Would you kill to defend your property?

[1stFlight]

Originally posted by PsychoSy
See, I disagree with that - my view is the moment anyone infringes on another person's rights, they should cease to have rights of their own and face whatever consequences for their actions. I'd have given the guy a medal! :p

I completely agree with this.

Your rights end, where mine begin and vice versa.

[intercede007]

This conversation got a little disturbing.

Is personal property soo important that a burgler running from your home deserves to be shot dead in the street? I'm sorry, but your damn Television set isn't worth somebody's life, not matter how much you paid for it or how bad you don't want them to have it.

Or maybe I've just taken the line I learned in weapons safety too much to heart: "A gun in the hands of a law abiding citizen is a defensive tool, not an offensive weapon."

[Paul]

If I felt my life, or the lives of those i love, was in immediate danger, i would use whatever force necessary to eradicate the threat. If I only disable the attacker/intruder, great. But i'm not going to go out of my way to aim for their foot.

If an intruder is running away, and was unarmed, i'd give chase and try and pin them down. But i wouldn't fatally wound them, or put myself in any undue danger to catch them. If they were armed, i wouldn't give chase at all - I'd be more likely to be thanking my lucky stars I were alive.

Ultimately, i don't subscribe to the feel that once someone enters your property they give up all their rights. Yes, they are breaking the law, and yes it's their choice to be there. But laws exist for a reason, and we can't have anarchy just because someone else chooses to break said laws.

Also, if the courts allowed you to murder those who entered your home without permission, where does it end? It sets a dangerous precedent. A kid steals some sweets from a shop - Do you murder them to teach other kids a lesson? Hell, do you execute people who disagree with you?

A little far fetched, sure, but you have to give some serious thought as to where such a law would take us.

[Filburt]

I think it's rare circumstance when you actually need to kill someone. I'd still prefer some way of disabling them...

I, like intercede, carry *two* degrees of power!

http://www.dodstudios.net/uploads/uploads/Bootofdoom.jpg

:D

They go well with "Bat of hitherto undetermined wrath"

[demonized]

Originally posted by vampireuk
old man who has been burgled dozens of times and the police have never done a thing. [b]

The man was just really pissed cause the police cant do anything about it. If it was me I would have shot these damn burglers myself as well but not kill them.

[vampireuk]

Originally posted by intercede007
I'm sorry, but your damn Television set isn't worth somebody's life

Not my TV, but touch my rig and they will lose a limb:p

[intercede007]

Originally posted by vampireuk
Not my TV, but touch my rig and they will lose a limb:p

HA!!

Well OK, I suppose I can conceed that ;)

[1stFlight]

See in some parts of Chicago (mostly the non-rich parts), if your house gets broken into, the cops won't even bother to take fignerprints.

After a certain point, if you're not willing to defend your own, you're willing to give it away.

Shot to wound, they'll just come back and sue you.

[LORD-eX-Bu]

meh, break into my house and take what you want if you can, threaten any member of my family or my life and you'll have to deal with me and a few of my most trusted friends:nono:

http://www.nvnews.net/vbulletin/attachment.php?s=&postid=165736

[ricercar]

In silicon valley, even the rich parts homes on the peninsula, fingerprints are not always taken for break ins. With 7 Million people between San Jose and the Golden Gate bridge, there are just too many crimes for the police to pursue.

I'd hope the police would react much differently to a robbery.

[AlienZombie]

I would, but the severity or way in which I went about defending myself or my property would depend on the situation. But if you think you can take my stuff with no repercussions, then think again. If it came to defending myself or a member of my family, then I wouldnt think twice. I grew up in a household with guns but dont own any myself. At some point in my life I will probably get one.
Funny story: a guy near where I used to live was a disabled veteran (he was confined to a wheelchair). Anyway, he had a sign on his door that said, "If you want to find out if there's an afterlife, then tresspass here." And wouldnt you know it, some dumb@ss tried to rob him, so the guy shot and killed him. The kicker: he never got charged for it (like he shouldnt have) because the sign on the door was considered to be ample warning for the intruder to know what he was getting himself into. Now thats justice!

[PsychoSy]

Originally posted by intercede007
Is personal property soo important that a burgler running from your home deserves to be shot dead in the street? I'm sorry, but your damn Television set isn't worth somebody's life, not matter how much you paid for it or how bad you don't want them to have it.

It's not about the possessions or the money - it's about principal. I wasn't put on this world to bend over for some asshat's decision to become a thief. Get a damn job. The only things a thief can steal from me that I wouldn't shoot him for is food, soap, beverages, cigarettes, and toilet paper. Hell, I'm generous enough of person to give such items (along with money) if asked for them. But stolen? No way, Corky! Anything other than those items that get swiped from me, I've got two legs or two cheeks of prime ass to plant a boot or a bullet in. :D

Or maybe I've just taken the line I learned in weapons safety too much to heart: "A gun in the hands of a law abiding citizen is a defensive tool, not an offensive weapon." [/B]

That's right - I'm armed for defense. If the thief isn't, that's not my problem. :angel:

I feel guns in the hands of law abiding citizens can and should be used as an offensive weapon. A bullet in the leg or the ass severely hampers the thief from running away. Plenty of time for the cops and EMTs to cart his wounded ass to the hospital where they can remove the bullet, sew him up, and release him. At that point, the cops can slip those pretty little bracelets around his sorry wrists and toss in the clink.

What? Pay for his hospital bills? Screw him!

I don't even pay my own hospital bills! :rofl

[LiquidX]

I have to say I would shoot first and asks questions later if I heard someone coming in my house. I don't think I would wait and question why there coming in my window. Also I don't think I would shoot a thief say......running from my house after I caught them with my toaster and X-Box in under there arm and god forbid they turn around and throw that toaster at me..

[intercede007]

I guess I just feel that nothing in my home is worth putting a bullet in somebody for. If someone is in my home, I am going to get my gun out of my nightstand, I will lock my door and I will call the police.

I don't think it's a real good idea to be walking around a dark home with a loaded semi-automatic not knowing exactly what lays ahead. Why even let them know I'm home?

[LORD-eX-Bu]

the only thing in my house that I consider more valuable than a burglar's life is my family, errr... and my guns:p

[fastguy94416]

If someone comes into my home In a fasion in which seems... questionable and I do not know this person, they quickly will find the muzzel of my .45 pointing at them

[sytaylor]

Originally posted by ricercar
What is the dividing line?, and Who decides? [/B]

dividing lines

1. When some asshat (name temporaily pilfered) enters your house without you knowing/wanting them there, for a reason other than good or indifferent

2. When you are being physically or mentally distressed in order for a crime to take place (note: distress is different to harm, being tied up and watching people break prized possesions for example, that would boil my blood, but nowhere near as much as them going after family etc)

Who decides?

Good question, right now its the courts, which means if killing force is used there is usually a jury. Thus, i'd hope most people could relate to the distress of the events experienced. Judges are sometimes good judges of what has gone on, but cases like this require a well chosen jury.