The FBI’s Uniform Crime Reporting (UCR) Program defines burglary as the unlawful entry of a structure to commit a felony or theft. To classify an offense as a burglary, the use of force to gain entry need not have occurred. The UCR Program has three subclassifications for burglary: forcible entry, unlawful entry where no force is used, and attempted forcible entry. The UCR definition of “structure” includes apartment, barn, house trailer or houseboat when used as a permanent dwelling, office, railroad car (but not automobile), stable, and vessel (i.e., ship).
- Of all burglaries, 60.5 percent involved forcible entry, 33.2 percent were unlawful entries (without force), and the remainder (6.3 percent) were forcible entry attempts.
- Victims of burglary offenses suffered an estimated $4.6 billion in lost property in 2010; overall, the average dollar loss per burglary offense was $2,119.
- Burglaries of residential properties accounted for 73.9 percent of all burglary offenses.
Do you have locks on your doors? Do you have fire insurance on your home and your possessions? It would be a rather miniscule leap of faith to state that everyone that reads this post that has a home has locks on their doors. This, even though the chances of being robbed on a national average is less than .02%, considerably less so, I imagine, in many gated communities that still have locks on their protected homes doors. Of course, if because of the low chances of being burglarized resulted in more unlocked doors, one could assume this would be inviting more thieves to enjoy the fruits of open door policies and would quickly raise the rates somewhat.
The point being? A majority of burglaries are the actions of repeat offenders, professionals and desperate drug addicts, so the percentage of the overall population that are home invaders is extremely small, yet we all have locks on our doors. We all would not invite thieves into our communities–and I even hazard to guess that almost everyone of the liberal, progressive advocates for open door immigration for both Arab Muslims and Latin Americans, with the current minimal policing, would ever invite them to be their next door neighbors without radically more background due diligence than is currently performed, even when it actually is.
If these folks feel so damn safe why do they have locks on their doors? Why is it that because not all Arab Muslims are not rapists, thieves or radical Islamists that it is just fine to let them all in, even if “only” 10% of them are so inclined. We all have locks on our doors to prevent against risks that are significantly less than the risks during the current period or radicalization of immigrants from the tribal Muslim lands being terrorists or inclined to become so at some point, and certainly far less risks than many of these mostly younger men committing crimes against the sanctity of American woman or our property.
Is the lock on your door offensive to the honest among us, is it a politically incorrect act? The answer is obvious and so is the absolute right of the American people to demand protection, locks on our nation’s doors as it were, to prevent even one citizen from being brutalized the way many in Europe are now suffering.
Difficult times demand hard decisions. Preventing the planned chaos in America by the progressive fascists who will use the violence and criminality in our communities to increase the policing powers of the State, very likely to the point of martial law, is not only the right of every American citizen, regardless of race, religion or sexual orientation, it is an obligation.
Two migrant men who lied that they were 15 ‘raped boy, 12, at a Swedish youth asylum centre and filmed the assault’ Refugee boy, 12, raped at migrant housing in Alvesta, Sweden Attack took place at housing for underaged migrants and refugees The two alleged rapists, both migrants, claim to be 15 and 16 Prosecutor says dental checks prove both accused are over 18.