Justice is never for the victims!

Statistically speaking, this is the anomoly, not the norm. You are far more likely to survive any kind of attack if you fight back, even unsuccessfully, than if you 'lay down and take it'. This applies to rape, theft, breaking and entering, and attempted murder.

I can't see how they would possibly have the chance to decide if you fight back or not. If they break into my house, unless they are stealth ninjas, I will hear it. By the way, I am a light sleeper, just by nature. Heavy sleepers may not have such a chance, but then it's entirely moot what the law is, so it can be anything. I would wake up, even from a deep sleep, however. At that point, they have just entered my home and I am now awake. No matter what weapon they have, inside my house, I can meet them armed and ready for combat.

Agreed, that was disproportionate force. Unfortunately, what 'proportionate force' constitutes tends to be entirely in the minds of the judges/jurrors. Here in the US there have been cases of criminal injuring themselves in the course of breaking in who successfully sued the owners. There have been other cases where the owners shoot someone for simple tresspassing, with no evidence of further criminal intent, and are found not guilty.

And what if you have guns in your garage? Or other weapons?

In the case of muggings, I generally agree. Unless you're foolish enough to walk around with a fortune in cash, no loss will be too much. Again, however, you are statistically more likely to survive if you resist. At least according to US crime stats.

 

That's pretty profound, Montresor! I like it.

Of course criminals are humans, Joaqin -- but they forfeit the right to my sympathy when they commit crimes -- my sympathies lie entirely with the victims.

All of this presupposes having the time in which to react, I understand that. But given that time, I believe that we should have the means and the support of society when we defend ourselves.

This sounds disproportionate at first glance, sure, but how many times had the teen trespassed? What was the nature of his harassment? I've got to tell you, if he had trespassed before and the legal system had given him a light slap on the wrist, and the harassment was something along the lines of "I'm gonna rape your daughter", then I as a father would probably take some steps, and the teen's pathetic "oh, I was just kidding, I'm sorry I ignored the 20 court orders to stay off your property and stop threatening your family" would fall on deaf ears. There comes a time when enough is enough. The situation was likely different than what I have postulated, but I'm more inclined to favor the otherwise law-abiding victim than the trespassing little snot. Especially if there were threats to the family involved.

Now you asked:

I'm sorry to say that it is. Now the best defense is of course good locks on the doors, a security system if possible, and IIRC owning a dog, not to mention not being stupid about leaving your really valuable stuff in plain sight. Nevertheless, what I am talking about is not a situation regarding some beer or a few dollars, but rather someone in your home who you have every right to suspect may be there for the purpose of causing you bodily harm or stealing what was the work of years to attain. To say that a homeowner in that position should stop to consider the criminal's viewpoint and "humanize" them is utterly ridiculous. The criminal made his choice the minute he decided to stop being a law-abiding citizen and prey on his fellow citizens

 

Wow, joacqin, please come done out of the fairyworld please. If someone is going to mug you, you have no idea if that is all they want.
If they have seen you out with your better half, they may have other things in mind. Incapacitate or kill you, take your wallet & keys(and car if you have one) go to your house rape, murder, whatever whoever is there(element of suprise as they have your keys).
Or even if not that bad of a crook, they have your wallet, your Driver license, credit cards, all types of other id & maybe your Social securtiy card. Bingo you are no longer the owner of your identity as there will be numerous loans & credit cards issued to you within hours.
Have fun over the next 3-36 months trying to get that cleared up. Hope you don't ned to buy anything that requires a credit check for a while.
Remember crooks are like predators, when they see their prey exhibit fear it increases their level of aggression.

 

Wow. We agree on both points. At the last store a worked for, the thieves took the store at gunpoint as the store was closing. They took the employees to the cash office and told them to open the safe.

It was a big store, and they missed an employee who was hiding in the store and used his cell phone to call the police. After a few moments they arrived, took a glance around, while never bothered to get out of their partrol cars, and drove off, leaving the employees in the hands of the bad guys. Fortunately all they wanted was money and then left the store shortly afterwards.

The cops came back and said: "We thought the store was closed." Really. The parking lot had about 10 cars in it at the time.

