Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
You do have a right to protect your life but if someone breaks into your house and has not harmed you and you shoot them that is not defending yourself that is called murder. How do you know what they are there for if you just hear them in another room and they are not coming toward you that probably means they are just trying to steal something or find a hiding spot to watch what they are doing if you can. As much as people want to believe it going after someone just because they broke in is not defending yourself.
Should the homeowner WAIT until they're physically harmed before using a gun? ... while interviewing the criminal from a safe distance? Should they have their gun in hand or should it remain in the locked drawer/safe? Should the homeowner wait before calling for help? ... or should they stand there for 20 minutes waiting for police holding the criminal with the gun on them? or?
Good luck to those who feel and act this way, it will work out OK some times for you and your loved ones...and when it does you will feel good ... you didn't harm another human, despite their bad actions and intentions. They'll probably turn their life around from this experience. Nicely done!
In thinking about this I wonder if many others live life in slow motion? I wish I did. For me things often happened quickly...in fact many of the bad things did... unexpected situations where others were criminals, insane, under stress or influence of drugs.
Not everyone who breaks into others' properties are bad guys but few of them are nice people with good intentions. Most homeowners with guns know this and will act accordingly...let the criminals be aware.
I think SE is a psych student at a university conducting an online experiment on how people respond when the hypothesis is put forward to let em steal and do nothing vs. stopping a felon in the act.
Castle Doctrine, you're allowed to kill someone in your house who is an intruder. Buu yah!!
Childish exhortation notwithstanding, the question isn't whether something is allowed, but rather is it justifiable. It isn't justifiable to take a human life out of a cavalier sense of entitlement. It isn't justifiable to take a human life out of craven resistance to learning and practicing reasonable discretion. It isn't justifiable to take a human life by way of any vacuous excuses.
Quote:
Originally Posted by freightshaker
I understand exactly what I'm saying.. I am a senior citizen. I don't have the luxury of questioning whether an intruder is meaning me harm.
Didn't you read what I wrote to you? I said, such excuses are cop-outs. You don't have to admit it, but don't reply to me as if I didn't say it.
Quote:
Originally Posted by scarecrow-
Only a liberal would try and justify an armed robbers actions...
Only a "conservative" would try and justify killing an unarmed homeless person. Are you done making up things to argue against, because you are incapable of arguing against what people are actually saying to you?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Orlandochuck1
I'd like to know, how do you make an accurate determination in a very short time.
Then you're a more evolved person than many of the would-be killers. That is precisely the question that moral human beings would be asking, and they'd recognize that the answers to that are inherent in the training that separates those who kill in the name of the "Castle Doctrine" and those who kill in accordance with the reasonable accountability applied to police officers in the line of duty. The rationalizations for lack of accountability will continue, because some people just love the idea of killing someone else without accountability, without humane consideration, without a shred of moral decency. Hopefully, you won't be one of those people.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Georgianbelle
bUU, will not answer the questions the rest of us ask him or her.
Why can't you understand that I am under no moral obligation...
Because you are. That's really the point. That's why I called the excuses "cop-outs". You are under a moral obligation to take all steps practicable to ensure that you only kill to prevent injury or death.
Quote:
Originally Posted by freightshaker
Has anyone else noticed that when faced with basic logic, these people disappear? Is there a black hole or something??
You must think that schooling you on the basics of morality is my main priority. I participate as much as and as little as I care to. Get over it. When the cop-out get repetitious, the thread becomes a lower priority. Show some moral ascendancy if you want to raise the priority.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Speleothem
Self defense is immoral? You're funny!
I would be funny if that's what I said. Refusing to acknowledge what is actually being said by people condemning perspectives that you want to support is defensive self-deception. How does that further the discussion?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Storm Eagle
You do have a right to protect your life but if someone breaks into your house and has not harmed you and you shoot them that is not defending yourself that is called murder. How do you know what they are there for if you just hear them in another room and they are not coming toward you that probably means they are just trying to steal something or find a hiding spot to watch what they are doing if you can. As much as people want to believe it going after someone just because they broke in is not defending yourself.
Your comments will likely fall on deaf ears. And those with deaf ears wonder why replying to this thread is such a low priority?
Childish exhortation notwithstanding, the question isn't whether something is allowed, but rather is it justifiable. It isn't justifiable to take a human life out of a cavalier sense of entitlement. It isn't justifiable to take a human life out of craven resistance to learning and practicing reasonable discretion. It isn't justifiable to take a human life by way of any vacuous excuses.
Didn't you read what I wrote to you? I said, such excuses are cop-outs. You don't have to admit it, but don't reply to me as if I didn't say it.
Only a "conservative" would try and justify killing an unarmed homeless person. Are you done making up things to argue against, because you are incapable of arguing against what people are actually saying to you?
Then you're a more evolved person than many of the would-be killers. That is precisely the question that moral human beings would be asking, and they'd recognize that the answers to that are inherent in the training that separates those who kill in the name of the "Castle Doctrine" and those who kill in accordance with the reasonable accountability applied to police officers in the line of duty. The rationalizations for lack of accountability will continue, because some people just love the idea of killing someone else without accountability, without humane consideration, without a shred of moral decency. Hopefully, you won't be one of those people.
Because you are. That's really the point. That's why I called the excuses "cop-outs". You are under a moral obligation to take all steps practicable to ensure that you only kill to prevent injury or death.
You must think that schooling you on the basics of morality is my main priority. I participate as much as and as little as I care to. Get over it. When the cop-out get repetitious, the thread becomes a lower priority. Show some moral ascendancy if you want to raise the priority.
I would be funny if that's what I said. Refusing to acknowledge what is actually being said by people condemning perspectives that you want to support is defensive self-deception. How does that further the discussion?
Your comments will likely fall on deaf ears. And those with deaf ears wonder why replying to this thread is such a low priority?
OK, picture this. My wife and I are in the family room watching a movie while our daughter plays with her Legos nearby. The front door crashes in, and four 350 lb men enter our home. They annouce "We are not armed and will not harm anyone. We just want your money and goods!" Within my reach is a handgun with 17 rounds of frangible ammunition guaranteed to shred a human body upon impact.
By your reasoning, I should sit there and watch them go about their business in my home, confident that I, my wife and our daughter will not be harmed.
Scenario #2: Late night. I hear a noise downstairs. I grab my gun (say it's my shotgun this time with five #000 loads of buck shot - designed to shred a human body upon impact), ensure my wife is still in bed and stealthily check my daughters' room to ensure she's in bed sleeping. I stand, quiet and unnoticed on the dark upper landing and watch in the dark as two shadowly figures carry my belongings towards the front door, not worrying since they are not appearing to move towards where I am.
By your reasoning, I should stand there and watch them go about their business in my home, confident that I, my wife and our daughter will not be harmed.
May I ask what particular variety of crack you are using?
And why do you believe the lives of the intruders in either scenario are of any significance in choosing my actions?
The first scenario yeah I could see using force but what justification do you have the second one? They are obviously not there to harm you yet you kill them? You do not have to do nothing you can call the police and there is a good chance you can get your stuff back. Like I said before killing someone when they are not harming you is murder not defending yourself.
I still think a lot of folks here talk tough about killing someone without realizing the consequences afterwards if found out to be an unarmed minor.
Id rather have a dead unarmed minor in my house, than a minor who was armed and killed one of my family members.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
... you didn't harm another human, despite their bad actions and intentions. They'll probably turn their life around from this experience. Nicely done!
Is there a black hole or something??
