self/property defense

[cheygriz]

All states allow you to use deadly force to defenf your life, or the life of another innocent person.

Some (few) states allow deadly force in defense of property.

Which do you think is correct?

 

[buck460XVR]

........aint no amount of material property worth another person life. Eye for an eye, tooth for a tooth, Saab for a Saab.


I have no problem with the taking of someones life in defense of mine or an innocents victim life.

 

[PotatoJudge]

Imagine unarmed drugies breaking in to raid an old lady's medicine cabinet. Sometimes defending property is defending someone's life.

 

[psyopspec]

Property generally isn't worth killing over, but in situations like those identified by Potato, where there is the slightest reason to believe that the criminal may be willing to kill, the law ought err on the side of the shooter.

 

[Avenger29]

Let's put it this way- I don't shed any tears over criminals who die while trying to steal property. Your property is part of your life. You worked to earn the money to get your property, giving up part of your life in the process.

 

[Mr White]

I'd shoot if there was a threat of violence.

 

[RCouch]

Very speculative, but if the bad guys of the world (take an area like Houston) always knew that civilians or even LEO's were never going to shoot because of a written or unwritten rule about not shooting when only property was involved, then there would be no deterrant to theft. At some point you have to defend what is yours or eventually lose everything.

 

[SoCalShooter]

I think you should be able to use deadly force to defend life and property, and to defend the life and property of your neighbor in need.

 

[Hokkmike]

If somebody is in your house in the dark of night how are you supposed to know their intentions? Tatically, why give yourself away by yelling leave now or I'll shoot? Still, I guess that would be the best things to do!

 

[Titan6]

A poll after my own heart. I predict that vast numbers of High Road folk including at least half the mods are all about blowing people away over property. And good for them it is their hard earned stuff after all...

I could say a lot about all the typos and spelling errors in the original post but I actually prefer it that way. It really gives a good idea of the mindset of the thread poster.

Let's see you left out a category. What about property that the loss thereby would likely result in great physical personal harm or death of self or others? Say, an Iraqi stealing a hummer so he can use it later in a bombing or raid.

I suppose in that case it would be fully justified. But if we are talking about shooting the dude in the back that just ran off with my lawn mower, nah I can get another mower and that is one less bad dream I have to have at 3am for years on end.

 

[TCB in TN]

I do not plan on shooting anyone over a pc. of property, but on the other hand....... I live in an area where most folks are armed, and for someone to come into my home, with that knowledge, means that they are more than likely willing to risk that and possibly worse. If I can safely extracate my family and myself from a situation like that then I would still propably not shoot, if there is any doubt, well you get the idea. But I should have the right to defend my property whether I choose to or not.

 

[TCB in TN]

I could say a lot about all the typos and spelling errors in the original post but I actually prefer it that way. It really gives a good idea of the mindset of the thread poster.

Chill out dude, this is not High road! Besides this is the internet, and last time I checked it is not a formal form of media. I have a hard time understanding people who bash others for poor spelling, grammar, etc in a form of communications that uses "Smilies"!

 

[BigBlock]

Let's put it this way- I don't shed any tears over criminals who die while trying to steal property.

Bingo. You decide to steal something, you're also taking the risk of getting shot. Just like I don't feel sorry for people doing stupid stunts that go wrong, I wouldn't feel the slightest bit of remorse shooting a verified bad guy for any reason, so long as it's legal.

 

[johncolo]

an Iraqi stealing a hummer so he can use it later in a bombing or raid" I take offence to this Ive seen it hear and at other fourms giving all iraqies or muslims our here to kill us you people are judging people by there color not there actions just because a few of them our bad doesnt mean they all are If I wanted to be like you I could say whites are all nazi and there the evil of this world or all blacks are ni--ers its just a flat out lie im sure you like to lock them all up in a jail somewhere to like they did to the japs during ww2 come on people its the year 2007 stop being so ****ing racist

 

[Dustinthewind]

An eye for an eye makes us all blind.

Mahatma Ghandi

I would rather lose some possessions than my ability to sleep peacefully at night.

