THE majority of people will agree with the judge who backed farmer Kenneth Faulkner's actions in shooting a burglar during a break-in at his home.

John Rae was shot in the leg during a raid on Mr Faulkner's farmhouse, and the cry of "serves him right - hope it hurt" will be heard the length and breadth of the land.

But the decision by the Crown Prosecution Service not to prosecute Mr Faulkner, and the support given at Derby Crown Court by Judge Andrew Hamilton, has muddied the legal waters considerably.

The law allows people to use "reasonable force" to protect themselves, but no one really knows what that means anymore.

Seven years ago, a public outcry greeted the manslaughter conviction of Tony Martin for shooting a burglar who broke into his isolated farmhouse.

The clear difference is that Mr Martin's gunshot killed its target and Mr Faulkner's didn't. But it could just as easily have ended in a death - and that, presumably, would have led to a different decision by the CPS.

We have every sympathy with Mr Faulkner - an old man whose isolated home had been targeted three times by someone who is clearly a scumbag - but it is a very fine line indeed and the law has to make up its mind.

People need clearer guidance about how far they can go in defending their property. Can they resort to the gun or does that make them villains too?

As the law stands at the moment, it really is anyone's guess.