Stand Your Ground (licence to kill)?

[RobDegraves]

At this point I am going to walk on over and attempt to place my hand on the handle of my cooler to prevent him from walking off with it. If during my approach he reaches for a weapon I will draw.

Role-playing is FUN!

OK... he has no weapons at all but he starts to run... man can that guy run fast. Even with the cooler, he's like a cheetah on a trampoline with roller blades. Now.. what do you do hotshot?... what .. do .. you .. .do?

 

[Xulld]

OK... he has no weapons at all but he starts to run... man can that guy run fast. Even with the cooler, he's like a cheetah on a trampoline with roller blades.

Well I have broke my back twice, so I cant run without placing my health and well being in danger, so, he just got away with my cooler. I will call the police and describe him to the police. I may drive around a bit once I get back to my truck (hopefully he did not steal that either).

Damn cooler thieves!

 

[crimresearch]

The dude says... you mean my cooler don't you?



OK.. so killing to retain property is not self defense. Therefore, if an intruder breaks into your home, but no one is there and he has no weapon.. is it self defense? Can you kill him legally.

More importantly .. would you?

Since I lack the psychic abilities of some here, I would have know way of knowing that he had no weapon...

So:


In a presumptive state, yes.

In a presumptive state, yes.

 

[Giz]

I wonder what the minimum threshold is that someone would kill for.

Let's say a thief comes in to your house but no one is home other than you. Thus, no need to protect your family or anyone else. In fact let's keep it simple. Or even better, the thief is not in your house, he's in a field but about to take something of yours.

What would you kill an intruder for?

Just showing up?
Your tv?
A sandwich?
To prove you can shoot better than a felon?
To feel manly?

Just curious.

What if he tries to make off with a strawman?

 

[RobDegraves]

What if he tries to make off with a strawman?

That would take longer.

Since I lack the psychic abilities of some here, I would have know way of knowing that he had no weapon...

So:


In a presumptive state, yes.

In a presumptive state, yes.

Since everyone is missing the point of a hypothetical situation.


Question.... Is it ok to kill someone to protect your property if your life (or anyone else's) is not at risk?

Is that easier?

 

[TeapotCavalry]

That would take longer.



Since everyone is missing the point of a hypothetical situation.


Question.... Is it ok to kill someone to protect your property if your life (or anyone else's) is not at risk?

No.

This question has been answered multiple times in this thread, including within the last few pages.

 

[Xulld]

Question.... Is it ok to kill someone to protect your property if your life (or anyone else's) is not at risk?

No, but it is ok to challenge that behavior, and if presented with a deadly threat meet it with deadly force.

Which is what this thread is all about. Some have beat around the bush about challenging someone in the act of doing something illegal without actually telling us what is wrong with it outside of it having the potential to escalate the situation as if the stealing was not an escalation already.

What if he tries to make off with a strawman?

I dont much care for those, kind of like the trash I leave at the curb, its ok that they take them, just dont bring them back.

 

[RobDegraves]

and if presented with a deadly threat meet it with deadly force.

What if the force presented is not deadly in nature?

 

[TeapotCavalry]

What if he tries to make off with a strawman?

Then aim for the head.

 

[Xulld]

What if the force presented is not deadly in nature?

This goes to assumptions. All I can do is react to what EXACTLY I have available to my senses.

So saying it is not deadly does not tell me what it is my senses are telling me.

It assumes a lot, and only tries to say what the thing is not.

Did he reach for something in his waistband after making a threat when I challenged his stealing my cooler?

What exactly is he doing, that is all that matters. Actions, reactions. Don't pretend to know what a person is thinking, or is capable of, that will get you killed.

 

[crimresearch]

That would take longer.



Since everyone is missing the point of a hypothetical situation.


Question.... Is it ok to kill someone to protect your property if your life (or anyone else's) is not at risk?

Is that easier?

Nobody is missing your 'attempt to build a strawman' point, which is why they are calling you on it.

Using deadly force against someone before they can successfully use it against you is not automatically identical to 'killing someone over mere property'.

Instead of excluding the middle, explain how someone is supposed to know that any given intruder has no weapon, and how someone is supposed to know that any given intruder has no intent to harm.

 

[Xulld]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Use_of_force_continuum

 

[TeapotCavalry]

What if the force presented is not deadly in nature?

Well I guess in an ideal world, where you can know that a threat isn't deadly in nature, you would overpower, disarm and restrain the perpetrator.

