Would you kill someone to defend your property?

[GraceAbounds]

I don't feel I can answer this with any measure of objectivity, and also, that my answer may be a little more than bitter.

I am a South African, which means that unless I want to spend my life in prison (away from my child and husband ~ the very people I live for), I don't actually have the choice of killing an intruder.

You see, under South African law, even if someone has a gun to your head... if you shoot them, charges WILL be laid and you WILL go to prison.

Fantastic for a country where they MURDER you for nothing more than a cellphone, or as little as the equivalent of $1. A country where 'petty' criminals get released for no other reason than over crowding in prisons. A country where there is more emphasis placed on the "human rights" of a criminal, rapist, murderer, than is placed on the human rights of their victims. We don't speak about "if" we will be affected by crime... we speak of "when" we will be affected.

That is the way all country's are going to end up if certain folks have their way. Criminals will be more protected than the victims. Thanks for posting your experience.

 

[TheOriginalJames]

I'd seriously rather get them in prison, than actually kill them, for that.

My point is this; They're breaking into your house, and you don't know what they're capable of. So if they find you they may not want to go back to prison so they'll do anything they can to keep from being caught; including getting rid of YOU, the owner of that house.

It's funny, because most likely 50% of the time they don't give two shits what happens to you while they're robbing you, your compassion for their life seems to be a hell of a lot stronger than any compassion they have for your life.

Make sense?

You can sit back and say 'no no I'd just beat the shit out of them' all you want, but when it comes down to it, I don't believe for one minute at all that you wouldn't do everything you can to ensure your life is protected over theirs.

So what should a court be able to pass as punishment for someone found guilty of breaking into a house then? Lock them up for the rest of their life or give them the death penalty? After all they will only go out and rob people again when the're released, according to you.:smiley24:

I'm not even talking about them robbing you of something quickly, getting caught and going to jail. If I'm home and I'm forced to confront a guy who doesn't care about my life, I'm going to do everything in my power to make sure my life is protected.

My life > some petty bastard thief who's breaking into my house.

 

[All Else Failed]

Alright. I said I would post when I had time. So here it is. Also, this is not what I believe to generally be right as a rule. I am answering the question "Would you kill someone to defend your property." That said, I am not speaking legally either.

What I was saying earlier to Peter was only a tangential part of my full response. Many people have suggested that a human life is more valuable than any object or material property. My response will largely stand in opposition to that viewpoint, as it pertains to me.

There have been distinctions made between harm towards your person and harm towards your property, whereby lethal defense is noble in one case and not in the other. In my estimation these two are one in the same. I'll try my best to explain with two Scenarios.

Scenario 1. A man breaks into my house and I catch him. He's armed with a pistol and intends to shoot me. Now, regardless of what happens, I face personal damage by any definition. I may never be able to ride my bicycle, race cars, or shoot hoops ever again. In this scenario, I believe most of you will agree that I would be justified in defending myself. Fine.

Scenario 2. A man breaks into my house with the sole intention to steal my car. Like the first man, he will still be depriving me of something that is rightfully mine.

The common misconception is that it is something that can be replaced. Rest assured this is not the case. It's true that another car can be bought, but there is more that factors into a vehicle, or any other property than just spending money. The cash used to buy the first car didn't materialize from thin air. It was paid for for by the time I spent at a job that I've fought hard for. That time lost can never be repaid. There is no restitution in Justice for time lost, because the nature of Justice is reactive, not proactive. Even if justice through the proper authorities is served, I will not be compensated for that part of my life lost.

My analysis of Scenario 2 does not even weigh in the psychological damage caused by having your belongings stripped from you. When I was 15 I was on my way to a bus stop and I was cornered while walking through a parking garage by two Koreans and a black guy. They only hit me twice. But for days I felt violated, picturing their hands in my mind rifling through my pockets to strip me of $32, my school bag, and all my books. I had to walk home. They didn't even leave me enough for my bus fare. The punches hurt for hours, but having things taken away from me hurt for much longer.

I see no difference between defending myself and defending my valuables. Taking away my property is depriving me of a standard of living I have worked hard and justly to maintain. I will fight to the death if necessary to protect that standard, which I have invested so much time and effort into. The value of any man's life who wished to deprive me of my standard of living is zero in my eyes.

Are you really willing to risk your life over a car? You won't need that car if you get shot over it, so I don't really think it would make sense to die over something that CAN BE REPLACED even though you say it would...."deprave you" of something. Thats like, a whole new level of materialism.

 

[Peter Parka]

I was more worried that he keeps his car in the house, to be honest! I wonder how he gets in through the front door?

 

[BreakfastSurreal]

just FYI...these people are the across the street neighbors of my parents. This is the neighborhood I used to live in, its very nice, and I personally know the guy who shot the robber. I think he might have jumped the gun, but you never know what you will do in a situation like that until it happens to you. I think he was being a good neighbor.

