Quote:
Originally posted by Robert
And therein lies one of the reasons why the justice system is royally ****ed up.
Someone breaks in and you have no idea if they are willing to do harm to you or your family. You *should* have every right to defend yourself, your family and your property without threat of prosecution at all.
The criminal *should* be seen as one who has willingly waived his or her rights if he or she decides to commit the crime.
Dear Robert,
We need to get one thing straight right from the start. I do not live in the magical kingdom of "Should" or "Ought2B." I am talking about the real world here, with the laws and legal system that we actually have (in North America and in the UK).
Trust me when I tell you that in the real world you are far, far better off putting a bullet hole in your ceiling and scaring a burglar off than putting a bullet hole (or trying to put a bullet hole) in the burglar.
Do not underestimate the willingness of a prosecutor to prosecute you and make your life a living hell and possibly bankrupt you through legal expenses if you dare to try to shoot a burglar. The apprehension and punishment of burglars is seen as the exclusive province of the police and the courts.
Shoot a burglar, and you are seen as criticizing the police. The prosecutor will spare no effort to put you in your place if you dare to do that. That is the real world that we live in, I am sorry to have to tell you. (Actual burglars are treated much more lightheartedly by prosecutors.)
Here in Nashville, we had a shop owner who owned a gun and kept it in his shop. His neighbor shop-owner, a woman, was in the course of being robbed and possibly raped. She screamed. The guy came to her rescue. The robber/would-be-rapist fled. Now here's where the guy made his big mistake. Instead of just calling the police, he gave chase, traded gunshots with the robber, and eventually killed him.
The result: the prosecutor submitted murder charges to a grand jury. The grand jury rejected the murder charges. The prosecutor then submitted the murder charges to a
second grand jury, which rejected them. The prosecutor then submitted the murder charges to a
third grand jury, which accepted them. The prosecutor then proceeded to prosecute the guy. His legal fees bankrupted him, and forced him to enter a guilty plea to end the matter and keep himself out of jail. (He got some sort of probation.)
Unlike the guy who saved his dog from the fire, there was no videotape of this, little news coverage, no help from the NRA or any pro-gun people, etc.
If you can get the law changed to read the way you think it ought to read, that's fine. Until then, though, you'd be ill-advised to shoot a burglar unless your life were threatened or you were threatened with serious bodily injury, or the equivalent for members of your family.
Sorry to tell you this, but that's the way the real world works.