1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

Is your property worth more than a human life?

Discussion in 'Serious' started by Rum&Coke, 3 Aug 2009.

?

Is killing an intruder justified if he attempted to non-violently steal your property

  1. Yes, a criminal gives up all right to life once he enters my house

    36 vote(s)
    32.7%
  2. No, life is too precious to waste satisfying a base need to dominate our self-described "property"

    12 vote(s)
    10.9%
  3. Criminals do have rights to life but adrenaline takes over

    9 vote(s)
    8.2%
  4. People have a right to protect their property but the action should be in proportion to the threat/c

    53 vote(s)
    48.2%
  1. Rum&Coke

    Rum&Coke New Member

    Joined:
    23 Apr 2007
    Posts:
    473
    Likes Received:
    14
    No linked news story here, I'm just interested in finding out from here: if you found an entirely unarmed intruder on your land would you consider it entirely justified to kill them i.e. with a gun? If the language here seems incendiary or bias that should be a sign of what (at least I believe) is the real answer to this. If you want to argue about why it is alright to shoot people dead because they've attempted to steal from you go ahead.

    edit: There is no "edit poll" option but clearly I mean "Waste life"
     
    Last edited: 3 Aug 2009
  2. Rkiver

    Rkiver Cybernetic Spine

    Joined:
    23 Apr 2009
    Posts:
    930
    Likes Received:
    42
    If said person was in my home, and threatening my family, then yes. Otherwise no. I'd incapacitate them without killing them and alert the authorities.

    Nothing is worth taking a human life unless the only alternative is they take yours or your families.
     
  3. Ryu_ookami

    Ryu_ookami I write therefore I suffer.

    Joined:
    11 Mar 2004
    Posts:
    3,326
    Likes Received:
    128
    If they are unarmed killing them would be over the top. If they armed in anyway or are threatening a family member in anyway then sure shooting them dead seems perfectly justified if they didn't want to get shot they shouldn't have broken in simple.

    Edit: My GF doesn't agree apparently kneecapping them so they don't run is the answer.

    Re-edit: And then forcing them to use correct grammar is her second option apparently.
     
    Last edited: 3 Aug 2009
  4. Rum&Coke

    Rum&Coke New Member

    Joined:
    23 Apr 2007
    Posts:
    473
    Likes Received:
    14
    I am very explicitly stating they are entirely unarmed. Now because we arn't gods we can't be certain of that fact in situ, so to imagine such a situation you must accept that an unarmed man = a burgler you have not (yet) seen with a gun/knife.

    But is merely being in your home a sign that they threaten your family?
     
  5. gnutonian

    gnutonian New Member

    Joined:
    6 Jan 2009
    Posts:
    340
    Likes Received:
    13
    They could be. I've used force for employers before, I will definitely use it for my family. Real criminals (i.e. people who knowingly commit a criminal act, such as burglary) lose a lot of rights, in my opinion, when they commit said act. If someone "pirates" my music, I won't batter him to death. But I may not think twice about doing it to a burglar who is in my house, posing a potential threat to me and my family.

    It's not just about property. If a person or multiple persons are in your house, already committing criminal acts (stealing your stuff); what is there to stop them from potentially harming you or your family? These are people that have willingly chosen to break the law, to take from you. What is stopping them from taking it one step further? You never know who you're dealing with, how desperate they are (drug addicts, for example) - until the day all evidence on those people and their past is presented in court.

    Courts cannot deal with primal instincts like self-protection or protection of your family/offspring. People go crazy over that stuff - they feel like they can't take the gamble that the person(s) will just take the property and leave.
    Add to that being awoken in the middle of the night (I don't know about you, but I need a few minutes to wake up and get my brain in order) and acting in that state of mind.... and you've got a murderer in a normal family man.

    It's a complex subject, and I don't think burglars abdicate their right to life (unless posing a direct threat); but I don't think victims of burglars should be imprisoned if they fight back and injure/kill the criminal in the process. (Unless you shoot a running burglar in the back, even adrenaline would be a bad excuse for that.)

