Francis Elliott and Richard Ford
Star musicians and your favourite Times writers at the Albert Hall
The leader of rank-and-file police officers accused Jack Straw of irresponsibility last night over his proposed review of the law on self-defence.
Mr Straw, the Justice Secretary, was also accused by the Opposition of a cynical preelection stunt after he proposed to review the law less than two years after a similar review.
But the attack by the Police Federation caused the most surprise, with their warning that any changes must not encourage the public to take the law into their own hands.
Jan Berry, chairman of the federation, expressed surprise at the latest review of self-defence law and said that nothing should be done that encourages vigilantism by the public.
“It is irresponsible for a government, either current or shadow, to use such a potentially dangerous subject to demonstrate a proactive stance on crime – not least the danger of raising public expectation when the reality is not achievable,” she said. “We need commonsense laws that protect the law-abiding public against a minority of offenders but we don’t want this to act as a green light to use excessive force nor to encourage people to take the law into their own hands.”
She said that a review of the self-defence laws was a laudable sentiment but in 2005 Charles Clarke, then the Home Secretary, and his officials had found the legal implications “fell short of a deliverable solution”.
Nick Herbert, the Shadow Justice Secretary, questioned the timing and motive of Mr Straw’s announcement. He said: “Jack Straw, the Government and Labour MPs have fought us for years when we repeatedly urged a change in the law to allow people to protect their homes against burglars, and the last time the Government cynically signalled a change on this they reneged just months later.
“People will rightly question the motive and substance of this latest review and whether the author of Labour’s Human Rights Act really believes in a long overdue rebalancing of the law in favour of the victims.”
Mr Straw said that he had been a “have-a-go hero” on four occasions. “I was presented, just by chance, with being a witness to criminal behaviour and thought I should intervene,” Mr Straw told BBC Radio 4’s Today programme. He said that he knew “from personal experience that you have all of a millisecond to make the judgement about whether to intervene”.
Mr Straw’s career as a “have-a-go hero” began in 1980 in Blackburn when he disturbed and then detained a burglar. It continued with the detention of a mugger at the Oval Underground station. In the early 1990s he chased a man who had attacked a woman at the same station but failed to catch him. In 1996 he chased a man who had robbed a member of the public and detained the suspect until police arrived.
Later, in her first speech as Home Secretary, Jacqui Smith attacked television programmes that “celebrate” drunkenness, in a speech to Labour delegates billed as the start of a new zero-tolerance drive against crime and antisocial behaviour. The Home Secretary told the conference in Bournemouth that she had no time for those who excuse bad behaviour because they were drunk.
She was also sharply critical of those who exploited images of drunken young people. “Why celebrate drunken behaviour on our TV screens?” she demanded. “Alcohol misuse can cause real damage to real people.” Officials said later that she was referring to programmes such as Ibiza Unearthed.Ms Smith emphasised the importance of local involvement in policing and laid out new policies to foster this. The publication of local police statistics would help to determine the priorities of local beat patrols in every neighbourhood from next April, she said.
Ms Smith also accepted one of the recommendations of a recent official review that there should be new “local community safety budgets” shared between police and local councils. The Home Office said that the budgets would cover areas smaller than council wards and that it was working with the Department for Communities and Local Government on how residents can influence how the cash is spent.
Providing further details of Gordon Brown’s announcement of 10,000 hand-held computers, Ms Smith said that it would be paid from a new £50 million capital fund for police technologies. It would also pay for mobile finger-printing devices that would allow officers more time on the front line.

Jack the lad
— Mr Straw’s cuttings file brought three more occurrences of his crime-busting exploits
— Neighbours recall an 11-year-old Straw in the late 1950s berating an ice-cream seller for illegally sounding his chimes after 7pm.
— Mr Straw, described by one neighbour as “a toffee-nosed boy nobody wanted to play with”, said he did not remember the event
— In 1999, as Home Secretary, he accosted a youth who was spitting from a Blackburn railway bridge. “I thought, ‘You can’t just stand and watch this’,” Mr Straw said. “He gave me quite a lot of lip, but after a while he calmed down.”
— Later that day he was forced to admit that he was accompanied by armed protection officers. Mr Straw’s spokesman said that he did not remember the event. (Patrick Foster)
Follow our three athletes' progress in their preparations for the London Triathlon, and pick up training tips and more
Enjoy screenings of all the classic films you love, plus take advantage of two-for-one tickets
We explore leisure activities that are safe and suitable for all of the family
Times Online's new TV show helps you make the right decisions for your pet
Read our exclusive 100 Years of Fleming and Bond interactive timeline, packed with original Times articles and reviews
The latest travel news plus the best hotels and gadgets for business travellers
Shortcuts to help you find sections and articles


A treasure trove of baubles, booty and stylish quests


Overseas contacts and local business information

£129,500
Bentley Edinburgh
£79,850
Mercedes-Benz of Northampton
£26,995
Unit 1, Woodfield Business Unit, Kidderminster Road, Ombersley, Worcester.
