From the inception of this country... (Reply #35)

In the discussion thread: Use of deadly force to protect property [View all]

Response to former-republican (Original post)

Sun Nov 18, 2012, 03:33 PM

35. From the inception of this country...

...the basic rights of life, liberty and pursuit of happiness have little meaning if those pursuits may be lost or destroyed by the selfish, capricious and arbitrary decisions of criminals. Some folks after a lifetime of work may, due to bad luck or low wages, may have not so much worth of possessions but who am I to decide that while it might be okay to shoot someone over a truck and $15,000 in tools that it isn't acceptable to shoot someone over grandma's pearls.

"Without doubt one is allowed to resist against the unjust aggressor to one's life, one’s goods or one's physical integrity; sometimes, even 'til the aggressor's death... In fact, this act is aimed at preserving one's life or one's goods and to make the aggressor powerless. Thus, it is a good act, which is the right of the victim." - Thomas Aquinas

Reply to this post

Back to OP Alert abuse Link to post in-thread

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum

Replies to this discussion thread

157 replies	Author	Time	Post
Use of deadly force to protect property [View all]	former-republican	Nov 2012	OP
Life is more valuable than property	creeksneakers2	Nov 2012	#1
I was asking about the law it self not how you personally value all human life	former-republican	Nov 2012	#3
Life is not inherently worth more than property.	Pacafishmate	Nov 2012	#23
I believe the Federal government has proven this	former-republican	Nov 2012	#28
Sounds like a complaint about a philosophy you also seem to be defending.	Dark n Stormy Knight	Nov 2012	#94
Kill someone because they dented your car and you'll see what humanity thinks of	Dark n Stormy Knight	Nov 2012	#95
it's not about property, not at all. It's about being safe and secure in your own home.	trouble.smith	Nov 2012	#129
Ah, such eloquence and clarity of thought.	Starboard Tack	Nov 2012	#139
that's the worst argument ever. You fucking fail.	trouble.smith	Nov 2012	#142
What if my own life depends upon that property?	GreenStormCloud	Nov 2012	#131
I thought it was legal in all states.	hrmjustin	Nov 2012	#2
It's not	former-republican	Nov 2012	#4
Really? In what states? And under what circumstances?	AnotherMcIntosh	Nov 2012	#101
I keep on reading too many stories of people who shoot and kill innocent people, sometimes strangers	SheilaT	Nov 2012	#5
How (too) many have you seen? People complain	Eleanors38	Nov 2012	#15
It happens fairly often.	SheilaT	Nov 2012	#34
Respectfully, check the National Safety Council for	Eleanors38	Nov 2012	#39
You are off by a factor of ten.	GreenStormCloud	Nov 2012	#130
You didn't cite sources. I will give one to you...	Eleanors38	Dec 2012	#154
So what is the acceptable number?	Sekhmets Daughter	Dec 2012	#152
If you use forceful entry	Berserker	Nov 2012	#19
I see it a bit differently.	Glaug-Eldare	Nov 2012	#6
I think we are pretty much on the same page	former-republican	Nov 2012	#7
If you see them do it, and you know for a fact it's a felony,	Glaug-Eldare	Nov 2012	#11
Are you serious?	Starboard Tack	Nov 2012	#29
I believe he's talking about personal property	glacierbay	Nov 2012	#31
Hope you are right. Imminent life threatening danger is the key.	Starboard Tack	Nov 2012	#32
since you are apparently independently wealthy, you can let someone steal your tools.	oneshooter	Nov 2012	#37
Not wealthy. On the contrary. Not financially, anyway.	Starboard Tack	Nov 2012	#43
So you believe that I should just give my tools to the goblins that want them?	oneshooter	Nov 2012	#45
You don't have to kill someone to stop them taking your tools.	Dark n Stormy Knight	Nov 2012	#48
No, not unless you feel like giving them.	Starboard Tack	Nov 2012	#57
"What do you do when that happens, shoot yourself?" Funny comment on a not at all amusing topic.	Dark n Stormy Knight	Nov 2012	#93
Ah, there's a funny side to most things in life. Too many take it all way too seriously.	Starboard Tack	Nov 2012	#111
if everyone	MrDiaz	Nov 2012	#52
What a crock. Where did I say not to defend against would be thieves?	Starboard Tack	Nov 2012	#58
I know that you've never said	glacierbay	Nov 2012	#61
Thank you.	Starboard Tack	Nov 2012	#64
I never said	MrDiaz	Nov 2012	#62
And I have no problem with any of that.	Starboard Tack	Nov 2012	#65
I agree with you on this subject.	Jenoch	Nov 2012	#118
Good. And I would do the same, so there is no "however" applicable here.	Starboard Tack	Nov 2012	#123