 

[All Else Failed]

just FYI...these people are the across the street neighbors of my parents. This is the neighborhood I used to live in, its very nice, and I personally know the guy who shot the robber. I think he might have jumped the gun, but you never know what you will do in a situation like that until it happens to you. I think he was being a good neighbor.

Um, he murdered unarmed men.

 

[teh_fuzz]

i owuld have no problem in putting a few slugs into someone if I felt my home, wife and or kids were in danger.

 

[COOL_BREEZE2]

Um, he murdered unarmed men.

Um, what were the men on his property going to do?

 

[HisHoliness]

Are you really willing to risk your life over a car? You won't need that car if you get shot over it, so I don't really think it would make sense to die over something that CAN BE REPLACED even though you say it would...."deprave you" of something. Thats like, a whole new level of materialism.

I'm not adding the risk of my life. That's already present, since I don't know what the intruder is capable of. Instead, he is risking his life. It's a risk any person should calculate before deciding to commit a crime against another. And it can't be replaced, even if you type in all caps.

 

[Dodge_Sniper]

You aren't very clear on this question. First you state it as if you are only killing to safeguard property. Then you talk about them being in your house... two different things IMO

If it was just to safeguard my property, then no. He's not right for taking my stuff (it can be replaced) and I'm not right in taking his life over it (That cannot be replaced) I don't care how you slice it up, if you kill him over your belongings, then you have just put a pretty low price on his life. I couldn't do that.

Now if he's in my house and my life or others are threatened, then it's a different story. I would kill to protect my family.

I have to agree. You can replace the stuff, not the person. If they're just stealing, then no, I wouldn't kill the person. Rough 'em up a bit, sure, but not kill. But if family members are in danger, then it's a different story entirely.

 

[teh_fuzz]

I've heard the audio from the 911 call the guy made while the whole thing happened.

and he CLEARLY states something along the lines "Ok you see this here? this is my gun" you can clearly hear the shotgun being cocked, then he warns them again to not move, and then he shoots.

If you were confronted with a gun and were doing nothing wrong why the hell would you move after seeing the guy with a shotgun pointed at you? More than that why would the guy simply shoot 2 dudes for the hell of it, and call the police on the matter?

point is the guys were breaking the law, and unless anyone else was there the argument could be that he thought they were coming for him een after being warned.

The two men were breaking the law and knew what they were doing is wrong as well as dangerous. Im my book give the old man a key to the city!

To make things worse some local activist douche bag is already screaming for attention calling it an act of hate against 2 black men... Mind you the fact that they were breaking the law.

 

[COOL_BREEZE2]

:homo:

 

[GraceAbounds]

I'm not adding the risk of my life. That's already present, since I don't know what the intruder is capable of. Instead, he is risking his life. It's a risk any person should calculate before deciding to commit a crime against another. And it can't be replaced, even if you type in all caps.

:clap Agree'd.

 

[TheOriginalJames]

My car cannot be replaced. It's not just a 2000 Civic Si. It's MY 2000 Civic Si.

Its got my stereo in it, I know all it's problems, it's got my modifications on it and I'm used to this specific car. I've shelled out thousands of my hard earned dollars for it, and I'll be damned if I'm going to let it go if I can put an end to the robbery in progress.

 

[All Else Failed]

Um, what were the men on his property going to do?

If we're talking about the neighbor that killed the two robbers, they weren't on his property.

 

[All Else Failed]

I'm not adding the risk of my life. That's already present, since I don't know what the intruder is capable of. Instead, he is risking his life. It's a risk any person should calculate before deciding to commit a crime against another. And it can't be replaced, even if you type in all caps.

Both parties are risking theirs lives in that situation. The best thing for you to do is to try and not compound it by going gun ho on them.

Anything material can be replaced.

 

[All Else Failed]

My car cannot be replaced. It's not just a 2000 Civic Si. It's MY 2000 Civic Si.

Its got my stereo in it, I know all it's problems, it's got my modifications on it and I'm used to this specific car. I've shelled out thousands of my hard earned dollars for it, and I'll be damned if I'm going to let it go if I can put an end to the robbery in progress.

you're really willing putting your own life in front of a material thing? So if you get shot in the face and die from trying to protect something YOU CAN REPLACE (I don't care if you have some sort of sentimental value towards it, it can be replaced) the car isn't worth much anymore to you, is it? You're dead.

 

[COOL_BREEZE2]

If we're talking about the neighbor that killed the two robbers, they weren't on his property.

Let me re-phrase that.

Um, and what were they going to do on the property that did not belong to them?

 

[All Else Failed]

Let me re-phrase that.

Um, and what were they going to do on the property that did not belong to them?

They were obviously stealing things. That doesn't mean they deserved to be murdered.

 

[Tim]

If it isn't okay for the cops to show up and gun these guys down for robbing this house, then why is it okay for this guy to do it?