No, he had every right to do that. What if the burglar had a gun? It would have been dumb of the OP to just do nothing and possibly get killed.

False imprisonment? You had me laughing my ass off and then you go and break the illusion and prove you're just a moron.

Everything the OP did seems justified. He could have killed him but he didn't. He was protecting himself and his property and seemed to use reasonable force. Where do you go getting false imprisonment? If a guy breaks into your house, you're just going to let him walk away? The burglar waived his basic human rights when he decided to violate the OP's rights. I'm also calling bullshit on this though because I'm pretty damn sure that you need to be served if you're being sued.

I normally don't wish ill on anyone, but I do truly hope someday that you face someone breaking into your house and threating your security and safety and then when something truly horrific happens such as your kids/significant other being crippled/killed/mentally scarred you will then wish that rather than upholding your bullshit "basic human rights" you would have done something. In the right conditions (i.e.: the person defending the home can't defend him/herself) this burglar would most likely do much worse than what was done to him and he isn't going to even begin to entertain the thought of rights. The way it should be is people like you with your style of opinion on these matters needs to go away. There is absolutley no reason that I can't defend myself, family or home to the full extent of my abilities barring torture and the like, if anything this is the one true basic human right.

technically Chelss24 is correct. and you can't waive your "basic human rights" just by violating someone else's rights... if you could do that, we would not be angry at Bushy for water-boarding war criminals. violating someone else's rights can waive certain rights (i think, not sure), but it definitely cannot waive your basic human rights.

He's lucky he wasn't killed for breaking into someone's home the homeowner had no way to tell whether the guy wasn't gonna hurt him so he defended himself . Yes this was totally avoidable if you don't want beat up or killed don't break into others homes .

Oh #37. *sigh* What was the OP supposed to do? Yell, "Hey, watcha doin?" and wait for the burglar to turn around and possibly come at him with a weapon? I don't think so. OP took measures to protect himself (and anyone that may have been with him). He punched him once or twice which, if you have a strong enough arm, can break a nose fairly easily, so it's not like the OP pushed him to the ground and beat him senseless. And it's a good thing that the OP did restrain him. Though the burglar had a broken nose, he still could have gotten up after the OP ran off to call the police and attacked him. Like a poster above me said - if you don't want to get beat up or killed, don't rob someone else's house. Simple concept, really. The OP was protecting himself and I hope that he gets away from this case free and clear. I hope the burglar has to pay for his own damn broken nose and gets to deal with the healing process behind bars.

Of course he is going to punch him. He has to do it before the (possible armed) burglar attacks him. Of course he has to subdue him with zipties, so that way the police can come and get him. It's a helluva more humane approach than knocking him out.

ummm yeah, by doing inhumane acts i personally believe you give up some of your "basic human rights" and it might have only been one good lucky punch. But false imprisonment? if i ever have to subdue someone that could be armed that bitch is gonna be zip tied, duct taped, frisked, and if i find a weapon, ima scare the shit outta him and slap him around a few times for senselessly endangering my life and mental well being.... and then im gonna call the cops after i take out my own gun and load it in front of him and keep it cocked and aimed at him

Figure I'd reply to my own post so that it makes a bit more sense lol. A lot of replies seem to have shown that many people are in total disagreement with me, so point taken! I'm a law student so I have a pretty strong idea of what constitutes as self-defense and the proper measures of justice, but I'm also from New Zealand so I guess our perception of morals and justification is somewhat different.

Many states in the US have enacted laws (in the last 20 years or so) that protect homeowners from people committing a crime like B&E/Burglary on their property. As some have stated, in some states you can shoot anyone who unlawfully enters your home - and the suggestion for years was to kill them if you do this so they can't sue. But as many have said, he did nothing wroing. And to those who scream unlawful imprisonment -I'd agree if he kept him tied up for a few days. This was called "restraining until authorities arrived". The victim should get therapy for the trauma he's suffered from haivng someone break in and the fight that ensued. Claim PTSD or some other emothional distress and sue the guy civally for the PTSD and for bringing a frivolous lawsuit......though if he's a B&E artist, I doubt he has shit.

and we all love the fact that you can just run the hell away when you see the man in the black suit coming =)