I agree with you.	oldbanjo	Nov 2012	#104
Taking away property is taking away life.	Atypical Liberal	Nov 2012	#71
Good luck. Wouldn't want you to lose that deductible.	Starboard Tack	Nov 2012	#76
Thanks. It represents about a week and a half of my life.	Atypical Liberal	Nov 2012	#107
" It represents about a week and a half of my life"	Starboard Tack	Nov 2012	#115
I think he means that the deductible's cost	Glaug-Eldare	Nov 2012	#121
I guess he doesn't like his job.	Starboard Tack	Nov 2012	#122
It's OK.	Atypical Liberal	Nov 2012	#137
I'm figuring the time it takes me to pay for a $1000 deductible.	Atypical Liberal	Nov 2012	#134
If you're the one killing someone for taking a tv, you're the one putting that	Dark n Stormy Knight	Nov 2012	#96
Nope. If you choose to risk your life for a TV, you've made that choice for yourself.	Atypical Liberal	Nov 2012	#106
I was addressing this specific part of your post:	Dark n Stormy Knight	Dec 2012	#148
Any would-be thief should assume that choice is the worst-case for them.	Atypical Liberal	Dec 2012	#155
Read his post # 6.	GreenStormCloud	Nov 2012	#132
I have no argument with that. It is also my position.	Starboard Tack	Nov 2012	#140
That's my position.	sir pball	Dec 2012	#150
No.	Glaug-Eldare	Nov 2012	#36
Good. Glad we got that straightened out.	Starboard Tack	Nov 2012	#38
Depends on the pizza...	tortoise1956	Nov 2012	#41
This message was self-deleted by its author	Dark n Stormy Knight	Nov 2012	#13
Well, the replacement cost of my phone is more than 500$, so	AtheistCrusader	Nov 2012	#8
I'd support your right to fight back	Glaug-Eldare	Nov 2012	#12
Well then I support changing the definition of a felony. The monetary value threshold should be	Dark n Stormy Knight	Nov 2012	#14
I think it's difficult to come up with a property asessment	AtheistCrusader	Nov 2012	#47
Almost entirely beside the point of my post.	Dark n Stormy Knight	Nov 2012	#49
It proposed using a different scale for determining felony status.	AtheistCrusader	Nov 2012	#56
Well, you talked about the difficulty of assessing value of something that someone is running away	Dark n Stormy Knight	Nov 2012	#97
Are you saying you support shooting thieves in the back?	Starboard Tack	Nov 2012	#66
No.	AtheistCrusader	Nov 2012	#68
OK, I'm with you there.	Starboard Tack	Nov 2012	#70
In some states that is not correct	AtheistCrusader	Nov 2012	#74
I guess that's how Kleck got all those numbers	Starboard Tack	Nov 2012	#77
Potentially. The criteria was legal defensive gun use.	AtheistCrusader	Nov 2012	#79
No. Texas law was changed after Kleck's study.	GreenStormCloud	Nov 2012	#135
I'm of two minds on this one.	AtheistCrusader	Nov 2012	#9
I think even if it was legal in every state , many would opt out of using deadly force to	former-republican	Nov 2012	#10
But that means	mercuryblues	Nov 2012	#53
I don't think think I could shoot a fleeing theft subject.	Eleanors38	Nov 2012	#16
stuff = life is moral bankruptcy	aandegoons	Nov 2012	#17
When we ignore the relationship	rrneck	Nov 2012	#22
Such eloquent grandiosity!	Starboard Tack	Nov 2012	#67
I guess you didn't notice	rrneck	Nov 2012	#69
I didn't miss the recession. Far from it. I would fight that same fight to survive.	Starboard Tack	Nov 2012	#75
don't dirty your hands, let your body guards handle it.	Tuesday Afternoon	Nov 2012	#26
possessions = small - large chunks of our lives and history.	ileus	Nov 2012	#18
The topic of this particular thread is deadly force. No one had justified the need for that in	Dark n Stormy Knight	Nov 2012	#98
Anything could result in death...just yelling at a thief could result in death.	ileus	Nov 2012	#120
I think it depends on the value of the property. If someone threatens my house with a Molotov...	slackmaster	Nov 2012	#20
Do you think the person that decides to shoot a car thief who is stealing his 14 year old SUV	former-republican	Nov 2012	#21
I agree that it should not be a crime to shoot someone to prevent theft of your vehicle	slackmaster	Nov 2012	#24
This message was self-deleted by its author	Tuesday Afternoon	Nov 2012	#27
I hope that I am never in such a predicament. I aimed my gun at a bird once - could NOT pull the	Tuesday Afternoon	Nov 2012	#25
I agree 100%	Starboard Tack	Nov 2012	#33
I can agree with you on this	tortoise1956	Nov 2012	#42
It should be illegal everywhere.	Starboard Tack	Nov 2012	#30
Are you a religious person?	former-republican	Nov 2012	#46
No.	Starboard Tack	Nov 2012	#55
Then your statement is very odd	former-republican	Nov 2012	#90
Which statement, and how is it odd?	Starboard Tack	Nov 2012	#91
This one	former-republican	Nov 2012	#92
