Would you shoot a burglar

[woodrot]

"Murder rates have increased by 52% in England and Wales since the introduction of gun control laws in 1968 and 15% since the 1997 handgun ban. So gun laws do not reduce murder rates or violent crime. "

this isnt a binary issue - the stat may be correct, the conclusion you posted is blates wrong Im afraid

[El Pibe]

and if you want a passing analysis on your knives control stuff I'll say that yes, when I was yong we all went through phases of carrying knives, the diference is that today there are pockets where people are actually willing to use them.

Statistically in, sy london, this has increased the rate by 0.5 per 100,000. Nationally the increase is statistically negligible (0.08ish).

That doesn't make the headlines any less shocking or the need for something to be done any less urgent, but this is all utterly non-sequitir in terms of the discussion.

And woodrot is right, you're trotting out yet another logical fallacy.

[Parkdrive]

I, for one, believe that burglars are a brave and hardy breed just like a learned judge said recently. Clown.

I believe somebody has previously posted on this thread something to effect that burglary is not a life threatening situation. Really, is that in evey case? How do you what an uninvited individuals intentions are once they have entered your property?

I do not own, and never have owned, a firearm. However, if I did, and I found myself in a situation confronting an intruder in my home at any time of the day or night, I'd shoot first and ask questions later. I can't see that engaging the person in conversation would lessen the threat to my well being. And what the f**k is he he doing there anyway? The last thing going through my mind would be the stastics thrown about on here as to the rights and wrongs of the situation.

[El Pibe]

"However, if I did, and I found myself in a situation confronting an intruder in my home at any time of the day or night, I'd shoot first and ask questions later."

And tahat's why I don't want gun ownership right there in a nutshell.

Plus if you actually follow that sentence with "m'lud" that's 20 years inside right there.

[DJKillaQueen]

"However, if I did, and I found myself in a situation confronting an intruder in my home at any time of the day or night, I'd shoot first and ask questions later."

And that's why anything that tips the balance in the favour of the victim and rids society of another scummy thief is preferable to protecting the rights of a criminal to carry on without fear or risk of harm to himself.

[Parkdrive]

El Pibe Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> "However, if I did, and I found myself in a

> situation confronting an intruder in my home at

> any time of the day or night, I'd shoot first and

> ask questions later."

>

> And tahat's why I don't want gun ownership right

> there in a nutshell.

>

> Plus if you actually follow that sentence with

> "m'lud" that's 20 years inside right there.

Just like the couple that just got away scot free yeah? And I'm not arguing FOR gun ownership, just saying IF I had, and IF a situation like that arose I would use it. Nobody on here seems to have come up with a sweeping condemnation of those that commit burglary or the like and that I find strange. It's as if trying to protect you and yours is in some way wrong.

[jumpinjackflash]

Completely agree with you, Parkdrive.

[El Pibe]

I think it goes without saying that noone here is championing the rights of burglars.

I'm sympathetic to those that say "given a situation that turns ugly I'll use whatever means I have to hand to protect my family"

I'm less sympathetic to a "I'd use a gun as a last resort"

Even less so to "anyone comes in my home gets two barrels"

I think those that are basically saying "give me a burglar and a gun and I'll learn 'em" are pretty loathsome

But I reserve my greatest contempt for DJKQ who is saying that "we need guns to redress the balance of a society with an enlightened justice system and reintroduce extraducial killing with protection for those who commit homicide because, you know, kids and that don't respect the law, when I was a lad a clip round the lughole was enough.."

[DaveR]

"Murder rates have increased by 52% in England and Wales since the introduction of gun control laws in 1968 and 15% since the 1997 handgun ban. So gun laws do not reduce murder rates or violent crime."

As already noted, the second proposition doesn't follow from the first.

That's because we don't know, and can't reliably predict, what would have happened to the murder rate if gun control laws had remained unchanged.

As I said, the use of firearms undoubtedly increases as firearm availability increases, but what is not clear (despite the attractive El Pibe reasoning) is that this consequently leads to an overall increase in the use of lethal force. So on one level, "guns don't kill people, people do" is true, but at the same time, it's also not in the least bit helpful.

