Gun Control & RKBA
In reply to the discussion: Please post reasons why it is OK to kill people in defense of property. [View all]We_Have_A_Problem
(2,112 posts)A criminal chooses to steal my stuff. That's the original crime. Do TRY to keep that in mind.
At that point, the criminal is deciding he is willing to risk his life and freedom in exchange for my property. You following along here?
By assuming that risk, he is accepting the consequences if he does not obtain my property and escape. We still clear?
Because of his actions, the criminal has placed me in a position of either letting him take my property or keeping him from taking my property. Again - this is the criminal's choice.
If I make the choice to stop him, that choice is reactive not proactive. I did not seek out the criminal - he came to me. I'm being forced to react.
Once I choose to stop him, the criminal may or may not end up dead, but at the end of the day, it was the criminal's choice to start the whole process.
At every point in this process, the criminal has made or forced every single choice. The sole choice I as the victim can make is to choose to be a victim or not.
By the way - i consider the use of lethal force to protect myself or my property to be the legal, moral and ethical choice. It is absolutely legal, certainly moral within the Judeo-Christian standard of morals and absolutely ethical.
Seems to me, you're advocating for the criminal and suggesting people have an obligation to be victimized.