No property is worth a life?

This is a discussion on No property is worth a life? within the Off Topic & Humor Discussion forums, part of the The Back Porch category; Originally Posted by Guantes Sometimes in my efforts to be succinct I am not as complete as I should be to make my thoughts clear. ...

Page 3 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast
Results 31 to 45 of 59
Like Tree44Likes

Thread: No property is worth a life?

  1. #31
    Distinguished Member Array DefConGun's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    Kentucky
    Posts
    1,670
    Quote Originally Posted by Guantes View Post
    Sometimes in my efforts to be succinct I am not as complete as I should be to make my thoughts clear.

    If I determined that he had broken into my car (Burglary possibly Grand Theft - both felonies) I would confront him with a drawn gun. I would not go out and play Octagon with him. Lethal force is allowed to prevent a felony where I live, although I would not use it merely to prevent a theft. I would also not shoot him if he ran.

    As to the escalation of force. If he produced a weapon, I would probably shoot him. That would depend on the weapon. With a contact weapon, time and distance permitting, I "might" try ordering him to drop it before shooting. If he produced a firearm I would shoot him. I believe that any escalation of his part would rise to the level justifying lethal force. I suppose it is possible that he might charge and attempt an unarmed attack. In many, many arrests at gunpoint, I have never had an unarmed suspect attempt an unarmed attack against a drawn gun. If such an extremely rare instance occurred, I would determine what I thought was appropriate action at the time.

    As to your second to last paragraph, that will depend on the statutes where you live.

    I think that I covered everything.
    You did cover everything. Thank you for your clarification and input. I'll have to check the statutes where I am and check into the legalities of preventing a felony or if stealing a car here is considered a felony.

    Thanks again,
    DCG

  2. Remove Ads

  3. #32
    VIP Member Array Guantes's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    Idaho
    Posts
    5,272
    You might also want to check your statutes re force allowed in a private person's/citizens arrest, if you have such. It could also be relevant.
    "I do what I do." Cpl 'coach' Bowden, "Southern Comfort".

  4. #33
    Distinguished Member Array DefConGun's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    Kentucky
    Posts
    1,670
    Quote Originally Posted by Guantes View Post
    You might also want to check your statutes re force allowed in a private person's/citizens arrest, if you have such. It could also be relevant.
    Thanks for the heads up. I'm not sure if I can use force in KY to stop a car theft because the example in our class addressed car theft specifically and this is where we talked about getting into an altercation and you not being allowed to shoot someone if they get the better of you in a fight. Basically the way it was explained to us is; someone could vandalize your car in your driveway and you can't shoot them but if they are trying to burn a building down in your backyard then you can shoot them. I get the gist of how this law is structured but when you look at it like that, it is the property the justifies a shooting and not value. My car is worth alot more than some old buildings that I have in my back yard. According to the way our law is, I can't shoot someone for burning up my $40,000 Lexus (not that I have one) but I could shoot him for burning up a building in my backyard that's probably not worth a couple of hundred dollars....its a little crazy in a way. I realize these are the laws in my state and your state's laws probably vary in flavor. I'll look into it like you suggested though.

    Thanks,
    DCG

  5. #34
    Distinguished Member Array DefConGun's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    Kentucky
    Posts
    1,670
    Quote Originally Posted by atctimmy View Post
    That is exactly how I feel about it. Three strikes and you're out!

    Frankly, IF IT WERE LEGAL I would have no qualms about shooting someone for stealing my property. I wouldn't lose any sleep over it either. The way I see it I trade my time (life) for compensation. I use the money I am compensated to purchase property. Be it a home, a car or other item, I have traded a portion of my life away to obtain that item. I think I should be allowed to defend my property with any amount of force I so choose. Death SHOULD be an occupational hazard for criminals.