 

Why on earth would you keep weapons in your garage or any other easily accesible place even if you are scared and paranoid? Keeping a weapon under your bed or in a bedside drawer must be the sensible thing even for people who are desperately afraid of drooling maniacs breaking into their houses to kill and mutilate. Again, for that scenario if someone breaks into your house with the intent purpose of doing you harm I do not think it matters how light a sleeper you are by the time you have figured out what is going on you will most likely be looking down the barrel of a gun, thankfully I dont think that happens very often. Most criminals are not interested in you or your family, they are interested in your valuables and most likely the next fix they can buy with those valuables. Frankly I am getting to be surprised that some of you are able to sleep at all at night so worried you seem to be of evil doers breaking into your houses at night. Is it really such a big issue for you? I do not think I have ever heard of it happening, I had a co-worker get her house burglarized but that was while no one was at home which to my knowledge is what the criminals prefer. How many sadistic psychopaths do you guys actually think wander around in the world? Sure, if you look at the crime shows on TV you get the impression that there are fancy murders all the time but I doubt it is like that in the real world. Anyhoo, as I see it this is a pointless debate as it is a non-issue. We might as well discuss the risk of bear attacks, yes they happen but it really is nto something you should worry about even if you live up in Alaska in which case you should have a pretty good idea how to handle the bears.

Lots of posts while I posted this one and I must say that I think it is you guys who live in a nightmare world. LDK you pretty much summed up te situation about the man pretty good except it was his son and they had been harassing and threathened him for years. I do not say the father did wrong, what I am saying is that society should not condone it and he actually did not walk he was judged to have been driven insane enough at the time of the shooting that he was not accountable for his actions which is something you "anti-crime" guys generally dislike if I am not mistaken. Again, martaug and others, what kind of a ****ed up world do you live in? The stuff you talk about happen in bad crime novels and shows very rarely in the real world or else the US is a more screwed up place than I ever thought. It would take me at most 10 minutes to jam all my cards, anyhoo if this is the world you guys choose to live in where you are so afraid that everyone is out to rape and torture you and your loved ones there is not much point of me arguing here. I have worked with people who have committed some of the foulest deeds imaginable and they did not work like that. They take people close to them, they take people that trust them so instead of you guys being so paralyzed and focused on the stranger that wishes you harm if you really want to find people who might do you harm look at the people around you, look at your relatives, look at your friends those are the ones most likely to hurt you.

 

No no no, martaug, crooks are people too. We should bow down to them and give them everything that we have worked our butts off for because they are disadvantaged and we are advantaged. We should sympathize with them and try to help them. If their mothers didn't give them enough hugs when they were little, we should let them rape and murder our wives and children because they need that to feel better about themselves. Don't you realize that they are only acting out because society hasn't found a way to accept their little foibles like rape and murder?

WE'RE the ones with the problem, not these innocent fellows who have criminal records a mile long, no sir. WE'RE responsible not only for our actions, but also for theirs, because they've never been taught properly. They matter far more to society than we citizens with actual jobs paying taxes and bettering society.

/end sarcastic rant.

Well, here in North America we also know how to handle the criminals so long as the bleeding heart liberals don't hamstring us, virtually holding our arms so the criminals can victimize us.

If you look in the weapons restrictions thread I mentioned a fellow who had torn a kid's penis and shot a police officer in the back of the head among his other 20 or so criminal convictions. Joa, this happened not far from my house. The man he put into a coma had never met him before. I agree that assaults like this don't happen every day but they are not as rare or far away as you seem to think.

 

I think i sorta understand joacqin now. Only your relatives & friends are dangers to you so if you make everybody mad at you Bing!,Bing!,Bing!
No friends or family to harm you!!
It's brilliant!!
It's insightful!!
It's ridiculous!!

Oh, if you think calling & cancelling your cards is going to do you any good think again, think again. They will use your ID to get new cards. vehicles loans, etc. You really need to look up identity theft.

 

You can freeze your credit though. Then even you can't get a card unless they contact you directly.

Joac - Sometimes they are very interested in your kids. That's why we have Amber Alerts. They may be looking for valuables but that's one rare instance where I would still shoot first and ask later.

