Based
"But but if their unarmed they might be trying to feed their family, think if they have a mental illness, the morality of it all"
Yea sooo anyway!!
"If you kill a burglar you're evil because you value your stuff over a human life!"
No, if you decide to burgle someone it's because you value their stuff more than your own life.
Um, no? To all of this? If someone breaks into your house and tries to run at you(or any direction that could be interpreted as such in the moment) despite you pointing your gun at them and yelling "don't move!", then it's ok to fire and that has nothing to do with burglary, because anyone who charges someone with a gun can be reasonably assumed to have intentions alot worse than stealing a tv. If they're clearly no threat, like if you somehow know for a fact that they're not dangerous like these scenarios all imply, it's murder. Life>property, and one guy who, in this scenario, you know doesn't intend to harm you is not a mass of rioters trying to break into your property for who-knows-what and necessitating you become a Roof Korean.
If you see a stranger on your property, obviously you are obligated to give them the chance to retreat UNLESS it's immediately obvious they're a danger to your life or that of your family's.
But if you aim your gun at someone, tell them to stop, and they don't, you have a right to defend yourself, your family, and your property. You are not obligated to let someone walk off with your stuff, but you are obligated to give them a chance to stop and if they're not a threat to your life (for instance, if they're already leaving the premises) you aren't really within your rights to shoot to kill.
Shoot to maim, however? I'd say if you're breaking into someone's house to steal shit, taking a bullet is just the risk you have accepted to take, but I would support shooting to injure rather than kill in cases where there is no threat to life.
I'm just baffeled that people think that someone breaking into an occupied house is somehow UNAWARE that they're breaking into an occupied house.
Just for once I want people to stop and think about the simple element of 'if you see a house with a car at the front and evidence of people inside, what do you expect to find inside it?'
It's nice that so many people don't have criminal outlooks but by fuck I wish they'd develop at least a bit of one.
give them a chance to retreat yeah but let's not be suicidal. don't give them a chance to harm you before you decide to defend yourself, that's how bad things happen. "well I wasn't sure if he'd -" no, you can't be sure. you don't know somebody else's intentions. but when seconds count you don't want to be giving them the opportunity to make those bad intentions clear.
you invade my home, my safe space, you have declared war. I don't care what your intentions are. don't start a fight if you aren't ready to lose.
Interesting convo. Just pointing out two things for the group not pointed at anyone in particular. If not familiar with these concepts:
NO ONE…shoots to maim or disable. That is a line made up by politicians and movie directors. Not a single informed person recommends this.
Other point is the 21 foot rule.
Yeah, there's no "shoot to wound", there's either "shoot for center mass" or "shoot to miss". Which is why I'm so all-or-nothing on this, because the only reason you ever shoot at someone is to kill them, and if you're doing that then either they're attacking you/someone else, they're trying to do so, you have a good reason to believe they might be and no desire to risk your life to make sure(the scenario where the intruder sees you with the gun and decides to runs towards you), or you're committing murder. Anything not falling under the first three examples is the fourth.
Where I live anybody who breaks into my home while I'm in it is eligible to be shot dead. They could be ramming my ice cream down their neck, I shoot them and kill them in front of my freezer, it's a justified shooting. I don't need to try and parse out what their intention is, I don't need them to advance on me, simply being in my home unauthorized is enough. My door (that they bypassed without my permission) is all the warning they get/need. I don't have to announce my presence, let them know I'm here, I can lead with muzzle flash.
Fun fact: Also applies to my car.
Don't want shot? Don't break in.
I doubt a judge, jury or the majority of civilization would agree with "breaking and entering is enough to warrant death as appropriate force", although it's not like an internet tough guy would ever have anything like ^^^ happen.
If I have it my way, it'll never happen. If you think I want to shoot somebody, you're mistaken.
But castle doctrine here is very strong. Somebody doesn't even need to make entry into my home and it's legal for me to shoot through the door (though I'm still responsible for where those bullets travel afterwards) so for example, some rando is attempting to kick my door in? Legal shoot.
Guy gets in and is simply existing in the space? Legal shoot. You can doubt or think whatever you like, but your opinion is irrelevant.
