Finland home invasion. Homeowner sentenced to 4 years. Criminal invaders sentenced to house arrest.

yes, because someone with a gun pointed at you is a really easy taget to take down.

Like you just have to attack him, and dodge all bullets.

Whatever. You guys are self defence maniacs. Such people should be in jail. That defend their own even by killing.

"Oh you touched me. You invaded my PERSONAL space. Now i will kill you *Kills you* USA Judge rules it self defence, the man gets a medal of honor, you are labbeled a bad guy. The End" - Someone who knows the turth.

originally posted by: ZeroFurrbone
The moral of the story is that everyone here are bunch of know-it-all.

Try to look in the fact that the ATTACKERS had a GUN but the VICTUM was NOT SHOT. Why would 3 PEOPLE get scared if 1 person with a KNIFE.

The story is presented just 20% here. It looks like more that the attackers and the victum knew each other. And this was not 100% home invasion but a dispute.

What it looks like is that they had a gun but didnt shoot. This says it all.

Now now we cant have the truth ruining a good story

a reply to: ZeroFurrbone

changed my mind.

a reply to: mamabeth

I pass by. I hear a screaming from your TV. I pull out my gun, because i think you are being killed. I break your door, rush in and see you tottaly okay, while i hold a gun pointed toward you.


What will you do? Shoot me ? Because you sound like a murderer.

originally posted by: Orionx2
So the moral of the story is make sure you kill them then dispose of the bodies and never report it to stay out of trouble.

Stop giving all our secrets away

a reply to: ZeroFurrbone

A normal person wouldn't break into my house they would call the police!

a reply to: ZeroFurrbone

So, regardless of what "is missing" from this report, the fact that one of these people had a gun, which to me shows they went into this, prepared to hurt someone, doesn't justify the fact that they themselves got hurt?

As an American, in a state that says if the above happens, I can shoot you inside my home, I don't understand why this fellow got such a harsh punishment.

If you just want to steal my stuff?
Better make sure I'm not home when you break in then.

Really shocking. In Texas the homeowner would be considered a hero and the criminals would receive jail time.

Sal

a reply to: gladtobehere

originally posted by: gladtobehere

4yrs in jail, damages: Finnish man sentenced after defending against home invasion

A homeowner in Finland has been sentenced to four years in jail and a hefty fine after fighting off three intruders who attempted to rob his house. The thieves, meanwhile, got lesser prison terms and are to be paid damages by their victim.

In April, a 35-year-old man from Hyvinkää, a town just 50km north of the Finnish capital, Helsinki, heard a knock on the front door of his suburban house and rushed to open it. As soon as he unlocked it, three strangers rushed in and launched at him, toting baseball bats and a gun.

The man retreated to the kitchen, where he found a knife and with it was able to overpower the intruders, two men and one woman.

The court spent nearly four months examining the case to come up with the unexpected ruling.

The homeowner has been convicted of “excessive self-defense and attempted manslaughter,” Helsinki news reports. He will serve an unconditional sentence for four years and two months, which he has to spend in prison. The man also has to pay damages to his attackers, with the fine totaling €21,000 (US$23,000).

The newspaper does not provide information on the severity of injuries sustained by the home-invaders, however, it is known that they survived the event.

The attackers were also convicted for felony home invasion and assault, yet their punishments are much less harsh.

All three received one-year-and-two-month conditional sentences, which is similar to probation or house arrest in Finland, depending on the case.

The offender serves the sentence outside of jail, but has to follow strict jail-like rules.

The trio was also ordered to pay the homeowner damages, but their combined fine was ruled to be €3,000 (US$3,300).

Summary:

Man defends himself from attack IN HIS OWN HOME and is sentenced to 4 years in prison and ordered to pay $23k in damages.

The criminals also get punished but only receive house arrest and are ordered to pay $3k in damages...

I put this in the NWO forum and heres why: there seems to be a conscious effort by TPTB to ensure that people cannot protect themselves.

Why?

Because it helps to ensure reliance on the state and discourage signs of independence.

Why own a firearm when I can hide in a corner hoping that nothing happens until police arrive, regardless of how long that might take.

The more dependent we are on the State, the more it helps to guarantee their power, control and longevity.

Do they realistically expect us to wait until we're half dead before defending ourselves?

The invaders already demonstrated a violent criminal intent by forcibly entering the home armed with weapons...

Yeah, if that happened at my house those three attackers would be very dead very quickly. This is $%&@#&% Disgusting. Hopefully the Finnish people will stand against this absolute mockery of justice. #Goingtovomitnow

Sometimes I feel like people just post these threads so they can tout their own over-inflated internet-bravado over a situation that will most likely never happen to them (since more of that is going on than talking about the specifics and laws of this case)…

'Well if you break into my house prepare to die ten times over at the hands of ruthless take-no-prisoners Rambo-Adonis'

Maybe you'd try to defend yourself, maybe you wouldn't have the chance, or maybe you'd be too frightened/overpowered (yup, even all you tough-guys). It would be a terrible situation to be in for anyone. It's nothing to flex over. After all, whoever may break into your house is not reading this thread. But again, you don't know the whole story here. I'm on the side that if you break into someone's house then you wave all rights to protection, but again, we don't know the full story.

originally posted by: intrptr
a reply to: Klassified

They deserved whatever treatment he deemed appropriate. Not that I condone torture of any kind...

Yes you just did. Why not torture all home invaders on live TV? During half time on the soccer pitch?

Damn Romans...

Lets not get carried away. Point made. I personally don't think I could ever torture anyone, I would be looking to kill, not maim. But some folks might really lose it when survival mode kicks in, and do things totally out of character for them. I've seen some good guys and gals "lose their religion" in fights, and they had to literally be pulled off the person they were fighting. None of us really knows what we're capable of until we feel it's our life, or our attackers life. Either way, had they not invaded this mans home with the intent to harm and rob him, none of them would have been sliced and diced.

Screw that.

If you break into someones home with weapons. Anything that happens to you is fair game.

This is utter bull.

Since I live in Ohio,I am posting laws that pertain to my state on when you
can and cannot shoot someone.
www.cleveland.com...

originally posted by: intrptr
a reply to: TrueBrit

Violence begets violence.

Heads on pikes, lol.

If someone broke into your house and your family is in danger, you would not protect them i suppose, right Intrptr? Best not be violent with them or you will only create a cycle of violence! I consider anyone who would refuse to protect their loved ones a sad excuse for a human.

I wonder if your wife or family knows you would stand by as they are assailed, raped or murdered?

a reply to: AMNicks

What a shame.

In my house I have a gun in every room but my children's. Most of them hidden in plain sight or in an inconspicuous location. My children know how to handle firearms so I am not concerned on that. In my bedroom closet I keep a Remington 870 loaded with 00 Buck shot. Someone comes in my house uninvited they will be spitting hot lead.

originally posted by: MisterSpock
"excessive self defense"

That is the saddest thing I've ever heard in my life.

Maybe the equal self defense would've been if he had a gun and baseball bats in his person, shot and killed intruders then finished them with bats.

Don't know if the verdict is a tragedy or comedy.

Sadly this is common practice in justice departments throughout Europe.

In general, European self defense laws don't allow for self defense.

Want an example of where the American progressive left can take a country, look at parts of Europe.

originally posted by: ZeroFurrbone
yes, because someone with a gun pointed at you is a really easy taget to take down.

Like you just have to attack him, and dodge all bullets.

Whatever. You guys are self defence maniacs. Such people should be in jail. That defend their own even by killing.

"Oh you touched me. You invaded my PERSONAL space. Now i will kill you *Kills you* USA Judge rules it self defence, the man gets a medal of honor, you are labbeled a bad guy. The End" - Someone who knows the turth.

What?

Why are you arguing made-up scenarios?

a reply to: gladtobehere

toting baseball bats and a gun

baseball bats and a gun, I see...

I thought in self defence you could use "like force to like force" to defend yourself. What, does and invader need to be wielding a tank before you can use a knife? And it was 3 against one.

What a crazy world we live in.

I would use a knife or whatever was closest, damn the prison term...my family comes first. T

These NWO judges may rot in a slow burning cauldron in hell, and like Prometheus their innards being eaten daily by carrion birds

a reply to: nightbringr

That not what I meant at all, but you probably know the difference between self defense and pay back.