American Politics Discussion Thread

[Tarkeel]

Perhaps most importantly though, it sets out safeguards for how your weapons are stored: Unloaded, at home (or your gun club), in a locked container adhering to a given security standard. (There is ofcourse an excemption for polar bear safety at Svalbard).

If you have kids, i can maybe see that being a good idea. But i for one wouldnt want to be fumbling around for my shotgun, or handgun and its ammo in the dark while someone is breaking and entering.

Do you have a deathwish? (*) Or just want to be prosecuted for murder? Because those are the two options of trying to use a firearm in home-defense here. The right to self-defense stops at proportional use of power. The whole idea of being able to protect yourself with guns is part of the illusion/lies.

(*) I don't have the stats at hand, but a significant amount of these situations ends with the homeowner dead at the hand of their own gun.

Edit: There was a case in the news here some years ago, about a Norwegian man who went to Florida to surprise his father-in-law. Ended with him being mistaken for an intruder and fatally shot. Just to underscore the cultural differences at play here. Just changing the laws isn't going to be a magic fix, you have to change the culture as well.

[superdeath]

While it IS a cultural thing, i value my things higher than someone who is willing to take those things. If they want them bad enough to die for them, thats on them. I also dont have the stats on hand, but i dont doubt it happens. However, i do doubt that had the situations where the gun hadnt been involved at all, that the homeowner wouldnt have been harmed/killed. Because again, those that break and enter have a death wish.

[Mjmd]

Most breakins are done when the person living there isn't there. So if you have it unlocked, its just going to get taken.

The average theft in a break in is $2,400. Is that worth a death? Yours, theres, someone elses?

[superdeath]

Most breakins are done when the person living there isn't there. So if you have it unlocked, its just going to get taken.

The average theft in a break in is $2,400. Is that worth a death? Yours, theres, someone elses?

True on the first part.

If they break in while im there, apparently they believe it is. Thieves get no pity from me. I know that might sound a bit harsh, but im not going to just give up something i worked hard for so that someone else can just take it. They break in, and i make myself and my firearm known, and they dont get into a surrender position (or dont run away) they are highly likely to get a shotgun blast somewhere. Luckily i live in a state/town that doesnt see much violence of that sort. But, i still like going to my grandparents out in the country and shooting targets/rabbits ect.

Im probably alot more whats the word... Draconian? When it comes to punishments for violent crimes. (breaking and entering if it isnt already classified as such, should be considered as such) At least when the evidence is rock solid. But before any of my ideas/reforms could be implemented, we would need a drastic change in how policing works.

[Amicalola]

What are the laws in the US? My instinct is that if you shoot a non-carrying home invader (particularly one without any weapon at all) that you could be prosecuted for disproportionate self-defense. Particularly if you kill them. But maybe in the US it's different?

[Mjmd]

My understanding is that it depends on which state you are in. You can guess which states have more lenient laws with which side pushes the the whole "defend your home" narrative.

[superdeath]

Iowa is a castle doctrine state i believe. Also, in a state or country where that isnt in effect, whats to stop someone much stronger than you even while unarmed (if you need to, think most any guy breaking into most girls houses) from simply overpowering you? Are you meant to just take it? Let insurance screw you over on what they will actually cover because god forbid you forget to keep receipts for EVERYTHING (or better yet, be like my grandparents and they kept most of that stuff including priceless things in their safe which got stolen even though it weighed easily 150+ pounds)

If the home invader is running away, and the evidence shows that you just shot them in the back, then you are likely going to be charged with something. However, its harder for them to prosecute you in a Castle doctrine/stand your ground state iirc.

I want someone to tell me its okay for people to steal their things, kill their dog, do whatever they want to you and your family because they dont have a weapon. Im trying not to be bias, but man its hard to not feel seething anger at someone having even the balls to break in and expect to get away with it because they cant be shot/hurt.

[Mjmd]

Again, most of the time, you won't be home and they are going to steal your unlocked gun.

There is also a large moral difference between threatening force and shooting someone because they are running away with your "insert x thing here". That isn't threatening you. You are literally valuing a thing more than a life. While there is a $ threshold the courts apply for things like that I'm pretty sure most things in most peoples homes aren't that.

There are also the cases where someone is "threatening by cutting across your backyard". The question of "what is threatening" to an untrained civilian is always a question.

[superdeath]

Again, most of the time, you won't be home and they are going to steal your unlocked gun.

There is also a large moral difference between threatening force and shooting someone because they are running away with your "insert x thing here". That isn't threatening you. You are literally valuing a thing more than a life. While there is a $ threshold the courts apply for things like that I'm pretty sure most things in most peoples homes aren't that.

There are also the cases where someone is "threatening by cutting across your backyard". The question of "what is threatening" to an untrained civilian is always a question.

The likelyhood that they enter my home when im not there, and arent caught by someone.. OR are there long enough/stay long enough to find every little thing i keep hidden is low. Very low. They would most likely enter, take my computer, maybe take my tv and probably skiddadle. They arent going to go thru every cupboard and filing cabinet looking for where i hide everything i own. 

Regardless, i already said if they are running away (back to you) they arent a threat, and if you shoot you are likely looking at some form of punishment. We basically agree on that. What we apparently dont agree on is Yes, my thing i bought and paid for is worth more than their life if they are willing to break and enter while im home. They have shown that they are willing to likely fight for whatever it is i own of value. Being that im about as physically strong as a overripe banana, i have a firearm and a knife that ive been trained on how to use properly.

The cutting across your backyard thing is tricky. Alot of those cases id put down as pure paranoia, along with usually people not reading signs saying "private property"

[Amicalola]

Iowa is a castle doctrine state i believe. Also, in a state or country where that isnt in effect, whats to stop someone much stronger than you even while unarmed (if you need to, think most any guy breaking into most girls houses) from simply overpowering you? Are you meant to just take it? Let insurance screw you over on what they will actually cover because god forbid you forget to keep receipts for EVERYTHING (or better yet, be like my grandparents and they kept most of that stuff including priceless things in their safe which got stolen even though it weighed easily 150+ pounds)

If the home invader is running away, and the evidence shows that you just shot them in the back, then you are likely going to be charged with something. However, its harder for them to prosecute you in a Castle doctrine/stand your ground state iirc.

I want someone to tell me its okay for people to steal their things, kill their dog, do whatever they want to you and your family because they dont have a weapon. Im trying not to be bias, but man its hard to not feel seething anger at someone having even the balls to break in and expect to get away with it because they cant be shot/hurt.

Ethics? Societal good? Fear of jail? It's not like they can necessarily expect to get away with it scott-free. But more importantly, not many people I know would commit breaking and entering just because they could. I mean, would you? (and this is kind of rhetorical, but also, think about it. If you wouldn't, what makes you special/different than so many other people?).

Is breaking and entering significantly less common in castle doctrine states than others? FWIW, it is more common in the USA than most developed countries despite the guns, according to this article (and as Mjmd states, in the US they are most frequent between 10-3pm when nobody is home). Really, I wouldn't be at all surprised if gun possession gives people the confidence to break into a house when they otherwise would not.