Quote:
Originally posted by Melusine:
But like I said, where I live most of them enter your house planning to STEAL, not to MURDER. Most of the time they flee when they fear the inhabitants heard them.
So why would you shoot to kill? Why not shoot in both kneecaps if you're "only" defending yourself?
I can totally understand that if you have a reasonable fear you or your family is in danger, that you'd want to make sure nothing happens to them. But why always shoot to kill? Why do I never hear someone "I'll shoot him in the legs" or somewhere else that has less chance of being lethal.
Murder IS worse than theft! Of course the thief is totally wrong for entering your house, and the consequences are his own fault. But YOU determine what those precise consequences are, and I for one cannot understand the ease with which people condemn themselves to having killed a person.
|
Because, Mel, although it is true that *most* intruders are there to steal and not murder, when it actually happens to you, are you willing to take the cahnce that the one in your home isn't one of the murdering minority?
And your point about disabling an intruder by breaking his legs is a good one, but breaking his legs or shooting him in the kneecaps does not prevent him from pulling out a gun of his own. A man is still capable of killing you with a gun, even when he is lying on his back. People have walked and run on broken legs before.
Sadly, the only way you can be completely sure that you are safe while you call the local law enforcement agency is to render the intruder unconscious. Since you don't want to hit him *without* knocking him out (only to have him turn around and shoot/stab you), you have to hit him very hard in the head to do it. Maybe with a bat/vase/anything else heavy. *Then* you can be sure you are safe in calling the police.
Naturally, the only problem here is that the intruder may die a slow death on your floor while the cops come. I have to say,
I feel no pity whatever for the poor dying
criminal. I have lived all of my life in poverty, living in what in the USA would be called 'the projects', surrounded by drug dealers, addicts and thieves. This is no excuse. I don't care if you *need* to sell
my video to feed your habit, and were killed by me when you broke into my home to get it. I saw an intruder in my home, assumed the worst, and took action. I have been dirt poor all of my life, and I have never been shot/killed/beaten for breaking into someone's home, simply because
i have never broken into someone's home. Don't tell me that people *need* to steal. They don't. I have no sympathy for someone who does. I don't think stealing a video should be a capital crime, but my viewpoint is that if you die as a result of me incapacitating you so I can be sure you will not harm me or my family, then tough luck. I won't cry over it.
If you don't want to be killed for intruding in my home, then
don't intrude into my home. You will be perfectly safe from harm if you sinmply do not commit the crime of breaking and entering, and thus putting me in a position to choose between your well being and thwe well-being of my family.
Please note - once again I am dealing with the abstract notion of home defense, *not* the Tony Martin case, though the two go hand in hand in my country.