    The man's got a point. When I read a news report on a criminal getting hurt whilst in the middle of a criminal act, I laugh (as I suspect most people do). It serves them right. No?
    I wouldn't dream of breaking into a house in a country with "lax" gun/self-defence laws. Getting shot < getting stuff. (And if you're a drug addict who needs to steal & sell stuff for your habit... too bad. Drug addiction = your choice. For whatever reason, you started it, and our modern Western nations offer plenty of ways to get off it.)
     
  6. KayinBlack

    KayinBlack Currently Rebuilding

    Joined:
    2 Jul 2004
    Posts:
    5,644
    Likes Received:
    344
    Shoot? No. if you enterr my house, my infirmity has made me abandon the 8-foot bo staff for a nastier weapon.

    5 feet long, 1 1/2" PVC Schedule 50. Caps are chemically welded on it, it's half filled with buckshot and water. Force multiplier. I could kill with that, but why when I can break both your legs? Especially when I can do it in one shot.

    I have many tens of thousands of dollars of equipment in my house. Some of it is customer PCs. I run my business from here, I have two daughters I would be instantly worried about. I could stand and scrap without them there. With them there, I will take no chances-and in this state, even if I use lethal force, the law is on my side.

    Plans are available for the modified jo staff I have described, just PM.
     
  7. C-Sniper

    C-Sniper Stop Trolling this space Ądmins!

    Joined:
    17 Jun 2007
    Posts:
    3,028
    Likes Received:
    126
    If someone broke into my house and was stealing things, non-violently, I would hold them at gun point and call the authorities. However, if i felt threatened by them, i.e. they charge at me, then I wouldn't hesitate pulling the trigger.

    Property can be replaced, life cannot. If I am about to be attacked and have to fend for my life then I will "watch out for number 1" and make sure I am the one left standing.

    As stated by KayinBlack as well, if I do end up killing someone in my house that has broken in, then the law cannot do a damn thing against me. Huzzah for Castle Law
     
  8. mvagusta

    mvagusta Did a skid that went for two weeks.

    Joined:
    24 Dec 2006
    Posts:
    4,639
    Likes Received:
    523
    I think that a criminal looses any rights for their own safety once he enters someones property without permission.

    Anyone loses their right to life once they threaten the life of anyone else, be it in public or on someone's property.

    But if you find someone in your house, especially with loved ones around, you probably aren't going to be calm and rational in your decision making process!

    So i voted to blame adrenaline.


    ninja edit: and if the intruder uses bad grammar then it's definitely go time! :hehe:
     
  9. Ryu_ookami

    Ryu_ookami I write therefore I suffer.

    Joined:
    11 Mar 2004
    Posts:
    3,326
    Likes Received:
    128
    well thats one advantage you have, if you do it in this country EVEN in self defence and you get imprisoned. this countrys legal system has become a joke a sick sick joke.
     
  10. talladega

    talladega I'm Squidward

    Joined:
    18 Aug 2007
    Posts:
    5,258
    Likes Received:
    495
    i wouldnt kill an intruder unless it was the only option. instead a gun in their face without pulling the trigger and waiting for police is better.
     
  11. Rum&Coke

    Rum&Coke New Member

    Joined:
    23 Apr 2007
    Posts:
    473
    Likes Received:
    14
    So you would say your thousands of dollars worth of equipment are worth more than someone's life

    Part of this is to find out whether people believe castle doctrine is a good thing or bad thing. Would anyone see someone running out the house with laptops/TV in hand, and shoot them?
     
  12. Gunsmith

    Gunsmith Maximum Win

    Joined:
    23 Sep 2005
    Posts:
    9,019
    Likes Received:
    1,358
    with chavs running rampant around where I live, I wouldnt think twice about giving an intruder a ****ing good beating.

    its a shame the law is never on the victims side in the UK :duh:
     
  13. capnPedro

    capnPedro Hacker. Maker. Engineer.