    Since it's not legal I will adhere to the laws of my state to the best of my ability.
    I've read this argument before on this forum and its a well thought out one but I'm not sure if it stands up to validity. Logically speaking, the argument says that you trade a portion of your life for said property and for taking said property, you are entitled to a life. I'm not so convinced that this is justice as much as it is vengeance. If you traded, for example, 5 years of your life to work for your car/truck and someone steals it, then is it fair to take 40 or more years that a person may have left of their life for the 5 years they took from you? I'm sure a rebuttal can include a rationale like; you are out of the first 5 years it took you to pay for the first car and now your are out of another 5 that it will take you to purchase another, not to mention other inconveniences that the matter costs you, etc. That is fair and I even agree with the logic of the matter. I'm still not convinced that the value of a life can be summed up so succinctly though.

    Without getting into what God or god/s that everyone worships, I am attractive to Old testament justice. If a man steals your property, then the thief is required to pay you back 5 or 10 fold depending on what it is, etc. If he has no means of paying you back then he is basically made into your indentured servant until the debt is paid off. If a thief takes a life, however, then he must repay with his life.

    I believe that if we went back to this way of justice then we definitely would not face an over population of prisons and all of the garbage that comes from that mess. A downside admittedly is; what if the criminal is dangerous and you don't want him/her around your family and this disqualifies him/her from being your personal bondservant. In matters like this, I still see no reason as to why you couldn't garnish his wages until he has paid back his debt to you.

    Just my .02 for what it's worth.

  6. #35
    VIP Member Array Guantes's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    Idaho
    Posts
    5,272
    Glockman10MM, being a Kentucky lawman, might be able to shed some light on your questions.
    "I do what I do." Cpl 'coach' Bowden, "Southern Comfort".

  7. #36
    Distinguished Member Array DefConGun's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    Kentucky
    Posts
    1,670
    Quote Originally Posted by Guantes View Post
    Glockman10MM, being a Kentucky lawman, might be able to shed some light on your questions.
    Agreed. I'm surprised that I haven't already seen him post on this thread yet. I haven't seen him post for a few days now. Maybe he has and I haven't noticed. Either way, I hope he's alright.

  8. #37
    VIP Member
    Array atctimmy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    NSA Headquarters
    Posts
    6,370
    Quote Originally Posted by DefConGun View Post
    I've read this argument before on this forum and its a well thought out one but I'm not sure if it stands up to validity. Logically speaking, the argument says that you trade a portion of your life for said property and for taking said property, you are entitled to a life. I'm not so convinced that this is justice as much as it is vengeance. If you traded, for example, 5 years of your life to work for your car/truck and someone steals it, then is it fair to take 40 or more years that a person may have left of their life for the 5 years they took from you? I'm sure a rebuttal can include a rationale like; you are out of the first 5 years it took you to pay for the first car and now your are out of another 5 that it will take you to purchase another, not to mention other inconveniences that the matter costs you, etc. That is fair and I even agree with the logic of the matter. I'm still not convinced that the value of a life can be summed up so succinctly though.
    I did not say anything about entitlement. I simply stated that I would not lose sleep if I shot someone while they were stealing my truck (or other high dollar item). Just to add in here again this is only if it were legal to do so. I think where you and I differ is on the value of a thief's life. I place that value at zero while my truck has five years of labor/value in it to me.

    I think the real question is, if we are able to stop a thief in the act, WHY CAN'T WE? Why am I required by law to allow them to get away? It makes no sense to me at all. It is a law that purely protects criminals during the commission of crimes.

    I also think you miss the fact that a thief will steal from someone else the next night and the next...and so on until stopped by a prison sentence or a bullet. I, like Ted, prefer dead offenders to repeat offenders. Also, don't forget about the deterrent factor. People would be less likely to commit a theft if they knew there was a high probability of being killed in the process.
    Last edited by atctimmy; September 13th, 2011 at 07:46 PM.
    Mark Twain:
    The government is merely a servant -- merely a temporary servant; it cannot be its prerogative to determine what is right and what is wrong, and decide who is a
    patriot and who isn't. Its function is to obey orders, not originate them.