It is arguable that the US research reported in the Guardian (link above) supports a theory that, in the UK, the use of lethal force by otherwise non-violent homeowners would be likely to increase if guns were more widely available (not difficult as it is currently so rare as to be front page news every time it happens), but it's only a theory, and there's a countervailing theory that wider 'responsible' gun ownership deters burglars etc., so there are likely to be fewer such incidents.

Ultimately, none of this really mstters because there is no prospect of UK gun laws being loosened, and no compelling reason to support any change (nobody is seriously suggesting that the murder rate would have been lower if gun laws hadn't been tightened). The only people arguing in favour of more guns are idiots who get a hard on at the thought of shooting a burglar - see posts passim.

[El Pibe]

"but what is not clear (despite the attractive El Pibe reasoning) is that"

as charming a backhanded compliment as I could ever receive, I'll take that, cheers ;)

"nobody is seriously suggesting that the murder rate would have been lower if gun laws hadn't been tightened"

actually that's exactly what the cited Harvard report was suggesting, ie "people don't mug people if they might be carrying a gun", reasoning attractive to aforementioned hard-ons and nobody else.

[DaveR]

For anybody who still thinks it's simple, see link for some relatively sober research:

http://www.crimeandjustice.org.uk/opus713/ccjs_gun_crime_report.pdf

I wouldn't place too much weight on the conclusions, which tend towards simple government bashing, but the review of the stats and research is pretty good.

[computedshorty]

I think a certain Judge has been reading your posts and is encouraged by your uncertainty of using a gun to protect yourself, most seem to be undecided.

If you were a Paraplegic and had won many medals, would you be in your right, and would you shoot and try to save them from being stolen and never be replaced?

Lets hope our winner was awarded the medals for shooting.

[Carter]

As far as I can work out most people on this thread have answered in the affirmative to the question "would you shoot a burglar" with answers ranging from gun turrets to artillary barrages. Others would use chainsaws, cricket bats, table legs, hammers etc. All of which can kill.

Only when I said "yes" and mentioned I actually have a legally held and licensed shotgun on my premises that I then become "Charles Broson", "demented", "trigger pillock", "penis extension", "suburban cowboy", an inferred child killer, "gun nut", "a psychotic" and probably other insults I can't be arsed to check back on.

None of you know me as a person. None of you.

You don't know that I have legally owned a shotgun for 10 years, and enjoy clay shooting. That I win competitions.

Number of people I have shot with it to date - zero.

Number of family members who have used it on themselves - zero.

Indeed, in that respect I am actually doing more than the law requires - the main safe has a manual key and digital keypad, and the ammunition is kept in a seperate safe with a keypad and different PIN.

All I did was answer the question asked. Whilst we have not yet been blessed with the splatter of tiny crap-filled nappies, if I did awake to find someone who had the potential to hurt me or my family I CANNOT guarantee that he is in fact just a lovable-yet-misguided-gone-slightly-off-the-rails rogue who needs a loaf of bread to feed his disabled kid, and not a coke-filled gang member on his initiation with no regard to human life and carrying a machete or pistol.

So, yes - if I had access to my firearm in that situation I would use it.

And I am happy to state it.

[DaveR]

""nobody is seriously suggesting that the murder rate would have been lower if gun laws hadn't been tightened"

actually that's exactly what the cited Harvard report was suggesting, ie "people don't mug people if they might be carrying a gun", reasoning attractive to aforementioned hard-ons and nobody else."

I should have said 'nobody in the UK'. And I was talking about the past, not the future. It seems to me perfectly possible that if the UK government announced that they were (i) issuing guns to all householders whose council tax payments were up to date and (ii) introducing a new binding policy that no-one would be prosecuted for shooting a trespasser on their land, provided you only shot them twice, that that may result in a dramatic fall in burglaries and only a negligible rise in murder figures.

I don't think it would be a good idea, though, and I suspect (based on the available data) that it would result in a fairly spectacular increase in the number of accidental and suicide deaths due to firearms, if nothing else.

