"Reasonable limits" on self defense

Sep 2017
4,884
5,805
Massachusetts
#81
I suppose it's a cultural thing, in some ways...

I am from Caucasus, I remember how it is there, no matter which nation or republic, or whether among Muslims or Orthodox Christians, they all follow the tribal Law of the Mountains. A man who enters another's home without permission essentially forfeits his life, over there. If it is, at least, the home of someone of your own clan, you may be spared. But if it is the home of a family from another clan you invade, you will indeed likely be killed. Police will probably not even be called, they do not get involved in such issues over there, especially in the rural areas, where the people have own ways of justice... A man over there is a warrior, a defender of his home, of his wife, and his children, above all else...

Practically a baby, but already with own kinjal (dagger)... That's Abkhazia, where I grew up lol

I left my home at about 11; but I also lived among many other Caucasians in Moscow too, and my upbringing thus stayed with me. And, in a way, still does.

I do see your point, and if a person poses me and my family no actual physical danger, I'd like to say I wouldn't also do any drastic to them in return. But, I honestly, I cannot say that. Until, God forbid, I am in that situation, I have no idea how I would react...
I'm not certain what I'd do in that circumstance, but I suspect that if my family were home, I'd be quick to resort to deadly force, whereas if it were just me, I'd be quick to simply leave and call the cops. Do I really want to live the rest of my life knowing I killed a man, all so I'm spared having to pay the deductible on my homeowner's insurance if my goods aren't recovered? Hell no!
 

Ian Jeffrey

Council Hall
Mar 2013
72,228
40,317
Vulcan, down the street from Darth Vader
#82
No, I'm very clearly not arguing that. Here, maybe this will help you to think it through more clearly. Imagine for a moment someone has been stealing some soda I keep in the fridge for myself at work. I've put a note on it telling the unknown thief it's mine and demanding that he stops, but still a little goes missing every few days. So, I lace the soda with poison, resulting in the death of the thieving coworker. Should I be allowed to get away with that, legally? Assuming you say no, would it be accurate to say that by making that claim you're saying the coworker had the right to steal my soda?

Presumably you can see that it's possible for you to simultaneously believe that the coworker had no right to take my soda, and that I had no right to kill him for it. Well, in the same way, it's possible to simultaneously believe that a home intruder had no right to enter your home against your will, and that you don't have a right to kill him for doing it (if you have the option to safely retreat).

Now, granted, attempted burglary is a more serious crime than petty theft, but the point isn't to say the crime are equal -- just to illustrate the non-sequitur of treating a rejection of the death penalty for a crime as if it were saying people should be able to get away with the crime.
None of your analogies work, though, precisely because the fact patterns are different and non-comparable.
 
Sep 2017
4,884
5,805
Massachusetts
#83
None of your analogies work, though, precisely because the fact patterns are different and non-comparable.
If you're unwilling to think about it from another angle, I'm at a loss. It's not like I can simply give you a sense of morality. If you value property within a home more than you value human life, simply on the basis of that property being in a home at the time, I guess it's a fundamental difference of values. For me, there's nothing magical about placing a trinket within a home, as opposed to any other building on the planet, that suddenly makes it outrank human life.
 

Ian Jeffrey

Council Hall
Mar 2013
72,228
40,317
Vulcan, down the street from Darth Vader
#84
If you're unwilling to think about it from another angle, I'm at a loss. It's not like I can simply give you a sense of morality.
I have plenty of sense of morality, thank you very much. We disagree, and I am fine with that.
If you value property within a home more than you value human life...
That is not the issue, and I have never said that one may kill another person to protect a small item of personal property, and it is disingenuous at best to suggest that I have. What I am saying is that a person in his own may protect that property with reasonable force (and no more), such that if the intruder escalates the homeowner may respond with like force rather than be required to retreat from his home.
 
Sep 2017
4,884
5,805
Massachusetts
#85
I have plenty of sense of morality, thank you very much. We disagree, and I am fine with that.
I didn't mean to suggest you didn't. I'm just trying to get at the fact that we have a fundamental difference of moral opinion on the relative values of life and property and/or the sanctity of the home. For me, the ephemeral psychological harm of having to retreat from your home and letting the police work it out is much smaller than the harm of killing someone.
 
Jul 2018
775
871
North Carolina
#86
I do see your point, and if a person poses me and my family no actual physical danger, I'd like to say I wouldn't also do any drastic to them in return. But, I honestly, I cannot say that. Until, God forbid, I am in that situation, I have no idea how I would react...
That’s a fair / good point. Nobody knows exactly how they would behave in that type situation. Sure, I would HOPE that I would also have good / sound judgement in that predicament if it ever happened.

That said anybody who invades my house definitely presents a physical danger / threat IMO. The only way they are no longer a danger / threat is if they have surrendered or retreated (fled) from my home. Then no harm will come to them .

I do know we have beat the the living HELL out of this dead horse on this thread huh? :oops:;)
9215E04E-C48B-4168-A0A2-1EC9764B0B13.jpeg

GOOD STUFF though IMO. :cool:


My 2 cents.
 
Jul 2011
3,414
4,966
UK/Australia
#88
I have plenty of sense of morality, thank you very much. We disagree, and I am fine with that.

That is not the issue, and I have never said that one may kill another person to protect a small item of personal property, and it is disingenuous at best to suggest that I have. What I am saying is that a person in his own may protect that property with reasonable force (and no more), such that if the intruder escalates the homeowner may respond with like force rather than be required to retreat from his home.
Ian, I know you to be far too reasonable and moral a person to advocate taking the life of anyone who is not legally entitled to be within your premises. I have agreed with Arkady thus far, because the moral code he espouses regarding the taking of life is in accord with the values of most civilised societies.

I suspect you two are on much the same page, but are addressing different aspects of the situation. The crux of the matter (as you have quite rightly pointed out,) is encompassed in the term 'reasonable force'.

The question of 'rights' is a vexed one in your society - where this concept seemingly takes precedence over all other practical considerations - and Arkady appears to be saying that adhering to a conceptual 'right' is not worth a human life - the homeowners, or the burglars. And to kill a would-be burglar, in circumstances where he is not threatening your life, is to rob him of his right to life. So, whilst I appreciate your measured and reasoned approach to dealing with someone who has illegally entered your premises - I have no choice but to agree with Arkady.

To clarify my position - if a burglar is armed and points a gun at you (or threatens you with a knife,) you would have every right to defend your life by shooting him. However, if you interrupt said burglar in the course of his felonious activities, and he attempts to flee - no legal system should protect you from a charge of murder, should you kill him, or assault and grievous bodily harm, should you seriously injure him.
 
Likes: Arkady
Sep 2017
4,884
5,805
Massachusetts
#89
That’s a fair / good point. Nobody knows exactly how they would behave in that type situation. Sure, I would HOPE that I would also have good / sound judgement in that predicament if it ever happened.

That said anybody who invades my house definitely presents a physical danger / threat IMO. The only way they are no longer a danger / threat is if they have surrendered or retreated (fled) from my home. Then no harm will come to them .

I do know we have beat the the living HELL out of this dead horse on this thread huh? :oops:;)
View attachment 17343

GOOD STUFF though IMO. :cool:


My 2 cents.
Until the horse's corpse has been thoroughly pureed, I just can't help myself.
 
Likes: Akosikojak