 

I believe that Vhailor would opine that justice is not supposed to be for the victims. Justice is for society. What victims want is revenge, or retribution, even if that does not take the form of physical harm. That's not to say that I think the current legal system is balanced. I am particularly disturbed by criminals who rack up dozens upon dozens of convictions, many for violent crimes. Surely at some stage we must just accept that they are a danger to society.

Do you expect a guard at every corner? Their prevantative role is in solving crimes. If criminals believe that they will be caught and punished then they wil be deterred from breaking the law in the first place. Not that they do a great job of this but the theory of law enforcement is right I think.

I'd be interested in hearing opinions on the Padraig Nally case that happened five years ago in Ireland. It covers a lot of the issues around home defence and is more complex than the 'rapist in the home' that many are using as their example. The facts are summarised as follows:

A) Padraig Nally was a farmer in his mid fifties who lived alone in an isolated area. After a few instances of opportunistic thefts in his area (simple burglaries without the home owner present, Nally personally lost a chainsaw) Nally became obsessed with the notion of being burgled. He withdrew from the community so that he could remain on his farm to watch over it. He frequently watched the entrance to his farm from a window whilst keeping his shotgun nearby. To clarify for Americans this is not normal behaviour in Ireland, Nally was clearly suffering from paranoia and needed psychological help.

B) Tom Ward and his adult son arrived at the house. Ward was a member of the travelling community, a group which is often associated with crime and lawlessness in Ireland. Ward went around the back of the house without calling to the door.

C) Nally noticed noticed the son at the front of the house. The son claimed that himself and his father thought Nally was not at home and that they merely wished to see if he had any scrap machinery that they could salvage and sell. The son maintained this throughout the trial. Whilst the pair did sell scrap machinery it is very difficult to believe this was their intention. They were almost certainly there to steal, although whether they would have done so with the homeowner present is unclear.

D) Having become aware that an individual has trespassed into the rear of his property, Nally retreats to his shed where he stores his shotgun. He confronts Ward and shoots him in the side, before proceeding to beat him repeatedly with a heavy stick. Ward's son flees having heard the shot and drives to the local police station to seek help.

E) Ward attempts to flee from the farm. Nally returns to the shed and reloads the shotgun. He then tracks down Ward again. He fires a second shot, which is fatal.

F) At this stage Ward posed no immediate threat to Nally. It would not, however, be unreasonable to state that Nally would have been at risk of a revenge attack at a later date by Ward and/or his associates. Living alone in an isolated area Nally would have been very vulnerable.

G) Ward had a number of previous convictions, including for assaulting a member of the police. Nally had no previous convictions but was clearly in a very unstable state of mind before Ward appeared.

H) At the first trial the judge directs that the facts of the case do not support a verdict of self defence. Nally is cleared of murder but convicted of manslaughter. Nally successfully appeals to have the case reheard with the option of self defence available to the jury. The retrial clears Nally saying that he acted in self defence.


I feel very uneasy about this case. An untrustworthy individual invaded a man's land (not home) with the intention of committing a crime. Nally was never really in danger during the incident. The main danger would have been in a revenge attack, the likelihood we cannot know now and which Nally certainly did not know. I can see justification in the first shot. I cannot see any in the second. He had to leave to reload the gun, before returning to execute an injured man as he attempted to flee. I cannot see how the law should allow for someone to be killed when they clearly pose no threat to others. Nebulous suppositions on future actions are worthless without mind readers, how can a legal system operate on a person's future intent to commit a crime? But being honest, I think I probably would have reacted in the same manner as Nally did.

 

joacqin, are you mentally ill? Or maybe desperately naive? You are obviously not stupid or otherwise mentally deficient.

I've looked down the barrel of a gun twice in my life and I have not led such an extraordinarily hard life. In retrospect, the first time I had a gun pointed at me, I was in mortal danger and what was worse was that my little brother was with me. The second time, I was not in real danger, as the wielder was just impressing a couple of stupid c*nts who were with him.

