Kim Du Toit, who I admire above all others as the Supreme gun-blogger on the net (and who I hold to a higher standard) offers a compare-and-contrast pair of news articles, where-in smash-and-grab robbers burst into a store with the obvious intent to steal the valuable stuff.
Case #1: England - Four ski-mask clad robbers burst into a British store armed with a hammer. The proprietor is intimidated to the role of observer, as the bandits smashes display cases, grab the loot and escapes to their waiting van. It is only due to the watchful habits of Bobbies *(policemen)* that they observed driving erratically, stopped, arrested and the forty-thousand pounds ($80,000) worth of stolen property is returned to the merchant.
Case #2: America - a ski-mask clab robber bursts into a store in Texas ...
From Kim's description of the event:
The store clerk began firing as the robber attempted to come over the counter.
The robber fled in a silver Ford Taurus, but was stopped about a mile from the FM 933, Highway 22 intersection by Hill and Bosque County deputies.
That's what I'm talking about!
Nothing was stolen, no property (eg: display cases) was destroyed.
The fact that the would-be robber was apprehended while making his getaway was due to normal police patrols only underscores that protection of private property is enhanced by the
ability of the would-be victim to protect himself and his property.
An earlier dialogue with the self-styled British "ABSO-Monger" demonstrated that The Brits ... especially what passes for a LEO-presence ...tend to believe that their gun control laws are justified by the lessening of "murders by firearms".
This anecdotal comparison between robbery-with-violence crimes reinforces the proposition that gun-control serves the interest of the Goblins more than it serves the interest of the average citizen.
I rest my case.