It Should Have Been A Defensive Gun Use: Just Your Average Home Invasion Edition

I think you missed it pretty sure it was covered; One less menace to society I’m sure was “turning his life around” or some tripe with two more left to be a burden on the taxpayers or meet a similar fate.

This fellow’s lucky that he got out as easy as he did. Hopefully better prep keeps the hounds at bay in the future.

That makes it look like they want the successful good guy to roll the bad guy up in thick plastic and drive him to a “dump” for the rats to chew on. After all they don’t count a dead body as a crime until they arrest someone.

And I read somewhere that in the US, you can buy a “machine-rifle assault-gun” with high-capacity “bananana clips” full of “Teflon-coated Black Talon cop-killer dum-dum bullets”, over the counter in any Wal-Mart (fitted with “shoulder thing that goes up” for a small extra fee) cheap for cash, no questions asked… Should we believe every bit of propaganda we get fed?

From a legalistic point of view, there’s no such thing as a “hot burglary” in the UK – if the occupants are home and “felt threatened”, it’s robbery not burglary (and a much more serious case, and much harder to deny in court)

In the UK, in general, burglars very much prefer empty houses, and will evade if disturbed. They’re also unarmed. Why? It’s easier to talk their way to a “reasonable doubt” or a lower sentence if they can try to claim they were confused, or lost, or helpfully checking a door left open. If they were unarmed, not obviously equipped for burglary, and their response when challenged was “Sorry mate, wrong house? Just leaving…” they’re more likely to walk or will be out much quicker. Meanwhile a knife will get you trouble, a gun will get the book thrown at you (and if you can afford, and are willing to risk carrying, a working illegal firearm plus ammo in the UK, you aren’t doing casual burglary).

If they get away from the scene on the day, a burglary is considered administration to roll up if they ever do match the crime to a suspect – and if nobody saw you, there’s rather less chance of being identified. A robbery is newsworthy, a live investigation, and a priority to get some action on. Again, much more incentive to avoid people if possible.

There are rare and newsworthy exceptions, but dig into them and they have a habit of confirming that a good way to avoid Bad Things happening to you, is to avoid illegal transactions with Bad People. If you aren’t believed to be “looking after this package, and don’t tell anyone” for your boyfriend/brother/’business associate’, for instance, your risks drop dramatically.

Defensively, it’s a popular myth that “if you resist the burglar they jail you” but actually, you have to be pretty egregiously stupid to get in trouble – but those cases are the ones that get distorted and reported. Cases like this one – – don’t seem to get the same level of attention, but that’s the actual UK case law rather than myth and misrepresentation.

Deaths and serious injuries will be investigated, even tried, but sometimes cases go to trial precisely to place a stake in the ground as to where the precedent and case law lies – so that there’s clear evidence for the future of “do not bring charges on this, they’ll be found Not Guilty as per “.

So long as the Bad Guy has most of the wounds to his front, and you didn’t chase them down the street to kill them or drag them back inside to keep hacking at them, an intruder who’s unwise enough to pick a fight with the homeowners will be told to “go and do one, sunshine” by the forces of the Law – but, frankly, in the UK you’re more likely to be struck by lightning than suffer a full-effort “home invasion” by armed intruders.

Those are all nice, but not as good as a gun.

That’s kind of how the guy explained the difference between break ins during my concealed carry class (he worked undercover for the state police). If a person breaks into a residence that he believes is unoccupied but then finds people and attempts to leave without harming anyone then the break in is a “property” crime. If the person breaks in while he thinks people are there and doesn’t try to flee if confronted then it’s a “personal” crime. I don’t remember the exact terms, but the difference is if it’s a crime against persons then defending with deadly force is justified, if the crime is against property then the use of deadly force is NOT justified.

Just like with other violent crime statistics, your “overall chance” in your lifetime of being a victim of (insert crime) has a lot more to do with your relationships, personal associations, tenancy to break the law, and geographical location within the country. You can’t compare the risk of someone who lives on 200 acres in Montana and honesty works for a living to someone who lives in an apartment in Englewood (Chicago) that sells drugs and bangs for a living.