Really? You think having a moral compass is contingent on being religious?	Starboard Tack	Nov 2012	#108
I didn't think you would understand it.	former-republican	Nov 2012	#112
Just because I find something abhorrent, doesn't mean I don't understand it.	Starboard Tack	Nov 2012	#117
What about the theives themselves?	Atypical Liberal	Nov 2012	#72
"Everyone should realize that the price you might pay for robbery or burglary is death."	Starboard Tack	Nov 2012	#78
Oh the courts here in Alabama already know.	Atypical Liberal	Nov 2012	#105
What does that have to do with anything I said?	Starboard Tack	Nov 2012	#116
You said we needed to notify the court and prisons.	Atypical Liberal	Nov 2012	#119
You said "Everyone should realize that the price you might pay for robbery or burglary is death."	Starboard Tack	Nov 2012	#124
I don't know what you are talking about.	Atypical Liberal	Nov 2012	#125
I give up	Starboard Tack	Nov 2012	#127
Oh, good.	Atypical Liberal	Nov 2012	#133
In my case, prudence might require me NOT to differentiate.	Lizzie Poppet	Dec 2012	#156
I agree 100%	Starboard Tack	Dec 2012	#157
From the inception of this country...	discntnt_irny_srcsm	Nov 2012	#35
Gandhi pretty much agrees with Aquinas, if one does not practice Ahimsa.	Eleanors38	Nov 2012	#40
Ahimsa: "Avoidance of verbal and physical violence...	discntnt_irny_srcsm	Nov 2012	#44
So many replies here basically saying Yes to your question because "property" is apparently more	Dark n Stormy Knight	Nov 2012	#50
Because no-one here knows the Vulcan Neck Pinch. n/t	PavePusher	Nov 2012	#88
Earther! Barbarian! Emotional Earther!	Glaug-Eldare	Nov 2012	#89
Nor how to shoot straight?	Dark n Stormy Knight	Nov 2012	#99
So, if you touch my bicycle, I would be justified in shooting you or beating you to death	Kolesar	Nov 2012	#51
1-5k for a bike....that's a lot of scratch.	ileus	Nov 2012	#54
My philosophy is "if you can't afford to lose it, insure it."	Starboard Tack	Nov 2012	#80
Everything I have is insured...it just depends on when and where.	ileus	Nov 2012	#83
That's good. Now you don't even have to think about killing anyone over a lawn mower.	Starboard Tack	Nov 2012	#84
M&P is short for Military & Police,	Glaug-Eldare	Nov 2012	#86
Yeah, I figured it was something asinine, and I guess Erie is just a lake.	Starboard Tack	Nov 2012	#87
With posts like #19, I think GC & RKBA is a long way from that.	Dark n Stormy Knight	Nov 2012	#100
This will always be a place where morons come in an attempt to pollute.	Starboard Tack	Nov 2012	#113
Post removed	Post removed	Nov 2012	#128
It's ultimately a moral decision whatever the law says	slackmaster	Nov 2012	#59
I totally agree.	Starboard Tack	Nov 2012	#85
While it is not wrong...	discntnt_irny_srcsm	Nov 2012	#63
I live in Texas, and I'm satisfied with the Texas Penal Code as written.	MicaelS	Nov 2012	#60
I think it silly to risk one's own life or take another's to defend property.	Kaleva	Nov 2012	#73
I can think of some exceptions, at least for me.	TPaine7	Nov 2012	#81
Massad Ayoob has a lot to say on this topic, actually	Glaug-Eldare	Nov 2012	#82
good post to think about	YllwFvr	Dec 2012	#145
Like Zimmerman shot an unarmed innocent person way outside the perimeter of his home?	graham4anything	Nov 2012	#102
Zimmerman appears to be claiming self defense, not defense of property	ProgressiveProfessor	Nov 2012	#136
How was the asswipe claiming self defense when he chased an unarmed man named Mr. Martin?	graham4anything	Nov 2012	#138
Claiming it is easy, proving it another. Why did you bring him into this thread?	ProgressiveProfessor	Nov 2012	#141
lol	former-republican	Dec 2012	#144
A "man" or sheep?	guardian	Dec 2012	#149
Is there a standardized legal definition of "deadly force" among the states?	Dark n Stormy Knight	Nov 2012	#103
Yes there is a standard definition of what deadly force is. There is not a standard definition of	former-republican	Nov 2012	#109
Yes. Force that is likely to cause severe injury or death.	slackmaster	Nov 2012	#110
I was responding to the effect of when it can be used.	former-republican	Nov 2012	#114
My thought is- it's just stuff	notadmblnd	Nov 2012	#126
This message was self-deleted by its author	Dash87	Dec 2012	#143
For me, as for a few others here,	montanto	Dec 2012	#146
Other side of the coin: People's thoughts on the use of deadly force/threat to steal property...	OneTenthofOnePercent	Dec 2012	#147
Is there even one State which does not authorize the use of deadly force against bank robbers?	AnotherMcIntosh	Dec 2012	#151
I guess it would depend on the monetary	Sekhmets Daughter	Dec 2012	#153

Edit History

Please login to view edit histories.