The American propensity for gun use when compared to Euros does not necessarily mean that Americans hold private property rights with greater sanctity. It is entirely possible that Euros and Americans both value their private property to equal degrees, with Americans chosing guns as one of many methods of enforcing their rights.
You may be right.
But as far as I’m concerned, anything used to break into the house is a weapon. Including the burglar themselves.
Home invasion burglary seems to be much more pervasive in countries with strict gun laws. No, I don’t have any stats.
How does that go down? Anyone experience it?
My Wife and I have two 65lb dogs. I really don’t know what they would do. They are a good alarm system. And I have no intention on counting on them to defend my Wife and me. And yes, if someone broke into my house, the life of my dog is more important than that of the burglar.
I own guns. Everyone has been handed down to me. I do enjoy shooting them, but my life certainly does not revolve around them. I consider myself to be a pretty common gun owner for the US. I can identify (within reason) the type, and use just about any firearm.
Sanctity of property is not the right way to look at this. It is the sanctity of safety. It is about not being violated and becoming a victim.
Possibly. More than likely, it won’t just be burglars getting killed, though.
Right! Also rapists, abusive spouses, & etc.
Surely Brits are smarter and more self controlled than us wild Yanks and they (you) would be able to refrain from shooting random people in the streets at least as well as we do (relaxed concealed carry laws across the nation have not resulted in the bloodshed predicted, Europe should be able to do even better, right?)
Neighbors you don’t like, drunks who stumble into the wrong yard, children who get up in the middle of the night, spouses you’d rather not divorce, pets who make too much noise, people in the house next door who just happen to be in the path of a stray bullet…
Such things can be carried too far and I think that’s the point CRSP was trying to make. But for my own part, I’d rather live in a society where I have the right to own firearms and to defend myself with them, than a society that thinks that I cannot be trusted to do either.
I didn’t really want to turn this into a gun debate, my posts have been meant to have more than just a little self-depreciating sarcasm in them (although it’s not unusual that I’m the only one who sees them that way), but based on what I’ve seen with CCW becoming more widespread, and taking into account the legendary politeness of the British, I think you could flood the isles with Glocks and their murder rate wouldn’t skyrocket … compared to the US, anyway.
eh. That seems pretty grey to me.
What is ‘immediate area’? I live on two acres. Most of which would be hard to build on. Though a squatter could pitch a tent?
So someone could camp on my property in Finland, and I couldn’t do anything about it?
Are you allowed to use harsh words?
If we’re all so polite, why would any of us have to own weapons 
For one night, sure (I’m assuming the law in Finland is the same as in Iceland and Sweden here). You get to camp for one night, pretty much wherever you want outside of the cities.
And people really don’t mind. Even though I’ve been woken up by a curious cow once or twice 
In your post you mentioned the following three things:
The closest neighbor lives a mile away
The next town is 15 miles away
The closest sherrif’s department is 65 miles away.
This really, genuinely wowed me, and if that makes you feel :rolleyes: than so be it. But I stand by my assessment that no one in The Netherlands could say that. I mean, 65 miles, dude, if I travel that far, chances are I end up in another country. And I don’t even live close to the border. As to densely populated: the Netherlands is less than twice the size of New Jersey, and over 16 million people live here, which makes it nearly as densely populated as New Jersey - the most densely populated state in the states.
Here in the US, camping on people’s land without permission would definitely be Trespassing. Picking berries and mushrooms could also be considered Theft. Especially up here where the mushrooms you’d be talking about would be Morels.
The idea of legalizing the practice of allowing complete strangers to set up a tent in your front yard or pasture, walk through your fields, pick your berries and mushrooms and hang out overnight would appear completely insane to the average American. We have Parks (State and National) for that kind of thing.
If you have reason to fear for your safety, and an intruder in a bedroom certainly gives you such reason, then of course you can take action in self-defence. It may well be that the police will investigate the circumstances, but in the vast majority of cases the actions are considered justified. Violence used solely to safeguard property is a different matter.
When I first traveled to Europe, I expected to see lots of people riding bicycles. After all Europe is the home of the world’s great bicycle races.
I did see lots of people on bikes, but all of them looked like garage sale rejects. They all looked worn and worn out.
I did not see a single nice bike like what I see everyday here in LA.
I asked about it and the response was, “If we rode nice bikes they would get stolen.”
:eek:
While I don’t leave my Trek or my Cannondale parked out in the alley, I feel that I can ride it, and if I get thirsty go inside a coffee shop for a cup with an excellent chance it will still be there when I come out.
In a later post someone posted the population numbers and size of the country , you were not being :rolleyes: . My apologies.
It’s been a few years since I had my Basic Introduction to Norwegian Law in high-school journalism, and my education took off in another direction after that. But the way it was presented to me is that the use of deadly force by a private citizen is completely illegal and always subject to lawful punishment. The “Necessary Self Defence” angle is a mitigation of punishment, not an exonerating circumstance. While the Courts may judge your claim of self-defence entirely valid, there is always supposed to be a legal consequence or punishment. (For instance, your firearms licence may be revisited)
That is the literal law, as I was told. However, precedence says that the Courts rarely exert punishment in cases where the claim of necessary self defence is proven valid and beyond doubt.
ETA: I’m talking about deliberate use of deadly force. There are other laws for “Action X with death as a consequence.”
As for my perspective on the stronger (and “easier”?) case for self defence with intent to kill, in the US, I don’t believe having a lower treshhold for lethal violence is a good thing. At least not in theory; in practice it may well be. It would be interesting to see a side-by-side comparison of fatalities in the burglar/victim in the US and Norway. If a lot fewer victims died in the US, I can certainly see it as defensible - at least morally.
I know the discussion is about America and Europe but I thought this article, although old, would be interesting to some people here. We’ve had quite a few similar cases here but this was the most publicised (and one of the most tragic).
My opinion is that if you have a gun you should be trained to use it and be prepared to use it properly. Otherwise you shouldn’t have a gun. That being said here in SA the chances of an intruder or hijacker having a gun is nearly 100% and I would certainly be prepared to use my gun if I needed to. I have caught intruders in my yard and I shot 2 warning shots and they ran away. I would however have been quite prepared to shoot them if they didn’t run.
Outside the big cities, it’s like that in the UK. I’ve left my car unlocked overnight regularly in the centre of Edinburgh (no central locking, easy to forget), and nobody’s ever touched it.
I leave my car parked in the street at night, and so far nothing has happened (knock on wood!).
Just my 2 eurocent!
The only thing that’s ever happen to my car (parked overnight outside downtown) is parking-tickets…
damn those lousy parking attendants