Dangerous Precedent

This is a dangerous precedent.

The recent case on the rights of home owners to self-defence has been entirely taken out of context by irresponsible politician pundits.

This was due to a recent case where a house-owner in East Coast had stabbed and killed a suspected robber. I will not delve deeper into this case, as this is an ongoing legal case. Though details of the case can be found online, we do not know the veracity of the details. Plus, I do not want to conduct trial-by-media.

The issue was worsened when a lawyer during a talk show claimed that as part of self-defence, the house-owner should not wield a weapon which is larger than the robber. This is misleading. Very misleading.

Worst, the misleading statement was picked up by political minions and had the statement attributed to the DPM who is the Home Minister.

Self-defence by home-owners is actually very simple. If there is imminent danger, there is no question what is the weapon that you wield in your hand. Even if the robber is wielding a small knife and if you have a handgun, self-defence is still permissible if the robber is about to stab you or your loved ones.

Only a fool will turn this into a political issue.

Despite complaints that our freedom of speech had been eroded, we Malaysians have too much freedom in our hand. We are instead are too immature to properly use the freedom of speech that has been placed into our hands.