the Law Enforcement Officers.
As well, under Tort Law, you are always responsible for the safety of ALL visitors to your property, even those who are uninvited or come with criminal intent.
It sucks, but it is that way for a reason. Otherwise, every one of those annoying door knocking salespeople in America would have been killed off a long time ago.
I don’t particularly know whether there is any particular law on the subject, but I think that barbed wire fences, etc. would be considered an obvious danger rather than a trap, provided the wire, etc. is not hidden. As such, if an intruder injures himself or herself on an obvious danger, it’s his or her own damn fault.
There is an interesting related case in the papers right here in Columbia MO, right now. (I guess if you found the Columbia Tribune on the web you could read about it.) A guy was sleeping in his bedroom when he heard a noise and an intruder looked in his bedroom door. He grabbed the loaded shotgun by his bed (Jeez - must be a bad neighborhood) and went after the guy. The guy who peeked in the bedroom got away, but one of his friends was standing outside in the driveway. The homeowner shot him in the forehead with a shotgun slug. He is NOT being prosecuted, at least yet. The parents of the dead kid have a full page add in the paper complaining about it.
Fishhead
Incidentally, there was a referendum in Colorado a while ago back about whether to allow booby traps but I can’t remember what came of it.
No they don’t, they have some of the same basic rights as everybody else, but that’s another thread.
Mantraps are illegal. What if two Girl Scouts selling cookies set off your shotgun trap? What if my HS boyfriend is tapping on my window to wake me up for a midnight stroll, and he falls into my dad’s tiger trap? That is why the laws are designed that way, not to give some scumbag “more rights” than you.
Fishhead, the homeowner might have a problem proving that he was in immediate danger, as the victim/loiterer was stnding in the driveway. I don’t suppose these guys were looking for a friend’s house and peeked in the wrong bedroom window? Oops, their bad.
Out here in the Desert, the local Law Enforcement Agencies suggest planting cactus under the windows. Nothing like a sharp plant up the *** to deter a criminal.
The criminals have the right to invade your home, steal your property, or even assault you; but at the same time, you do not have the right to protect yourself, your family, or your home from them. You are expected to wait the hlaf hour for the cops to arrive.
Who has more rights there?
I do agree with the idea of criminalizing the traps that are outside the home, inside is another story.
But what are those pesky little girlscouts doing breaking into your home? Certainly they can sale you the cookies while remaining on the front porch. Would’nt you agree?
You are not at home. The fire department responds to smoke coming from your house. Perhaps the Christmas decorations are malfunctioning. A fireman is killed or seriously injured by your mantrap.
You would deserve a long prison term, kiddo!
You’re conflating two different issues there. One is the right to protect your property and the other is the right to protect your person or others. The distinction is critical.
The law gives you the right to protect yourself or others with force, and even deadly force, under appropriate circumstances when you or others are at risk of harm. What it does not do is give you the right to protect property with deadly force.
If you are in your home and an intruder enters, using force would serve to protect your person and your property. However, if a home is empty, a mantrap will serve to use force only for the protection of property. Under the law, you cannot use force and put a person’s life and well-being at risk merely to protect property.
In California, it is your legal duty to leave your home if an intruder, um, intrudes. I’m quite certain shooting the bastard is considered ill-mannered and very gauche.
Uh, Tedster, no, you don’t, just like I said in this thread. Cal. Penal Code sec. 198.5 allows you to kill all the intruders you want in your home, provided of course that they’re threatening you.
A more sane trap would be something like an entrance cage. When you leave your home you engage the thing and someone breaking in is confined to a little area of your house, they can go back out the way they came but can’t get any further.
This ofcourse means that fire fighters might not be as effective in protecting your house, but if the cage unlocks when the smoke detectors go off that might work.
Also about the obvious vs inobvious risks (eg razor wire fences vs gun traps) if it’s ok to have something that’s clearly a risk then would having a screen door with a shotgun showing through be alright? It’s now clear that there is a risk at attempting entry and so if someone is dumb enough to procede is it their own fault just as when they attempt to climb a dangerous fence?
Uh, yeah ya do. What if they aren’t “threatening” you? It’s a joke, agreed, but that’s California.
This is great.
We debated the same issues in Criminal Law and Procedures, and I still believe that people should maintain the right to protect their and themselves from criminals.
Unfortunately each of the several states refuses to allow such a normal concept.
All traps, whether humane or violent are not only considered illegal, but the civil law suit that would follow would help the criminal steal whatever he was unable to the first time.
It is still true that the criminal has more rights than the victim.
You do not have the right to attempt to deter crime, you do not have the right to prevent crime. You do not have the right to defend yourself, because if you do and the criminal is injured in any way, he will sue and you will lose. Check the local civil trial records.
Essentially, you must allow the the criminal to steal whatever he wants, you should help him carry it out to his vehicle, too, to help ensure that he does not injure his back and sue you.
When he attacks you personally, many jurisdictions do not allow you to actually possess any form of defensive weapons, so you must hope that the criminal has mercy on you. Again, if you defend yourself and the criminal is injured, prepare to lose another law suit.
The sharks are circling.
Sorry,
I just wanted to clarify again, that I am against all traps outside the home. Plus I do not agree with traps that are designed to maim or kill. I have too high of a respect for human life.
However, just hoping that the criminal smiles for the camera and does not steal it, too, is not enough.
Positive marking systems, detention systems, and photographic or other recording systems working in harmony with each other should be allowed, though.
I think the General Question has been answered, so I’ll close this thread. I invite you to take the more controversial aspects of this topic to Great Debates.
bibliophage
moderator GQ