The thief broke into the house, and it happened that the owner was at home and was slightly injured. The thief's family blocked the door and demanded compensation. What should I do?

Did the owner set warning signs in advance? In particular, will you tell me that you will be beaten for stealing and breaking into houses? If not, then the hitter must be liable for compensation, because thieves also have the right to know. However, the owner can also sue the thief for not handling the theft permit, which belongs to unlicensed operation, so as to reduce the amount of compensation.

I think if you find a thief, run quickly and wait for the police to count the lost property after calling the police, so that you can judge the thief! Otherwise, if you hit a thief, you may be imprisoned. If you are beaten by a thief, people will say that you have already broken up with the thief and are all adults. If you want to make up for finding him, it's no use fighting.

This is not a battle. The police usually regard it as a fight. When a thief enters the room, it is not as simple as fighting. This is called robbery! Laws that cannot protect normal people and good people have no credibility! Any criminal who breaks the law first does not apply any legal protection in the process of committing a crime, and the law is not the umbrella of the wicked! The family members of criminals dare to block the door, which shows the social atmosphere. Laws and regulations make people laugh!

Anyone who invades other people's houses is a felony that threatens others' personal safety, but we actually take the amount of stolen property as the basis for conviction. This is a typical joke, which encourages the arrogance of criminals today and puts the protection of criminals' legitimate rights and interests above the rights and interests of victims, which will lay a huge hidden danger for maintaining social fairness and justice!

I will listen to you if I don't beat the thief, and I will go to the public security bureau with you. How can I send it? First of all, of course, we must subdue, and there will inevitably be some injuries in the process of subduing. The thief is an offender, the owner wants to stop the illegal behavior, and the thief himself has to bear the damage. If you want to compensate the thief for the owner, it is to reverse black and white, regardless of right and wrong. Who will stop the illegal behavior in the future?

It seems that the thief industry is really good, including medical expenses and lost time, as well as compensation for mental damage. If the claim is successful, it means that the profession of thief has been legalized. Today, due to the epidemic, many industries have not returned to the right track, which will lead to more and more people joining the profession of thieves.

All the people should learn to catch thieves, or they will not catch thieves and call the police. In fact, the owner's family only needs to state the process of catching, and it is not responsible for not continuing to fight after the uniform. In the early years, I saw many times in the street near the railway station that the police caught the thief, pulled out the belt and buckled it on the ground. I still keep kicking, and I haven't heard that thieves are suing the police.

The most suitable way for the host: coming, brother! Have a cup of tea first! Brother, don't hesitate to steal. If you have fun, go home early and rest. By the way, do you call yourself? If you don't drive, I'll drive you home. By the way, be careful when you walk to the stairs, it's a little slippery there. Go ahead, I'll help you from there.

Has the world changed? The thief went home and had to cook for him. Give him some color to see see Prepare some money. Let him go home safely, or his family will demand compensation for the thief's labor. If you do, you must compensate for intentional injury. Be sure to smile at thieves in the future. The thief's family goes to that house every day and demands compensation from the victim for poor hospitality.

Both first-time offenders and recidivists are thieves, and a person with normal thinking knows what the result is. If you get something for nothing, you will be severely punished for stealing other people's property. It was self-defense for the shopkeeper to beat the thief. If you don't hit him, he will hurt you. There is a great difference between justice and injustice. Stealing is a crime. Predestined love, whether it is a first-time offender or a recidivist, will be sentenced when it is heavy, so that thieves can know that the cost of stealing is high, and the punishment for being raw is to condone crime.

If the thief enters the house and faces the owner, then the theft will escalate to robbery, which means whether you die or I live. In the struggle between the master and the thief, the thief was injured, which should belong to self-defense. However, if a thief breaks into a house and sees his master at home, he turns around and runs out, being chased and beaten by his master, and being slightly injured, it will be difficult to judge. The personal rights of citizens are protected by law. Although this person is engaged in illegal activities, his personal rights are still protected by law, although his behavior involves illegality. That is to say, this is the man who broke in and stole things? Personal? Wearing a legal shield that is inviolable to anyone, no one has the right to interfere with this person's behavior and actions except the law, otherwise? Replace the judiciary without authorization? Punishment? Thief. ? Otherwise, it is illegal! Then, is this very contradictory to legal propaganda, appeal and call to encourage the broad masses of the people to resolutely fight against all illegal and criminal acts and elements? !

According to your logic, in this case, if one or several people use force in time to control and stop the behavior of the person who robbed the steering wheel of the bus driver, does this person or several people constitute the personal rights of the person who robbed the steering wheel? This person or these people have been suspected of fighting violence with violence. This person or these people broke the law? Alas! According to your logic, are you determined to put yourself and everyone? System? Become? Wax man? Then!

According to your logic, you are determined to interpret the law as wise after the event! According to your logic, you are determined to interpret the sacred law on paper, write one thing, say another, and act another! But you have to understand that the law is sacred and inviolable! The law makes every citizen understand that illegal behavior is extremely risky! The minimum is the punishment requirement that has been clearly defined in the legal provisions! That's what the law does! Only in this way can we measure people's behavior! The law empowers every citizen. What about the law? Weapons? It is already in the hands of every citizen. When your rights and interests are being violated by criminals, can you say that the legal weapon in your hand can only be used in the specific environment of the court?

Home is a person's last security guarantee and has unlimited defense rights. American householders are not guilty of shooting criminals who break into private houses illegally. In contrast, China's handling of such matters is unfair. Tolerating evil is a blasphemy against good. Self-defense can't be a gangster holding a knife, you holding a knife and a gangster holding a gun. It is fundamental that weapons and means higher than gangsters should be allowed to defend against infringement.