4 ms·
Not sure about the US, but in the UK where I have more experience having my stuff stolen, if you rob a house and the door is locked it is a far more serious cri
by BearsAreCool 8y ago
Not sure about the US, but in the UK where I have more experience having my stuff stolen, if you rob a house and the door is locked it is a far more serious crime than if the door is unlocked. Big reason people made sure to lock their doors in my neighbourhood growing up since 90% of the yobs would just check if doors were locked, not actually dare to break in.
- bmilleare 8y agoThe bigger issue is insurance. If you have stuff stolen and there's no sign of forced entry (home or vehicle) then your insurance company will likely be asking questions about how exactly the thieves gained access.
- gnicholas 8y agoI think there is no difference in the US. Either way it's "breaking and entering" if you so much as open the door, if my law school memory serves.
- thaumasiotes 8y ago> in the UK where I have more experience having my stuff stolen, if you rob a house and the door is locked it is a far more serious crime than if the door is unlocked. This doesn't make much sense from first principles. I assume everyone agrees that theft is equally unwelcome regardless of whether the door was locked. But the additional damages from breaking into a locked home are pretty minor compared to the damages of the theft. Why would there be a large difference in punishment?
- isostatic 8y agoStealing a bike out of your front garden is no where as near a violation as entering your house (castle) and taking it.
- thaumasiotes 8y agoSo what? The claim is that it's a "far more serious crime" to enter your house and take the bicycle mounted on the wall, when the door was locked, than to enter your house and take the bicycle mounted on the wall, when the door was unlocked.