I have to assume an intruder means me the worst possible harm or a knock or doorbell would be used. It's not about possessions.

Property crimes are really crimes against a person’s life.

What is money, really? Money is the fruit of your labor--of your time and effort spent gaining particular skills and then spending years on the job to save up and accumulate whatever you can.

In other words, money is a tangible representation of your life--those hours, days, years spent doing something--that somebody now wants to rob you of.

So when you have you car stolen or someone cons you into giving them $10,000 or $100,000 this may be, in effect, years of your life that they have taken from you. Years of work, years of savings, years of accomplishments that have now been obliterated.

It’s not just things that you’re losing with theft--you’re quite literally losing parts of your own life.

These days you’re not even safe sitting at home because criminals can still attempt to rob you using your own digital devices--like phones or computers--sending messages, looking to exploit human naivety.

And what is the greatest risk they are facing for trying to rob thousands of people of parts of their lives, cumulatively amounting to thousands of human lifespans? A few years in prison, maybe--with the ultimate sentence often reduced for good behavior.

Let’s do a little thought experiment--let’s assume an average person could save up about $10,000 per year and we’re professionally active for about 40 years, between about 20 and 60. So a theft of $400,000 is effectively a theft of an entire professional lifespan of a single person.

Even in arguably the safest city in the world--Singapore--money lost to scams exceeded $80 million in the first half of 2019. That is approximately 8000 years worth of personal savings robbed by criminals from citizens and companies in the country.

Taken from here

you could have stopped at the first one.

yes I value a penny or even a worthless pile of garbage over the life of an intruder

I'm not going to say things are more valuable than a life.

However, their argument doesn't take into account that people put years of their life into acquiring things they need to live, like a car so they can go to work. And insurance isn't standing right there to hand you the replacement. Not to mention the insurance that cost years of life to pay for. So in a sense, criminals do steal life away from their victims when they steal things.

The firearm should be first and foremost a deterrent to stop trespassing on others. Protection of oneself and family is a constitutional right therefore a GOD given right.

The person who robs you is probably capable of murdering you and your family.

I would prefer not to be robbed. I'd prefer a bullet to the knee stops them but the knee is harder to hit than the torso.

I pray I am never faced with the dilemma.

Some folks salivate at the thought of shooting someone.

Liberals will truly justify anything to try and prove a point. They have zero pride

Burglary is the same as rape. Invading someone's home is a lifelong-lasting violation that the victim never gets over.

You mean the things I pay for with TIME spent from MY LIFE to acquire? Yes. Yes I do value that more than yours. Thank you.

First of all, it’s real hard to see John Krasinski saying that.

If I may throw some biblical context on this one.

Exodus 22:2

2If a thief be found breaking up, and be smitten that he die, there shall no blood be shed for him. 3If the sun be risen upon him, there shall be blood shed for him; for he should make full restitution; if he have nothing, then he shall be sold for his theft. 4If the theft be certainly found in his hand alive, whether it be ox, or ass, or sheep; he shall restore double.

And some nice context from AI:

The Bible addresses the issue of killing an intruder in Exodus 22:2-3. It states:

Nighttime Intrusion: If a thief is caught breaking into a house at night and is killed, the defender is not guilty of bloodshed. Daytime Intrusion: If the same situation occurs during the day, the defender may be considered guilty of bloodshed. Context and Interpretation

Self-Defense: The scripture implies that defending oneself or one's property is permissible, especially at night when the threat is perceived to be greater.

Intent: The law distinguishes between the time of the incident, suggesting that the intent of the intruder and the circumstances of the defense play a crucial role in determining guilt.

Additional Considerations

Restitution: The Bible also emphasizes restitution for theft. If a thief is caught, they must repay what they have stolen, which reinforces the importance of property rights.

Moral Implications: While the law allows for self-defense, it also encourages caution and consideration of the situation, especially during daylight hours.

This biblical guidance reflects a balance between the right to protect oneself and the moral implications of taking a life.

Years ago I listened to an interview with an ex/retired house burglar. One thing I remember from that was him saying that he had a policy to never break into a house that had our flag flying, because there's a large correlation between gun owners and people who fly the flag on their house. He said there's plenty of other houses, so why take a chance, just skip it and go to a different house.

My things represents the part of my life spent earning a living in order to have enough money to buy them.

If you steal my things you steal part of my life. In return I take time from you.

Yes I do value my things more than your life

👆🏻This!