During those assaults, should I have been calculating how often such interactions occur? Did it matter during those moments how often 'bear attacks' occur as compared to my situation? Should I have taken comfort in the knowledge that my assailants most probably just wanted my valuables so as to get their next fix? Or should I have not feared them at all because joacqin has worked with such people and determined that they are most likely only a threat to family members and those who are close to them?

Both of my attackers deserve to die. I would kill them both had I the opportunity and the impunity - my word of honor..take that for what you think it's worth over an internet connection.

I'll stop living in a nightmare world as soon as you stop living in a dream world. Stop talking about **** that you really don't know about.

 

Apparently all you guys live in much more horrible places than I do. I do not believe I live in a dreamworld but I am getting more and more convinced that you guys live in the worst slums imaginable or that the situation in North America is just as bad as all the prejudice and stereotypes have been proclaiming since forever. I had thought that maybe it was exaggerated but listening to you guys it seems that the US is completely lawless. Must be quite horrible. Kinda funny that it is so lawless in the states, I was under the impression that the US was one of the if not the harshest western country for crimimals. Funny that. I mean, the US who is so rough and where the liberal sissypants have very little influence over the justice system compared to the other western democracies should be the safest most lawabiding society right? Listening to you it sounds not much different from downtown Mogadishu during the 90s.

 

As far as home burglaries are concerned, I think that it matters a great deal where you live. I have never had my home broken into, and I don't know anyone in my immediate neighborhood who has had their home broken into either. The biggest issue involving theft we ever had in our neighborhood was last year - at the height of $4 per gallon gas prices, several sheds were broken into and the gas cans (for our lawn mowers) were stolen.

IMO there is a huge difference between using a crowbar to snap the latch off someone's shed versus breaking into someone's house when they are likely home. I and many other people in the community have alarm systems, but not on our sheds. (It was actually quite humorous. I lock my shed with a quality lock that would be difficult to get through. So they broke the entire latch off instead. The lock was perfectly intact, and I reused it when I got the shed fixed - now with something that will be considerably more difficult to break off.)

This is one of the reasons why you should NEVER carry your social security card on you. If you're smart, they also won't have "all types of other ID" either. If they happen to have one form of ID (for example a Driver's License) that's bad enough. But if they have two forms of ID, you are screwed with a capital S. I don't like the fact that I routinely have to carry around two froms of ID on me. I have my Maryland Drivers License, and my Military (Civilian) ID. There's no reason you should ever NEED to have your actual SS Card present on your person for everyday activities. Most people shouldn't need to carry around any ID other than a drivers license (a credit card is not considered a valid ID - and those can be turned off within minutes, and most credit card companies will credit your account for any purchases you did not make).

While I think that joa's assessment is overly optimistic, I must also point out that I believe some people are being too pessimistic. That, or the suburbs of Baltimore are a lot safer than most other areas of the country. I don't know of any super-criminal activity like the kind martaug describes in my area, nor have I or anyone I know personally had an experience like nunsbane. I have family that live all over the country - including Seattle, Omaha, Witchita, San Antonio, Minneapolis, New York City, and Washington DC. From coast to coast and in between, some of which are in cities that have some of the highest crime rates in the country. None of them have had issues as described by nunsbane and martaug. *shrugs* Maybe we are all just amazingly lucky.

 

Concerning crime, yes, we probably do live in a much worse place than you. Most of it is drug related in some way. If they would just legalize half the junk, half the crime would go away; prisons would empty and judges and lawyers would be able to process their case loads in realtime. But there would be a lot of unemployed drug dealers and assorted criminals.

 

How many of you have had a house burn down? I'd bet not many -- but a few maybe have. Does that mean we shouldn't have smoke detectors in our houses? Or that we shouldn't carry house and property insurance? Of course not -- only a fool would fail to take the necessary precautions against such things, even if those things occur rarely. By the same token, home breakins DO occur. It only makes sense to take precautions against that, and to expect that when we defend ourselves, the government won't turn on us with pathetic liberal glee and make us into the criminals.

He was outnumbered 5 to one with a lady present, and there are still moronic liberals trying to make him out to be the bad guy because he didn't face all 5 foes in a "fair" fight? Un-bloody-believable. I hope this judge has a brain is isn't some hugs and kisses kind of guy who will listen to the teens' stories about their sad childhoods and how they're actually heroes for not breaking into the apartment downstairs because there were senior citizens in it.

