I disagree. All I know is what was in the story, and it sounds to me like she did believe that she was in danger, and she did think that taking the guns was justified. She used to be married to him, and I presume they lived together at the time, so maybe she didn't really think of it as breaking and entering or illegal. I doubt she gave it a whole lot of real thought, considering what a flawed plan it was all the way around.
If he is in front of you with a gun, threatening you, he's a threat. If he's still in jail, he is NOT a threat.
She responded to the potential of a future threat, a thought that there might be danger some time in the future. She was not actually in danger. She thought she might be in danger in the future.
Unless they were not separated, it's pretty clear it was breaking and entering.
We'll have to agree to disagree that someone in jail is a threat to someone outside of jail.
2% of domestic violence includes use of a firearm, and he had the firearms longer than they have been going through the divorce.
As I've already said, she doesn't come across as terribly bright and I have no idea what she was thinking (neither do you all, btw). What seems reasonable is that she was in fear for her safety from this man who had beaten and threatened her in the past (that's what he was in jail for), so she broke into his home and stole his weapons, then turned them over to the police. I think in her mind she felt she was doing the right thing for her own safety. Otherwise she'd have just kept them or hidden them or something.
He was in jail for the accusation, not for the actual crime. One goes to jail before being indicted or certainly before convicted, which is where he was at - accused. Not surprisingly, he denies the crime. Whether he is guilty or not is not yet determined.
I agree she isn't very bright. I don't think she stole them from the point of view of personal financial gain, but she still had no right to take them.
What I DON'T think is that she went, "Oooh! I'm so cute and I have a vagina!! I'm going to break into douchie's house and steal his stuff, then go be cutsie to the cops, who will fall in love with me and my super cute vagina!"
While I don't think she was quite that obvious in her conniving, I think she was close to that. More along the lines of "I'm a woman who is claiming to be in danger, so they certainly will not arrest me for taking his stuff. I'll get him - I'll make this a huge pain in the ass for him, and maybe gain advantage in the assault charge because he isn't supposed to have these guns and it will look like he refused to turn them in - and I saved the day on that one!!"
I think she had no reason to think she'd be held responsible for her actions because she accused him of a crime, and she's a woman who claims feeling in danger, so she's entitled to do stuff.
We know women are about 40% of the perpetrators of domestic abuse, and about 93% of people in jail for perpetrating domestic abuse are male. What does that tell you about the differences that actually exist between men and women in domestic violence?
Did she steal anything else, or just the guns? Because if she's just a thief, why not take some money or valuables? Why take guns and then give them to the cops?
We agree she thought she had a reason. What we seem to disagree on is whether that reason is sufficient to steal from someone. What we seem to disagree on is whether or not she thought she was simply entitled to do it (which is why she took them to the cops without fear of consequence) vs. she is just stupid and unaware that breaking, entering, and taking goods from someone else's home is legal.