In the real world, you probably don't have the training to do that and no way of knowing how dangerous the perpetrator is. I'm not a gun owner, but, having some experiences with being too "lenient" with my attackers backfiring on me, I would not hesitate much to pummel someone until they posed no threat to me at all (ie surrendering, unconscious, or dead). Mace spray would be ideal, now that I think of it.

 

[crimresearch]

What if the force presented is not deadly in nature?

Again... explain how you , or a person in such a situation, would know that.

 

[Xulld]

Mace spray would be ideal, now that I think of it.

Yea If I had no practical considerations, Id carry a pepper spray, a tazer, a club, and a gun.

Love my cold steel black thorn walking stick, goes with me everywhere, better than my cane.

Its just not practical to carry all that stuff. For me it is even less than practical as all added weight just makes my back hurt even more.

 

[3point14]

I'm not balking at it, I answered in the only reasonable way. You can just as easily ask whether I would prefer to have an elephant invading my house, with just as much relevance to the real world. In the real world, I do not have the choice to decide whether I will be home when someone attempts to burglarize me; so any preference i might express is nothing but pointless wishful thinking.

Unless they have some direct application to real-world situations, hypotheticals are just an exercise in mental masturbation.

I think one of the ways we explore our morals is to ponder questions at the points of our moral compass and then explore the answers with logic to find out if our worldview is consistent. I don't understand how you can think it's unusual or unhelpful.

 

[RobDegraves]

Well, it does seem as though someone gets it.

I think one of the ways we explore our morals is to ponder questions at the points of our moral compass and then explore the answers with logic to find out if our worldview is consistent. I don't understand how you can think it's unusual or unhelpful.

I find that the evasions about strawmen and asking about precise details are just that... evasions.

In the end, you do have to ask yourself... what are you willing to do under what circumstances.

Are you willing to kill to keep your property?
Are you willing to kill in war?
Are you willing to kill to protect yourself from non deadly harm?

Etc.

Now... being in the real world means that you don't often have the knowledge to make the perfect decision and you might make mistakes, overreact, etc. That is understood. I usually think it's best to err towards caution. If you can't tell if someone intends deadly force, it's best to assume it, etc. However, I am also very clear as to what I am willing to do in most circumstances.

I find that in general many people have not asked these questions but rather hide behind rationalizations. That is what I was attempting to remove.

 

[Xulld]

I find that the evasions about strawmen and asking about precise details are just that... evasions.

In the end, you do have to ask yourself... what are you willing to do under what circumstances.

You may not realize it but these two sentences do not jive.

The first one you seem perturbed by our insistence on the details. In the second you acknowledge that the circumstances matter.

I find that in general many people have not asked these questions but rather hide behind rationalizations. That is what I was attempting to remove.

After one of my best friends was brutally murdered I spent a lot of time thinking about this. I would be surprised to find any element I have not considered in this regard.

 

[RobDegraves]

After one of my best friends was brutally murdered I spent a lot of time thinking about this.

I lot of the people that I have taught in the past were seeking to learn martial arts because they had been attacked. Many times, they simply didn't know what to do or what they should do.

It's an important question and one that still has not been attempted clearly by anyone on this thread that I have seen.

A number of people said they would not kill someone unless they had to. A few seem to be sitting in their house, stroking their gun and hoping that someone comes in uninvited. One of the most common rationalizations is that anyone coming in their home poses a threat to them and their family.

So.. free of any rationals...

1. What would you kill for?
2. Could you realistically kill?
3. As a follow up... what are you willing to die for?

I sometimes remind my students, if you are willing to kill you should be willing to die. If you get involved in a violent situation, even with training, even with a gun, you run a risk of being killed.

Something everyone should think about... and few do.

 

[RandFan]

I think one of the ways we explore our morals is to ponder questions at the points of our moral compass and then explore the answers with logic to find out if our worldview is consistent. I don't understand how you can think it's unusual or unhelpful.

I grew up a fan of Dirty Harry, Death Wish and Mad Max. I am capable of moral outrage toward criminals who harm and take. I once returned from vacation to find my home ransacked. Important, valuable and sentimental things were taken or destroyed. It's devastating and violating.

But I've come to see the human condition as far from black and white. I've worked as counselor at a boys ranch and on my mission counseled inmates. These are human beings and sometimes events contribute to their crimes. I'm not at all dismissing personal responsibility. I accept that it is important. I don't have the opinion that we ought to stand by helpless. I could kill someone who broke into my home. But I've decided for myself, and myself only, if I have a chance to preserve life I will.