>The solution is to identify, arrest, and prosecute criminals. Which the government is not obligated to do in the US. The solution is to pass laws that allow c

>The solution is to identify, arrest, and prosecute criminals. Which the government is not obligated to do in the US. The solution is to pass laws that allow citizens to defend property with the same force that they can defend their own and others bodies from injury. It should be pretty clear that humans are pretty good optimizers. Its never about if the activity is legal or not, its about what is the reward is, vs what the actual risk is (i.e, getting arrested is not really a risk when your source of income doesn't depend on your criminal history) The only way to stop humans from doing said behavior is increase the risk of doing it. If laws were passed that allowed citizens to freely own guns, and use those guns to defend themselves and property, you would see massive decrease in property crime. And yes, you do get an increase in shootings. Statistically though, the shootings happen more in alteractions where tempers flare rather than home invasions or robbery situations. Suicides still preside overwhelmingly as the leading cause of gun deaths. Overall, from a personal harm perspective (amount of harm * risk), its much safer if you have loose gun/self defense laws. Unless of course you are so well off that you can just replace stole stuff indefinitely, but again, the humans taking your stuff will optimize for that over time as well.