It is no secret that in the U.K., homeowners have no right to self defense. Last year, Barry-Lee Hastings faced murder charges and was convicted and sentenced to five years for manslaughter for the stabbing death of an armed home intruder.

Last week, CNS News reported on Tony Martin, who was convicted in April 2000 for the shooting death of a home invader using an unregistered shotgun. During Martin's parole hearing, a concern for "burglars' rights" became a major issue.

They [Martin's lawyers] also criticized the parole board for raising the issue of "burglars' rights" by asking if Martin was likely to use similar force against criminals in the future.

Martin's lawyer, Bitu Bhalla, said that the board shouldn't have submitted "arguments on the strategy for burglars generally.

"The burglar, if he decides to attack a householder, ought to be aware that if reasonable force is used against him, he will not get any protection," he said.

The parole board was not swayed, however, and addressed concern for the well being of home invaders. Lawyer Pushpinder Saini argued, (emphasis added)

"Even if only those who came onto his property were the group at risk of the use of lethal force at the hands of Mr. Martin, it was not irrational for the board to consider such a group was entitled to protection."

What the parole board is saying, is that a burglar or home invader has a reasonable expectation of safety when they break into your home. Apparently, concern for that safety is paramount to the homeowner's expectation of safety, because Tony Martin's parole was rejected, as he was considered to be a danger to home invaders.

This sends a strong message to citizens in the United Kingdom: Defend yourself, and go to jail. Show penitence, or stay there.