There are certain precautions that are prudent to take to prevent theft.
Reasonable measures would include locks and possibly alarms;
otherwise, excessive security measures amount to
little more than paranoia. Possession of a firearm IS a means of theft prevention,
lest criminals who get past the outer defenses make off with loot or do worse.
Yes I have. As an ultimate last resort. Your overall defences are only as good as your first line.
That makes zero sense. If my first line of defense is a “no trespassing” sign, the second line consists of locks on windows and doors, third line (theoretically) is whatever alarm system might be in place, or possibly a watchdog, etc., and your argument has been that locks aren’t enough, you should have alarm systems, etc., yet you now say that your defenses are only as good as your first line.
Bah! Why do I still feed you? Back under the bridge with you.
I think that the real problem with ivan’s arguments is that they
very much ignore the rights of the property owners to protect themselves.
At the very least, a home invader represents a tangible threat to security.
No one wants to have their home invaded; and it’s probably true,
I think, that no one wants to shoot someone over a TiVo.
Some might feel justified in shooting an invader simply for invading their home.
Any number of scenarios might or might not be true about the invasion.
There is no way for the homeowner to know which is true.
Regrettably, there is no way to read the mind of the invader.
Otherwise, the choice to shoot or not shoot would be easy.
Loss of property is of course not commensurate with loss of life, but the threat of
loss of life is a powerful motivator.
Some people don’t have gardens, or outside property, remember? If you are intent on protecting things within your home, good locks are better than a gun, especially if the burglar might have a gun too.
Interesting question, if you’ve believed what you are accusing me of since before my previous post.
That’s the stupidest thing I’ve ever read (today). Your overall defenses are only as good as your first line, if and only if you only have a first line.
But never mind. Put up or shut up (because your first statement is AFAICT untruthful).
WHAT IS THE MINIMUM AMOUNT OF SECURITY (AND I WANT SPECIFICS, NOT JUST “GOOD LOCKS”) THAT THE CRIMINALLY DISEASED BRAIN SAYS I NEED TO HAVE BEFORE I BEAR ZERO MORAL FAULT FOR BEING BURGLED?
I want specifics: what brands of locks? How many? Triple deadbolts? Window locks? What kind? Do I need bars on the windows (putting me and my family at risk of dying in a fire)? What kind of alarm? What kind of sensors? How many? What breed of guard dog (even if I’m allergic?)?
Tell me where the goal posts are, and stop moving them once and for all, on your idiotic theory that (as opposed to having every moral right to leave the Hope Diamond out on a stand in my front yard for me and my neighbors to enjoy, without some scumbag taking it) I have ANY moral responsibility to scum-proof my house?
Psssst…you’re giving him what he wants. Just let it go, let him have the “last word” and hopefully the fucking thread will die soon.