Great car insurance deals online
90k + Bonus + Options
Confidential
London
£23,716 +
Highways Agency
National
£
£43,405 - £48,228 pa
Notting Hill Housing
London
£30,000 base, £100,000 OTE
Riches Consulting
London/South
with annexe accommodation and 5.25 acres
£1,100,000
Beautiful Gardens w/ stunning Thames Views
Studios £33K, 1 Beds £60K, 2 beds £79K
Mortgages, bank acc & money transfers to help you buy abroad
Explore mystical Jordan
From £1030 for 7nts 4*
to USA's Most Cosmopolitan City; San Francisco!
£POA
Book Now for Winter 08/09 and Get 10% off!
Great travel insurance deals online
Contact our advertising team for advertising and sponsorship in Times Online, The Times and The Sunday Times. Search globrix.com to buy or rent UK property. Visit our classified services and find jobs, used cars, property or holidays. Use our dating service, read our births, marriages and deaths announcements, or place your advertisement.
Copyright 2008 Times Newspapers Ltd.
This service is provided on Times Newspapers' standard Terms and Conditions. Please read our Privacy Policy.To inquire about a licence to reproduce material from Times Online, The Times or The Sunday Times, click here.This website is published by a member of the News International Group. News International Limited, 1 Virginia St, London E98 1XY, is the holding company for the News International group and is registered in England No 81701. VAT number GB 243 8054 69.
It is obviously an election ploy (consider the timing). But although I am not a Labour supporter, on this occasion I believe Jack Straw is absolutely right. The law does need to be changed to heavily favour the law abiding, hard-working citizen who seeks to protect themselves, their families and their homes and property from criminals. (The police would rather people just stand there and allow themselves or others to be robbed, burgled or stabbed, without doing anything about it and then, once so robbed or burgled or dead, leave them to try and find the criminals - who, if caught, just get let off with a slap on the wrist or, even if the Courts jail them, are still let out quickly by the lefty probation service). Many people agree that criminals, in commiting a crime, should lose the right to protection of the law. Maybe this would make them think twice before commiting crimes - the current leniency of sentencing certainly does not.
Edward, London, UK
To George from Glasgow..
Jack Straw is saying what most people think Georgie-boy in order to get your vote! If he was actually going to do anything about it he would have done so ages ago. It may have escaped your notice, but its not like he has been in opposition for a decade. He was Home Secretary for years for God's sake!
I sometimes wonder about the intelligence of this great British public!?
Mark, Birmingham, UK
At present, the law allows for "reasonable force" to be used to protect oneself, ones possetions or one's family. what possible good can be achieved by extending this I do not know. The definition of "reasonable force" can only be defined by a "reasonable" jury. I think most of us would consider it reasonable to grab a knife to defend yourself againts a thug with a knif, but probably unreasonable to either carry a knife on your person "just in case" or to reach for a gun to "defend yourself" from a criminal who is already fleeing the scene. If vigilantee-ism is allowed, then we undermine a system of law and order which is already seriously undermined by excessive political interferance.
becky, truro,
Sure you go to the defence of a young woman apparently being assaulted by a yob. You get a torrent of foul abuse from her and broken ribs and severe facial damage from him. Turns out he's the boyfriend and its a "lovers' tiff" You dash out to protect your car from vandalism by hoodies and get a knife to the chest and its curtains. Makes good headlines mind you! In the first instance walk on by, in the second call the cops, they may take forever to arrive, they may not do much, your car may be damaged (you are insured no?) but at least you're not. As for meteing out summary punishment (even death) to intruders or trespassers - well police cells are not nice and prison even less so.
colin houlding, Bury, Lancs.
The Police Federation should remember who pays their wages and why. The current disgracefull missuse of authority and power by their members against the public who have been protecting themselves, and others, against criminal activity should be a matter of review. The respect for the police by the public has deteriorated over the years and this kind of nonsensical attitude is part of the reason. To leave these matters in police hands usually means minimum action (or even interest) and no certainty of aprehension of perpetrators. It would seem that the police are slowly but surely seeing themselves as the controllers of the public rather than their protectors.
mike gee, bournemouth, uk
A review on the 'self-defense' laws has already taken place.
Why doesn't Jack Straw get to the 'laws' which really need to be reviewed and reformed.
He could make a start by making a pledge to call A Government Lead 'Holistic' Examination of Family Law and tell us how he is going to bring all matters to do with child protection, child care and family justice out of the dark so that justice for children is enabled to be served and can be 'seen' to be being served!
Darnthesafetynet, London, W11 1NR
How often do any of us see a handbag snatched or a person beaten up? Very rarely. How often do we hear someone swear in front of children, spit in the street, scream and shout loudly at dead of night on their way back from the pub? Very often. These are the sorts of abuses that Straw should be attacking. Where are the public information films that go a long way to showing people how to react in these circumstances? People learn by example and it is time these public information films were brought back to show us how best to deal with these individuals. Use could be made of cameras these days, simply report the time the place and the incident and prosecute these people. Zero tolerance starts with ending swearing in public and such things and not chasing "granny bashers" down the streets.