Montresor, do us a favor and keep us appraised of this story as it progresses.

 

I'm not arguing that these things don't EVER happen. I'd be foolish to make such a statement. And I also think that it's totally reasonable to take some precautions - I have a burglar alarm on my house. All I'm saying is it's not nearly as common as some of you are proposing. The thing where I agree with joa is if someone is willing to break into your home when you are present, then chances are they are after YOU and not your valuables.

 

And this is where I sound in.

The whole credit thing really pisses me off. All it takes is a criminal to steal your credit card or worse, your identity, followed by a few clicks of the mouse by a corporate idiot at one of the 3 credit bureaus, and *POOF* your credit is totally screwed! To get it back in to shape, you have to call, mail, fax, and email requests to all parties involved...then you pray they side with you...but even if the negative marks are agreed to not be your fault, the mark remains on your credit for upwards of 7 years.

I think that if it's *that* easy to screw a person's credit over, it should be just as easy to fix it.


Anyway, the possibility of identity theft is more than enough motivation for me to shoot to kill any moron who breaks in to my house.

 

What makes you think the garage is an easily accessible place? Seriously, it's as heavily locked and guarded as the rest of the house, it's just not heated and air-conditioned.

If you follow your apparent strategy and carefully questions the invader as to their intent, purpose, psychology, personal history, and current arms, yes I imagine you probably would be looking down the barrel of a gun in no time. It would probably take an average criminal at least several minutes just to get through the door to my house. By that time alone I'm armed and waiting for them. Even if we assume they get through quickly, unless they are intimately familiar with my house, it would take them several minutes to find me. Again, I'm armed and waiting. I have the advantage of knowing my house inside and out, and they don't. There's also the fact that I'm naturally a very quiet person, whereas a stranger rumaging through my house would not be. I think it much more likely that they would be looking down the barrel of a gun in no time, probably while lying on the floor bleeding from their leg wound.

It is a matter of proportionality. You apparenlty have far more poor people around you than crazy/sadistic (and I mean diagnosed by a psychologist crazy, not just weird). As for drug addicts, they tend to be all three.

Actually, at my local university, there were a long string of home invasions (defined as breaking in when people are home and terrorizing the people one way or another) at the dorms and appartments. It went on for the entire time I was there and no one was ever caught. It may well still be going on for all I know. These things really do happen, and in some places they happen with some frequency.

Joacqin, again, it seems to be a matter of proportionality. Everywhere has criminals, but what kinds varries wildly. I won't say these things are common, nor that I expect it to ever happen to myself or my family, but I do understand it is quite possible, and I intend to take reasonable precautions against it. It's the same reason we put maternity on our health insurrance as soon as my wife and I got married. We don't expect to have kids any time soon, but that's no guarantee. You seem to think we live in a constant state of fear and paranoia, but really our precautions are little more extreme than putting locks on the door, a lightning rod on the roof, and having fire/flood insurance.

Oh, I do. I choose my friends carefully. At the same time, though, so-called stranger-crimes (crimes commited by strangers or near-strangers) are becoming more and more common.

That's a great theory, but in reality that punishment must be swift, relatively sever, and the best way to do it is frequently but inconsistently (i.e. it actually works better if a few people get away with it every once in a while). Our justice system tends to be slow, erratic on severity, and, at best we have a 50% closure rate by arrest alone, let alone conviction.

I don't know about a medal, but I agree that criminal charges should be out the window.

Umm, actually, from the statistics I've heard, the US on average has far fewer violent crimes per capita than most western nations. Of course, at the same time, I've heard that New York City is statistically the most dangerous place to live in the western world. That being said, the reports being brought in just on this thread show that this isn't a US problem. Germany and Ireland aren't in the US after all. Joacqin, I don't know much about Helsingborg, could you fill us in some? What's the population, the average income and profession, the density? Are you in a large city, a small city, a large suburb, or something more rural. The big densities of crimes do tend to be centered around large cities, especially those with a stark difference between their upper class and lower one (such as NY City).