Why Is Killing a Burglar Justified? This, for Starters...

On May 9, 2012 in Ocoee, FL, two armed burglars, Nolan Darnell Bernard, 27, and Charles Obinna Okafor, 28, forced their way into a home, and held the four victims, Brienna Campos, 20, Alex Zaldivar, 19, Brandon Campos, and William Harrington, at gunpoint. They were forced to the ground and held there at gunpoint while Bernard and Okafor ransacked the house, stealing electronics, personal items, and a cell phone. Unfortunately for the burglars, the cell phone had a tracking application on it, and the police located them inside a home with the phone. A car matching the description of the getaway car was parked outside and two handguns were in plain view inside the car. It looked like a pretty open and shut case.

However, despite the lengthy criminal history of both suspects and the fact that they had each already spent time in prison, a judge granted Okafor bond with the conditions that he remain confined to his home and have no contact with the victims. Bernard and Okafor, already convicted felons, were already facing the possibility of life in prison for charges including burglary with a firearm, robbery with a firearm, false imprisonment with a weapon, and aggravated assault with a firearm. Not to mention, these two felons were also guilty of possessing a firearm. How did they get guns? They're felons! That's against the law!

On Monday, September 10, 2012, Brienna Campos and Alex Zaldivar were preparing to testify against their attackers in court on Tuesday. They, along with another man, 23 year old Remington Campos, were at the same home that Bernard and Okafor burglarized in May. At 5:15 am, an unnamed suspect broke into that same home and shot all three occupants. The attack left Brienna Campos and Remington Campos seriously wounded and killed Zaldivar.

The radio frequency ankle monitor worn by Okafor indicated that on the day before two witnesses were set to testify against him in a trial that could send him back to prison for the rest of his life, he left his house at 4:40 am and returned at 5:46 am. Technically, all of this evidence is circumstantial, but is there really any doubt who killed and wounded those potential witnesses? Would anyone like to question how a convicted felon, who already had the handgun used in a previous crime seized, was able to acquire another gun while on house arrest and then use it to commit another crime? Would anyone in favor of gun bans like to explain how the law kept Okafor from acquiring a weapon not once, but twice, in a short amount of time and under difficult circumstances?

Okafor had nothing to lose. Even without the witness testimony, there was still enough evidence to link himself and Bernard to the May 9 burglary. This wasn't a case of intimidating witnesses; this was just revenge.

This is one reason why you will hear many gun owners say that they abhor the idea of taking someone else's life, but will still shoot a burglar, robber, attempted murderer, or rapist to kill. The idea that someone with nothing to lose can ambush you again at a time of their choosing, forcing you to be hypervigilant at all times while you know they are free, is torture.