John, Dundee, UK
This sounds to me like a vote winning soundbite designed to help win the next election but seeing as nothing has been done about this for the last ten years, are we all daft enough to believe that anything will actually happen?
Fred James, Worcester, UK
All very well for the different veiws, thing is if I see
an old person being mugged in the street, do I jump in and try to do something or stand back because.
1) He migt have a dagger and would probably use it because he will only get community service.
2)If I really clout him he can sue me for compensation.
Ahh bless I'll just give him a hug, providing of course he's wearing a hood!
Hobbit
Hobbit, Robertsbridge, East Sussex
The current law has been working fine.The streets have never been safer thanks to the liberalising of society a trend which doesn't tolerate citizens becoming judge and executioner. There seems to be a vocal group who will always rally to any suggestion that they can have greater freedom to bestow their perception of justice.
Brown's cynical ploy of attracting Tory voters by adopting Tory policies is very disappointing.
Russell, Aberdeenshire, Scotland
The arrogance of the current police forces in the UK seems unplumbable. The law is already in our own hands - we merely delegate our freedoms under the law to those whom we pay to enforce it. When the police fail to do what they are paid to do then every citizen has the freedom to do it for themselves and if a burglar fell off the roof or was shot by a householder every day for a month or so then the country would be better for it in every way. Better still if police officers were sacked for neglect of duty when they fail to behave properly.
Damocles, Exeter, UK
The arrogance of the current police forces in the UK seems boundless. The law is already in our own hands - we merely delegate our freedoms under the law to the police. When the police fail to do what they are paid to do then every citizen has the freedom to do it for themselves. If a burglar fell off the roof or was shot by a householder every day for a month or so then the country would be better in every way. Better still for us all if police officers were sacked for neglect of duty when they fail to behave properly or spouted the sort of arrogant nonsense reported here.
Damocles, Exeter, UK
Geoff, I don't think killing someone is "ok" in any country even if the person is a burglar. And where do you draw the line, do you have to catch them in the act or is it alright to hunt them down afterwards and then kill them??
Michael, Poole, Dorset,
The Police Federation will gain enough credibility to comment on this issue when their members actually show an interest in attending burglaries.
Everyone knows the Police are virtually useless in such circumstances and are keener on prosecuting victims (that is if they can tear themselves away from their favourite sport of persecuting motorists). Easy targets, every time.
That said, this is an utterly cynical bit of grandstanding by the Government who couldn't care less either.
Steve, Lincoln,
I agree with Straw's dabbles into intervention. BUT, all of the described incidnts were before Labour under his former boss had managed to politicise our police force and turn the police's agenda from one of protecting the public into achieving targets for political purposes.
Since then the police have become an organ of Labour, out to suppress free speech, enforce anti-discrimination laws ahead of crimes against the person and property.
Labour has uncorked the genie of a politically controlled law enforcement agency. It will be more than a struggle to get him back in.
Edwin Thornber, Bucharest,
The police chief is only interested in protecting her cushy job, until the police in the UK realise why they are employed by the public it will be necessary for the public to protect themselves. If Manchester police think that riding a bike is too dangerous for their officers what hope can the public have for a law abiding country.
Peter Fordham, Pego, Spain
this is simply 'good for conference' gets a rousing applause to show the public how tough labour is on crime etc etc
the timing is shameful, the content without substance.
the present laws allow self defense- it is the interpretation bythe police and courts which cause a few and only a few problems!
mike, oxford, england
So we're just supposed to sit quietly and let the criminals get on with it then, as the police sure won't do anything to help us.
Yes it's an election ploy of course, and they don't really want us to feel safe in our own homes.
If killing burglars is OK in the US, why not here?
It's all about the rights of the offender again, rather than of the honest citizen.
My view is if they choose to break into your house, they lose their right to not be attacked. Sounds fair to me. Nobody is asking them to break in.
Geoff, Pontefract,
Leave off Jack Straw as he is only saying what the vast majority of the public feel. As for the police not wanting people to take the law into their own hands - could it be that people no longer have any confidence in the police. The police in the UK are now isolated from the general public and I know of one case where an individual was assaulted by a bar bouncer and actually went to a policeman to complain and was locked up and charged because the bouncer and the copper were mates. The copper then lied in court about the circimstances. In another case a friends car was hit by a van and he called the police immediately on his nobile as the van sped off only to be told "just claim it on your insurance"
George, Glasgow, UK
Man's first law codes of Hammurabi were the first social compact in which society guaranteed protection and justice to the individual. When society abdicates its responsibilities under the social compact and either refuses or is incompetent to either protect OR provide the individual with justice, their responsibility reverts to the individual. What is seen today is simply the individual re-asserting his right of survival.
Bob Evans, Anaheim, California