 

[Ron James]

If you shoot only in defence of property, and not the threat of harm or violence to yourself or others not only are you no better than those that would steal your property, you will be sharing a cell with them. That may be wrong, but that's the way the boat floats. I've worked all my life for what I have, but nothing I own is worth taking another's life and having to live with it. And before someone says wussy, I have killed in the service of my country, and served 26 years to uphold our constitution. I didn't serve for someone to misuse any part of it. Thats the way my boat floats. The most uncommon thing is common sense.

 

[Mr White]

What we would actually do and what we say we will do on a public forum might not always be the same.

 

[Titan6]

Johncolo- Gosh I did not know I was a racist. Maybe you should read some of my other posts before you jump to such a ludicrous conclusion. But I have been to the middle east a few times. So let me see Iranian, Syrian, Jordanian, does not matter. If someone were stealing my hummer in the middle east I would automatically make the assumption they were going to use it later to try to kill me or my fellow servicemen with it. If you want to call this racist go ahead, I call this smart.

 

[JWarren]

I will use lethal force to defend my life, my loved ones lives, and my property. In my state, the law supports this.

I feel that is one is willing to steal, they assume the risk of that choice. Understanding that your life may be forfeit for it is in itself a deterrent.


John

 

[BigBlock]

If you shoot only in defence of property, and not the threat of harm or violence to yourself or others not only are you no better than those that would steal your property, you will be sharing a cell with them.

Not really. There are plenty of places where it's legal to shoot somebody over property. In OR, where I am, I am free to shoot anybody who has made unauthorized entry into my home, whether they are armed/threatening, or not.

Now, I would probably either injure them or hold them at gun point until the police arrive, but if I had to shoot them, I see absolutely nothing wrong with that. As far as I'm concerned, theives are worthless, their lives count for nothing, and anything that happens to them is ok by me. They made the choice to become a theif.

 

[JWarren]

If you shoot only in defence of property, and not the threat of harm or violence to yourself or others not only are you no better than those that would steal your property...

No better that the thief???

I would not be the on initiating an illegal, immoral, and selfish act. I would be responding to willful harm being done to me.

I'm sorry, but I work too hard for what I have. AND I have a lot of things that cannot be replaced-- heirlooms.

In December, my home was burgularized while I was at work. I lost the Remington 700 that my grandfather gave me right before he died. This was his favorite rifle. I also lost a Remington 1100 my father got me for my 15th birthday. Irreplacable.

I am fortunate that they did not see other things of value in my home that have been passed down to me.

Ask me if I value these things more than a piece of social trash who choosed to take from honest people....

John

 

[clt46910]

Some of the posters feel that the criminal has rights to life. So it seems all they have to do is kick in your door, yelling "I am only here to steal your TV, not going to harm anyone"

You can helplessly watch him carry out your TV while snatching up the remote on the way out. How long do you think it will take the rest of the scum learn you are easy? You will soon have lots of visitors just wanting to steal you stuff. Because the police are not going to post a cop at your front door.

Remember he declared his intentions not to hurt anyone so you and your family are not at risk. But it is not worth taking his life for the few things he and his friends will carry out the front door while you sit there.:banghead:

 

[Ala Dan]

Your LIFE, or the LIFE of a loved one = YES

Property is a material thing not worthy of taking anothers LIFE too defend~!

 

[vis-à-vis]

I would shoot to kill someone if they were trying to rob me of my house (arson for instance). My house is integral to my survival. I consider a home invasion a personal threat and would use deadly force in that instance. KY state law has a provision for defending one's property with lethal force and I agree with it. I would not, however, kill someone over my car. If they were using what would be construed as lethal force to take it from me, then yes I will do so but only insofar as I am protecting myself.

 

[Titan6]

J Warren- They probably couldn't carry anything else off. I hope you bought a bigger, better gun safe. If they saw your stuff they probably will be back.


'Sigh' - It is too bad people read so poorly these days. I blame the schools.

Let's see breaking and entering and burglary are very different crimes than property theft. Kind of like Armed Robbery is different from shop lifting. I know, I know many of you can not tell the difference with that either but I can't help that. Any time someone enters a dwelling illegally that is not their own they do so with the full knowledge that they may meet the legal occupants. They already have a plan be it kill you, run away, beat you up whatever... You have no way of knowing that plan or intent or the capability to carry it out. This is why in most states you are well within your rights to defend yourself within your dwelling with deadly force. This is fair and reasonable in my mind.