So u would rather let the burglars get away and do nothing?
It's not my job to stop burglars - that's the work of law enforcement.
If, statistically speaking, attempting to stop a burglar increases my chance of getting hurt,
then not doing anything is preferable if I stack my life up against my property.
My life is more important than my property.
You're running on the unfounded assumption that attempting to do something about it won't backfire
on you - and you're advocating taking that risk because you might lose property, despite the fact that
any loss of property can more than likely be fixed down the line if you're still alive or unhurt whilst
the same cannot be said if you enter into a physical altercation and get killed or permanently handicapped as a result.
Lucky if u dont get assaulted in the way then ur luck is pretty darn good.
No you're not. Most home-invasions are not carried out by people looking to harm you.
The vast majority of people entering your home uninvited are looking to get your valuables and leave
undetected.
The only place where your logic would make any sense is if the person entering your home is entering it
with the express intent to harm you. These are however, statistically speaking, extremely unlikely events -
furthermore engaging with such an individual should still be a last option that you go to when all other options
have been exhausted (such as evasion or evacuation) because the only way you're going to get hurt to begin with
is if you actually engage. You cannot get hurt in a fight you're not having, and every fight you do have includes
the possibility of loss.
ud rather let the burglar get away with ur property
If that's what I have to do to ensure my own safety - yes, why not? I can replace my property, I cannot replace my life.
and let that idiot break into more homes
when u could have prevented it and prevented other ppls home being burglarized?
Ifs and buts - You don't know that you could have prevented it. The only thing I know is that I could try.
Furthermore, this is a false dichotomy.
Not putting up a fight the exact time and place when I am in the vicinity of a potentially dangerous individual
is not the same as not doing anything at all.
I can contact law enforcement, I can provide them with information that may lead to the apprehension of the
perp later down the line.
It is however not my duty to put my life on the line for other people who may or may not get hurt down the line,
and I recent that way of thinking.
My life is my own, as is yours. I am not a slave to the collective well-being of society, and my primary charge is
my own health and well-being and that of the people close to me whom I care about.
Man, ur one of the reason why the world is today and why crime rate is high and will never stop!!!
Nope. Crime is produced by social factors like poverty, neglect/abuse, and mental health issues - not by
me, or anyone else for that matter, not wanting to play the yahoo and put our lives on the line for
replace-able material things doing something that we already pay others to do, who do it willingly
understanding the consequences and having both the training and legal privileges to deal with the issue (I.E law enforcement).
Thats not an opinion thats a fact sir XD
No it isn't, and if you think it is, it just goes to show how little grasp you have of the concept of facts,
and the issue we're now discussing, "sir".
EDIT:
Also, take note that burglarizing ppls home is not just only for stealing.
Note, if you actually read my post, you would know I didn't say this. I said that the vast majority of the times
home invasion is predominately motivated by material gain.
Home invasions done for other reasons such as violence or rape are statistically speaking few and far between in comparison.
Theres tons of other reasons as well, murder, "RAPE" which happens alot everywhere,
Actually, it happens relatively seldom, unless you live in a third-world country.
(rape is most commonly committed by people you know and trust, who you willingly spend your
company with - not home-invaders)
Home-invasions related to sexual assault are usually committed by people with mental health issues, which
are only a very small fraction of home-invasions.
The ones where violence/assault is the primary motivation overlap there, but are usually carried out by criminals
targeting other people who're involved with criminal activity.
If you don't want mafia hit-squads, or gang-bangers breaking into your house at night to beat or kill you, not
borrowing money from mafia, or getting involved in gang-related drug-rings is a good way to go.
The deranged psycho breaking into your house at night to kill you is so statistically unlikely in almost
any modern developed country that to buy a gun to protect yourself from it borders on engaging with paranoid delusion.
This doesn't even go into the fact that these kind of "psychos" rarely pick their victims at random -
they often stalk their victims for weeks before they take action, leaving threatening phone-calls etc.
It also doesn't cover the fact that the most unstable of these people are very often entirely incapable of getting
past general security measures, which means that you can keep them out of your house by simply having a reinforced
door and windows with shutters (like my apartment for instance).
These kind of individuals are more likely to attack you in the street, when you commute to and from work, or
when you're on your way home after having been with friends etc. then to butt heads with your house's security
and attack you in your own home.
But anyhow, yeah, just sit there and get assaulted while they take ur stuff and let that doood come back for more
when u buy some more new stuff! U might as well askk him where he lives so u can visit the
dood when u get paid and hand him ur paycheck along as bending over and give him the lube.
It would save u a new window everytime he visits /salute O_O
Anyhow, keep on making facile stories that in no way make an argument trying to belittle the person you're speaking to
demonstrating your deep lack of education on the topic.
I'll be sure to put flowers on your grave if you ever get killed in an assault that didn't need to happen
because you provoked some thugs by overestimating your fighting chances and escalating the level of force
when you tried to take them down.
Fun fact - the vast majority of gun deaths in the U.S, of which we know the cause of, happen because of
scenarios like that. They don't happen as premeditated murders, or in self-defense - they happen because
paranoid trigger happy morons without a proper appreciation for risk management fire their guns at every
little shadow they think might harm them, or over perceived aggression that they're hyper-sensitive to because
they think every other person wants to kill and rape them.
If you want to talk about people's attitude attributing to a problem - you're a poster boy for that right now,
especially granted your last paragraph.
U watch CNN? Well, apparently u dont. Hope u educate urself on that.
On the other note, if the mayor of ur city decided to implement death penalties for robberies what
do u think will happen to robbery? does it increase?
Cuz once a criminal, always a criminal and its always best to stick to this theory that to
risk urself and ur fellow community to believe otherwise.
Have you ever looked at actually crime statistics or taken classes in criminology? Didn't think so. I have btw.
If you put the death penalty on robberies you'd have **** loads of more deaths on your hands
because people who rob due to poverty and anti-social behavioral tendencies rob no matter what the laws say,
and when they know they're going to get the death penalty if caught, they're not going to think
about the consequences of getting caught anymore.
They might as well just break into houses armed with UZIs and kill everyone, because the punishment is going
to be the same in either case - death penalty.
Not doing this is one of the primary principles informing the creation of new criminal laws, which
you would know if you weren't completely ignorant on this topic.
As for the second paragraph - Not only is this factually wrong, it's an extremely socially regressive attitude.
If it were common, it would actually make issues worse - if people jailed once for a crime
know that they're going to get stigmatized for life, and never be trusted or viewed as ordinary
humans again, they have absolutely no incentive what so ever to attempt to reform themselves even
if that's what they want.
It also ignores all the crimes a person can get caught for that we might ought to reconsider whether
to be crimes to begin with.
By your logic, guys caught for stealing weed and therefore branded as criminals, would find themselves
on a very short road to worse crime because they wouldn't really have any other reasonable options now would they?
Once a criminal always a criminal right? How would they get work? When they then turn to theft, you kill them?
Great society and community right there. Congratulation. If that's how you feel, I'm sure you'd feel right at
home in Iran.
Also, you don't get to talk about risk. You think actively putting yourself in harms way on the faint
possibility of harm is less risk than not doing so, so really man, you have no leg to stand on here.
I don't think throwing books and pens at a burglar will scare him off.
