In a situation where an individual is attempting to reenter their property, the belief that the person who dispossessed them had no claim of right is crucial for justifying the use of force. This principle stems from the concept of self-help in property law, where individuals have the right to reclaim their property without resorting to legal processes if they believe they have been wrongfully dispossessed.
For an individual to justify using force, they must be convinced that the person currently occupying the property does not have a legitimate claim to it. This belief influences their decision-making and renders their actions reasonable under the law if they feel their rights have been violated. The expectation here is that the use of force is only deemed justifiable when it is in response to an unlawful act of dispossession, effectively restoring their rights over the property without unlawfully infringing on the rights of others.
In contrast, believing that force was necessary to ensure compliance or that the other person is likely to retaliate does not provide a solid legal or ethical basis for the use of force; it focuses more on the dynamics of interaction rather than property rights. Furthermore, premeditated actions might imply intent to harm rather than reclaim property, which could undermine the justification for using force entirely