  9. #38
    Distinguished Member Array 21bubba's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    ky.
    Posts
    1,890
    Quote Originally Posted by DefConGun View Post
    Thanks for the heads up. I'm not sure if I can use force in KY to stop a car theft because the example in our class addressed car theft specifically and this is where we talked about getting into an altercation and you not being allowed to shoot someone if they get the better of you in a fight. Basically the way it was explained to us is; someone could vandalize your car in your driveway and you can't shoot them but if they are trying to burn a building down in your backyard then you can shoot them. I get the gist of how this law is structured but when you look at it like that, it is the property the justifies a shooting and not value. My car is worth alot more than some old buildings that I have in my back yard. According to the way our law is, I can't shoot someone for burning up my $40,000 Lexus (not that I have one) but I could shoot him for burning up a building in my backyard that's probably not worth a couple of hundred dollars....its a little crazy in a way. I realize these are the laws in my state and your state's laws probably vary in flavor. I'll look into it like you suggested though.

    Thanks,
    DCG
    At neither CCW class ( went with my daughter for her's) I've attend was I told this," you not being allowed to shoot someone if they get the better of you in a fight".
    I believe either you or your instructor are mistaken.

  10. #39
    Distinguished Member Array DefConGun's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    Kentucky
    Posts
    1,670
    Quote Originally Posted by 21bubba View Post
    At neither CCW class ( went with my daughter for her's) I've attend was I told this," you not being allowed to shoot someone if they get the better of you in a fight".
    I believe either you or your instructor are mistaken.
    Interesting. I'm trying to look up some statutes to familiarize myself so that I'll have a better idea about these matters. If you can find the statutes that can either confirm or debunk the matter of being able to shoot someone that gets the better of you in a fight, I'll be most appreciative. I'm going to try to do the same. I've found some statutes but I'm going to have to do some more digging before I'll have a better idea. Once I have some statutes, I'll be sure to post - if I can find anything. Its getting late though so its not going to happen tonight.

    DCG

  11. #40
    VIP Member Array Guantes's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    Idaho
    Posts
    5,272
    Remember, when researching, that is is not merely a fight, but a fight wherein you are attempting to stop criminal/felonious activity.
    "I do what I do." Cpl 'coach' Bowden, "Southern Comfort".

  12. #41
    Administrator
    Array SIXTO's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    Ohio
    Posts
    19,665
    Personally, I think any nogoodnik should or could be shot on sight. I'd have no problem with that. However that is not the world be live in, nor it is the rules we are dealt. I can't think of a single piece of property I own that is worth getting in a shooting over. Its not that I wouldn't want to, heck, maybe I actually would... but it it truly worth it all things considered? No, its not. Castle Doctrine or whatever state law you want to debate with it doesn't matter. If I shoot to save my car, I can pretty much promise its going to cost me far more than the cars worth and a heck of a lot more than my insurance deductible to shoot the car thief. Bottom line is, it just isn't worth it. The personal satisfaction might be though.
    "Just blame Sixto"

  13. #42
    Distinguished Member Array DefConGun's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    Kentucky
    Posts
    1,670
    Quote Originally Posted by Guantes View Post
    Remember, when researching, that is is not merely a fight, but a fight wherein you are attempting to stop criminal/felonious activity.
    Gotcha. Important distinction. Thanks. ;-)

  14. #43
    VIP Member Array Guantes's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    Idaho
    Posts
    5,272
    Sixto,

    You make good points, worthy of consideration by everyone.
    "I do what I do." Cpl 'coach' Bowden, "Southern Comfort".

  15. #44
    Senior Moderator
    Array HotGuns's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    Arkansas
    Posts
    14,842
    I personally think that hanging thieves would be more of a detterent than shooting them.

    Shooting them is just so sudden and quick and few people if any would witness it.

    At least hanging them in public would give their buddies pause... if only for a moment, the next time they tried to steal something.
    I would rather stand against the cannons of the wicked than against the prayers of the righteous.


    AR. CHL Instr. 07/02 FFL
    Like custom guns and stuff? Check this out...
    http://bobbailey1959.wordpress.com/

  16. #45
    VIP Member
    Array atctimmy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    NSA Headquarters
    Posts
    6,370
    I sense that I'm being mocked.
    Mark Twain:
    The government is merely a servant -- merely a temporary servant; it cannot be its prerogative to determine what is right and what is wrong, and decide who is a
    patriot and who isn't. Its function is to obey orders, not originate them.

Page 3 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast

Links

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

Search tags for this page

concealed carry

Click on a term to search for related topics.