Really? You'd rather have your throat slit trying to be macho than have an increase in insurance premium?
High Court: Homeowners can use 'disproportionate force' against burglars
- Thread starter scorza
- Start date
Really? You'd rather have your throat slit trying to be macho than have an increase in insurance premium?
Soldato
- Joined
- 27 Apr 2011
- Posts
- 5,607
- Location
- UK
Lol what you cant understand is when it goes wrong ona regular robbery, your family is at needless risk. By acting out all the time your family is under greater risk. Duh
inb4
'not if i shoot em first'
Its clearly the cultural divide though, you're trying to reason with someone who lives in a culture where it is effectively encouraged to have an assault rifle to 'defend' yourself.
when its so ingrained into a population its difficult to get across another point of view.
Wrong statistic.
What are number of incidences of home invasions with the intention to rape/murder/torture (outside of revenge related incidents) compared to the number of home invasions with the intention of burglary?
I have my assault rifle to go to the shooting range and enjoy it, not for home defense. I've been here 20 months, I see it from both point of views but the culture is different here, as are the criminals. Not just because they may have guns, but because they are crazed lunatics.
Soldato
- Joined
- 12 Sep 2012
- Posts
- 11,698
- Location
- Surrey
^
Got there before me
We have a higher burglary rate compared to more violent crime in your own home. The chances of these worse case scenarios are much much lower here, hence the cultural divide between acemastr and most of us.
It is riskier to act under a normal burglary. Consider that assuming the worse case scenario then increases the overall risk of acting compared to not acting.
It is very simple
There have been quite a few instances where householders have fought off home invaders - with and without firearms. If they did what you said they'd probably have sustained terrible injuries or be dead. With all the best will in the world I'm not going to be able to fight off a 6'5 280lb thug without a pretty big equaliser like a firearm.
And therein lies the reason why your posts are not really relevant for the UK. I'm not going to try to say whether your attitude is appropriate for the US, as I have no personal insight into the culture, but in the UK, it's far more likely that it's a simple burglary, and it's far less likely for the burglar to be armed with anything more than a kitchen knife.
Perhaps it makes me a <SlangNameForACat>, but I'd far rather sit in the bedroom with my GF and son and push the wardrobe in front of the door whilst waiting for the police, than confront an intruder and get stabbed over a couple of DVDs and the keys for 10 year old car
I'm not really sure of the point you're trying to make? What is it I've said they're supposed to do? Barricade themselves in a room and phone the police? Unless you live in the middle of nowhere, you're unlikely to be waiting more than 20 mins for a response, probably much less - we have more than enough heavy furniture in our bedroom to block the door for that long - as I would imagine many people do, and unless you're a specific target for some reason, I doubt an opportunistic attacker is going to hang around for 20 mins trying to break in when they know the police are on the way.
Last edited:
Soldato
- Joined
- 12 Sep 2012
- Posts
- 11,698
- Location
- Surrey
There have been proportionally more, many many many more where the burglaries have been without violent incidents to the residents of the house. In these cases you could be conservative with the likely hood of unsuccessfully defending your house and many times more people would have sustained injury than in your example. Not only are your examples anecdotal but the same argument applied against your point proves the safer option is not to act in Britain.
"Home Invasions" is a media term that isn't individually covered by a distinct statistic but covered under other crimes such as murder, rape, GBH, burglary etc. The reason why they do all that stuff isn't primarily for fun, it's to get the maximum amount of money from the victim e.g. force them to hand over all their savings accounts, gives the crims time to go and sell their stuff.
Soldato
- Joined
- 12 Sep 2012
- Posts
- 11,698
- Location
- Surrey
I think you have watched enough TV, bed time now
Or do you want to keep arguing that regular burglaries are not that regular compared to insane rapefests and torture lulz
Seriously, in your opinion would you say these invasions account for even 5% of the burglaries? 2%?
I really want to know what you think the realistic proportion is.
And therein lies the reason why your posts are not really relevant for the UK. I'm not going to try to say whether your attitude is appropriate for the US, as I have no personal insight into the culture, but in the UK, it's far more likely that it's a simple burglary, and it's far less likely for the burglar to be armed with anything more than a kitchen knife.
Perhaps it makes me a <SlangNameForACat>, but I'd far rather sit in the bedroom with my GF and son and push the wardrobe in front of the door whilst waiting for the police, than confront an intruder and get stabbed over a couple of DVDs and the keys for 10 year old car
I'd rather be sat in the bedroom with a shotgun or a powerful pistol just in case they tried to get in.
Soldato
- Joined
- 12 Sep 2012
- Posts
- 11,698
- Location
- Surrey
That is not grossly disproportionate force though, is it. If they are trying to get into a room of which they know you occupy, then it would be fine and NOT what we are talking about
Well it wouldn't be fine since pump action shotguns and powerful pistols are prohibited in the UK. I'd be looking at time inside, not the home invader.
Soldato
- Joined
- 12 Sep 2012
- Posts
- 11,698
- Location
- Surrey
Your time inside wont be due to the law in discussion but for possession of firearms. So how is that relevant?
Soldato
- Joined
- 13 Apr 2013
- Posts
- 13,598
- Location
- La France
Incorrect. You can posses a pump action shotgun on an SGC providing the magazine has been permanently modified so that it will only hold 2 rounds.
Same goes for semi-auto shotguns.
This is where it becomes a bit of a circular argument.
If it was that easy/legal for the general public to get hold of shotguns/powerful pistols, then the intruder would expect the householder to have one, and so more likely to bring one themselves.
So it stops being an equaliser and simply makes it more likely for you to get shot.
Soldato
- Joined
- 13 Apr 2013
- Posts
- 13,598
- Location
- La France
You'd be cucked if you were shot with one, so yes..
You can own unmodified 3+ round; pump, and semi-auto on Section 1 FAC as well.