[Huguenot]

Burglars haven't demonstrated any particular intelligence to get where they are in life, and it seems patently obvious that their craving for cash and fear of death would more likely to result in the appropriation of handguns for a 'shoot first' policy that would come into play if homeowners came home or woke up.

The reality is that the surprised homeowner, not being of a sociopathic bent and unaccustomed to the scenario, is unlikely to come to a trigger pulling decision before the burglar.

Surely so much is obvious.

Those people on here thinking they would defend their family to the death are imagining ridiculous scenarios where they step cat like down the stairs and surprise a burglar with a hard stare, a cool mien and 2lb of heavy steel levelled at their forehead.

The reality is a messy tragedy of partners blaming it on the cat, negotiations over whether there really was any noise, a decision to get a glass of water, and then a bullet in the guts from a petrified burglar who thinks you might have a gun and might want to shoot him.

The sooner suburban heroes get schoolboy fantasies out of their head and think about real life, the sooner they'll understand that liberalised weaponry in the home is a pathetically stupid idea.

[Carter]

And still with in the insults, Huguenot.

I think I am just going to ignore you now like the bodies of my two previous girlfriends who I blasted away whilst they were getting a glass of water.

I really should get around to tidying them up. The cleaner dosen't like the smell.

*edit* This is satire. SATIRE. (Just in case, KK...)

[Huguenot]

Carter, you were at pains to point out you were not a suburban hero, but a responsible sporting clay pigeon shooter.

I'm quite happy to accept you at you word, so why would you think the last post was about you?

[KidKruger]

Good heavens two murders just been confessed in a single post, surely that's an EDF record.

[Carter]

Because most of the other insults listed were from you directly at me.

Since you haven't apologised for the former, I assumed continuation of the theme.

[DJKillaQueen]

But I reserve my greatest contempt for DJKQ who is saying that "we need guns to redress the balance of a society with an enlightened justice system and reintroduce extraducial killing with protection for those who commit homicide because, you know, kids and that don't respect the law, when I was a lad a clip round the lughole was enough.."

Where on earth have I said that or anything like it El Pipe.....utter nonsense. How can anyone have a sensible debate with someone who invents my words for me. You are being totally ridiculous and you know it.

DaveR is at least trying to have a sensible debate around the complex issues raised. You might want to take a leaf out of his book El Pipe.

[Carter]

One last thing before hopefully this thread gets put to bed.

Having owned a firearm for 10 years, I would argue that my level of personal responsibility and awareness has increased. Knowing that I have a lethal weapon within 45 seconds of reach - get keys, open safe, open second safe, load, point - means that things that go bump in the night have to be approached more carefully.

I have never yet come across the situation where the gun has come out because the cat farted.

*Edited for speeeelling*

[Huguenot]

Well, if I were to put the extrajudicial execution of suspected burglars on the one hand and the ridiculing of people who think firearms are a bright idea on the other, I'm not exactly struggling to see which is the greater crime.

But I'm surprised that a man hard enough to pack a gun and act as judge jury and executioner would wilt so readily under a few choice observations.

[El Pibe]

"And that's why anything that tips the balance in the favour of the victim and rids society of another scummy thief is preferable to protecting the rights of a criminal to carry on without fear or risk of harm to himself."

Pretty self evident that that means killing thieves is a good thing as is allowing people guns in their home.

Killing an intruder is, weirdly enough extrajudicial.

Sheesh. I may have extrapolated a bit but I can't see how I put words in your mouth.

[Carter]

Utter hypocrisy.

Huguenot would use anything that came to hand, defensively mind. A 12lb lump hammer will put someones brains through their arse.

And El Pibe will commit a war crime and shell the perps entire neighbourhood. Just to make sure.

[LondonLogCo]

Ok

Hands up

( don't panic! it's only a survey, not Carter walking into the room with his rifle)

I can't decide, wether I like this thread or the "Begging bowl" one the best

Any votes ?

Here's mine

Would you shoot a burglar

Content: 9.3

Mentalness: 9.7

The begging bowl

Content: 9.7

Mentalness 9.2

So thus far, the WSAB is nudging ahead. But I'm easily swayed