Ok?
B&E? That's a pretty broad term, which doesn't help to describe or differentiate between the specific intricacies of a typical property burglary or/and a home invasion? While it's true, most 'property theft' burglaries are done purposely during the day while people are at work or school by the type of perpetrators who only want to steal and not hurt someone they encounter? Ok, so they are the majority... Are you making a specific point? Nevertheless, There are Burglaries and there are Home Invasions. While a home invasion is a 'type' of 'burglary', the 'modus operandi' of a home invasion is a completely different kind of animal all together.
And if I'm not mistaken, this thread and thread title speaks specifically on home intrusions? Which means when there is a forced intrusion where clearly the perpetrators know people are at home? I'm pretty sure, the OP gave a couple of specific scenario's in the OP that this specific subject matter and what type of self defense weapon would be chosen by those who would respond to a home intrusion which is occupied? in other words, a home invasion?
However, since you are speaking on 'the overwhelming majority' of B&E? let's look at some facts and statistics of both types shall we?
B&E: or Typical Property Theft
1. According to FBI statistics, a burglar strikes close to every 30 seconds in the US. Every 30.48 seconds to be exact. That adds up to two burglaries every minute and over 3,000 burglaries per day. Despite that, 'break-ins' (B&E) and burglaries, only came in as the second most mentioned property crime worry amongst home owners in America. Number #1 worry? Gun violence from the perpetrator's during the commission of the same. #1 worry by 'the majority' of home owners... Real or imagined?
2. The average financial loss from just a typical daytime burglary when people are at work or school, is $2,661 dollars. That might not sound like a lot of money to some, but if you're young and working hard, trying to move up in the world and are living check to check? A loss of almost $3,000 if your home is burglarized can be a big chunk of change. There is also other things to consider other than a monetary loss, what about the mental and emotional impact?
Most victims of the type of 'B&E' you describe; may very well need to recover from not just a financial setback, but at the same time they're mourning the loss of also, maybe things with a lot of sentimental value? they're also feeling insecure and dealing with the intense feelings of vulnerability, a lack of safety and a lack of sleep they once had before the break-in.
3. Most burglaries, or typical 'B&E' property crimes, usually happen in the middle of the day. While it might seem counter-intuitive to many, most burglaries occur in the bright light of day instead of under the cover of darkness. More specifically, if you’re wondering when most break-ins happen, it’s after lunch between noon and 4pm. FBI burglary data shows that of all reported residential burglaries, most occurred in the daytime compared to at night. But out of those evening burglaries? What time do most robberies occur at night? Studies have found the hours vary throughout the night until dawn.
4. Typical property only burglaries or B&E's are more frequent during the summer months. More people are burglarized during the month of June, then any other month.
Home Invasion:
Merriam-Webster dictionary defines a Home Invasion as such. the crime of entering a dwelling and committing or with intent to commit a crime (as assault) while armed and while another is lawfully present.
1. There are over 1.65 Million home invasions per year nation wide, which accounts for about 66% of all the 2.5 Million burglaries that happen every year according to the FBI. And while I'm sure that 66% includes both, those who purposely broke into a home that was occupied with the intent to do harm and those who broke into a home unknowingly if it was occupied is a moot point? because they can still turn violent, regardless of the perpetrators initial intentions.
2. During those, 38% of them end with some type of violent assault and/or rape, which rape occurs in 60% of those same home invasions.
3. Only 7.2% of those are committed by someone who knows the victims.
4. According to the Bureau of Justice, 1 in 5 violent home invasions, victims are seriously physically injured or killed.
5. Statistics show, home invasions decrease by 30% when there is some type of visible security devices installed in the home.
6. Homes without security systems are 300% more likely to be targeted for a home invasion.
7. Bureau of Justice statistics report, that during home invasions where the perpetrators are armed? Handguns are used in 41% of those incidents.
While I don't know or clearly understand your intended point of interjecting the majority of typical day time property burglary statistics where only property is sought in a thread that specifically asks about types of weapons a home owner would use in a home intrusion? My only question would be, does the philosophical dynamic of a typical daytime burglary that you well-reasoned and statistically show are 'the majority' of all burglaries, nullify anything in this thread concerning the subject matter of an armed home invasion? Does it prove or counter the unlikelihood of a gun benefiting a resident in a home-invasion situation on a macro scale? Those who defend the right to own weapons for home protection, see the issue from a micro standpoint.
The way our social contract with the government works, is rights are afforded to individuals, specifically in this context; the right not only to own a weapon but also defend oneself. No matter the majority of statistics, or how unlikely, it has happened where criminals break in a house, maybe thinking no one is home, and yet, still commit violence against the home owner if they are present. In that scenario, those who defend the right to keep a weapon for home defense would argue that it is unreasonable to rely on the police to arrive in a timely enough manner to protect them and their families right to live.
All kinds of bad things happen because of this, including accidental shootings, or even purposeful homicide on the part of the homeowner (shooting a burglar as he runs away). All that being said, the fundamental defense is that the government nor any other institution can not interfere with one's right to protection. In a public setting it is reasonable to expect that protection to be supplied by the public (police or whatever), but in a private household that right to protection can not be reasonably supplied by the public, hence the advocacy for self-protection.
In America we aren't 'supposed' to sacrifice rights, even for the greater social good. We let death-row inmates who clearly committed murder appeal their decision a dozen times, at the expense of the taxpayers and society as a whole, because their rights trump the aggregate drain on societal capital (money, public lawyers, judges, whom all could be doing more pertinent work). The same emphasis on protecting an individuals right also applies to a law abiding citizen who wishes to have a fire arm to protect themselves.
While saying all this, the homeowner will never in the moment truly know the invaders intentions, and its not unreasonable to think that someone who purposefully put them in that situation at least gave up their right to safety.
I have responded to and worked many a home invasion in my time. And while the statistical majority were only property theft or didn't include serious injury from assault. I have seen my few where they indeed have. Many years ago, I responded to a home invasion where three armed males kicked in the front door of an elderly couple, hog tied them and gagged them both with duct tape, pistol whipping them both to an inch of their lives, while stealing all of their valuables and packing them into the couples vehicle which they also stole.
But before they left, they boiled a very large 'gumbo type' pot of water on the stove and poured that pot of water over the top of that tied up and gagged couple before they left. Only the elderly male survived the assault. I can only assume, if their odds would have been better; of not being apart of the 'statistical minority' if their front door would have been a solid core door, with a proper 3 inch bolt lock, that went into a solid door jamb which would have taken a few minutes longer and multiple more kicks to bash in?
Maybe that would have given them the needed extra time to grab a firearm, which they also didn't own; and possibly defend themselves? Statistics be damned? No one will ever know.
Last edited:
