MAY I express my admiration for Adrian Lemaitre in his determination to physically defend his property against criminals (or should one not use that word?)

We had the usual pitiful and defeatist response from those whose task it is to enact laws (MPs) and those whose duty it is to enforce them.

The Swindon Police Crime Prevention Officer advises householders 'not to have a go' if confronted by a burglar, since the intruder 'may be armed or have a weapon.'

The response to that is for every householder also to obtain arms and a weapon, so that they will be on an equal footing.

He further states 'the law states you have the right to use minimal force to protect yourself.' Fine. So when a householder is confronted by a burglar and is in the act of striking him on the head with a weapon, is he supposed to stop in mid-air, phone the GW Hospital, and ask them to send out a doctor with an instrument to measure the thickness of the criminal's skull, so that he can mathematically ascertain the lawful amount of force to use?

Forget the 1998 Human Rights Act. Criminals do not have any rights when committing an offence on someone's property.

As for Julia Drown's comment that 'some intruders (she means criminals) are misguided' the mind boggles at such a fatuous statement.

I again refer to my hero, Tony Martin. The criminal he confronted, Fred Barras, will never commit another burglary.

He is dead.

G R BRAY

Swindon