The release from prison of Tony Martin, the Norfolk farmer who shot dead an intruder, has brought the problem of rural crime back to the front of the national consciousness.

Many have expressed support for the action he took in defending himself and his property when burglars invaded. Whether the public sympathy is for him or against him is not really the point.

If one takes the view that citizens should behave in a manner that does not put them outside the law, then he was guilty of using excessive force to deter burglars.

In practical terms his problem was that he shot the raiders when they were retreating. Reasonable force must be used. His object had already been achieved by whatever means. They were running away. If they had still been coming at him then the conclusion may have been different.

This is an extreme case, but it is indicative of a greater problem. The police have a difficult job convincing those involved as victims of crime that there is any point in reporting some crimes. Scepticism normally greets the release of crime figures. Most of us know of unreported crimes, which would make the rate of detection lower. We have had items stolen from our farm which have not been reported. There does not seem to be any point.

It is very difficult to make farms and many other rural businesses secure from the determined thief. Much farm equipment, especially the small power tools which are essential these days, is easily portable. Some items, such as stock trailers, do not look out of place after they have been stolen and have gone to a ready market. They are also quite difficult to identify and there is no national register.

Extra police officers are not necessarily the solution. If there is a significant rise in the number of crimes and the numbers of people committing them, then the police are bound to struggle to control them.

No one organisation can stand against a tide. Law enforcement is a matter for everyone. It is an attitude of mind. That is why Neighbourhood Watch schemes are so widespread.

They work best when a few individuals take responsibility for the organisation and can act as co-ordinators, between those who report suspicious activity and the police.

It is also important that the punishment for criminal offences is seen as sensible and in proportion to the offence and that fines, when imposed, are actually collected.

Too often one hears of fines that are paid in instalments, where after the first few payments nothing happens and the problems of collection become too great and too expensive.

Perhaps community service would be more use than fines. The last thing society wants is more people in prison.

Law abiding citizens are entitled to go about their business without being in fear of criminal activity. At the moment, particularly in some areas, they cannot. What seems to be needed is a new alliance between the public and the police to significantly raise detection levels.

The thing that deters is not the severity of the punishment. The deterrent lies in the probability of being caught. It would not matter if the penalty for speeding or parking on a double yellow was hanging, if no one was ever prosecuted.

There has never been a golden age when there was no, or little, crime. There has always been too much. What we need is less and we need it soon.

Updated: 10:57 Tuesday, July 29, 2003