    Joined:
    11 Apr 2007
    Posts:
    4,381
    Likes Received:
    241
    Zoë: Preacher, don't the Bible have some pretty specific things to say about killin'?
    Book: Quite specific. It is, however, somewhat fuzzier on the subject of kneecaps.

    Seriously though, I'm with Gunsmith. A dead chav is a service to society.
     
  14. Ransoman

    Ransoman New Member

    Joined:
    18 Jul 2008
    Posts:
    105
    Likes Received:
    0
    Having been the victem of a Burglary myself, knowing the financial and emotional damage (and my own long term Psycological effects). If this situation came up i would definately use violent force, but i wouldn't kill them. Probably disable them enough to tie-wrap their hands and feet together, then call the police.

    The only time when i would willingly use lethal force is if my GF's life is threatend (or the unmentionable "R" word).
     
  15. Thatguy119

    Thatguy119 Member

    Joined:
    17 Nov 2008
    Posts:
    707
    Likes Received:
    8
    No offence to those who have different beliefs to me, but I find the idea that some people would even consider the question whether it is right to shoot an unarmed man or women posing no danger sickens me. THEY POSE NO DANGER, they have entered your property yes, but what have they done to harm you, tread on your flower beds, knocked over a vase, anything coming close to ending their life it totally unreasonable in my opinion.

    If they were obviously intent upon theft, then using reasonable force to stop and detain them of course, but lethal force? No
     
  16. kenco_uk

    kenco_uk I unsuccessfully then tried again

    Joined:
    28 Nov 2003
    Posts:
    9,696
    Likes Received:
    308
    Boom, headshot. Then I'd sue his family for the cleaning bill and disposal.
     
  17. Rkiver

    Rkiver Cybernetic Spine

    Joined:
    23 Apr 2009
    Posts:
    930
    Likes Received:
    42

    If they are unarmed and pose no actual threat to my family then I would not kill them. Incapacitate them till the cops arrive sure, but kill them? No.

    Sure humans can be scum, but I wont take a life unless it's defending myself or my family from a very real threat.
     
  18. Gunsmith

    Gunsmith Maximum Win

    Joined:
    23 Sep 2005
    Posts:
    9,019
    Likes Received:
    1,358
    and here in the UK his family would sue you for a loss of earnings.

    welcome to the UK justice system, please keep your hands inside the car at all times.
     
  19. RotoSequence

    RotoSequence Lazy Lurker

    Joined:
    6 Jan 2004
    Posts:
    4,588
    Likes Received:
    7
    "Murder" is a rather loaded term, don't you think?

    Still, violent force isn't out of the question if someone violated my sovereignty and stole my goods, armed or not. I wouldn't consciously try to KILL them, but they shouldn't get away with this **** until the police can get around to figuring out who-dunnit. They're an overloaded force as it is.
     
  20. BentAnat

    BentAnat Software Dev

    Joined:
    26 Jun 2008
    Posts:
    7,231
    Likes Received:
    219
    Well. I reckon it's situation dependant.
    If i wake up in the middle of the night go look around the house and see some dude in my kitchen/brother's bedroom/whatever, you can rest assured i am in my groggy state ot gonna ask any questions. It's gun out and fire away. Law here dictates one warning shot if he's in your garden. In your house, none needed.
    There's advice floating around here that says "if you're going to shoot at someone, shoot once, shoot to kill"
    Shooting for wounding WILL result in the wounded person pressing charges against you (and you know the legal system is f**** enough to let him get away with that, provided he has a good enough lawyer). Shooting a second shot would mean that one shot was premeditated.

    On my yard, i'd probably not hoot at the person... in my house, i would. Anyone in my house without my consent and/or knowledge is a threat, is trespassing, and as such qualifies as a danger to me and those i love.
     

Share This Page