Go back
Defending our homes, right or wrong?

Defending our homes, right or wrong?

Debates

shavixmir
Lord

Sewers of Holland

Joined
31 Jan 04
Moves
89792
Clock
19 May 04
Vote Up
Vote Down

Originally posted by Brother Edwin
I value my possesions over the life of a intruder.
If he/she ignores the law then I dont see why I have to obey it.
Huh?

Let me get this straight. You prefer your stamp collection (or warhammer collection in my case) over the life of someone else? You'd rather have someone die, their family suffer that inconvience, than being robbed?
Are you sure?

Everytime my car gets broken into and they steal my radio, I'm on the verge of mass-destruction. Just ask anyone who knows me. It's like I'm a centitaur (as sort of bull) and someone has just pulled the red cloak of +1 anger over my eyes. I lose it completely.
Seriously, I've been arrested over my anger on this issue.
Anyway, when push comes to shove. It's my fucking radio! Don't fucking touch it. (excuse the language, but it does have a point).
BUT
BUT
BUT
To seriously kill someone over it....HELLO....
That someone probably needs drugs. Who makes drugs unavailable? The government does.
etc. etc. etc.

As for killing people in case they are murderers....DUDE...
What on the world would make you fear killers? Do you know how many people are killed annually in the west? Do you know how many people are destroyed in car accidents? Maybe you should go out and burn cars instead! Make the world a safer place.

I'll give you a hint whilst I'm at it. When you're making your molitive cocktail, add some sugar. That makes it sticky and it burns better.

Brother Edwin
7 edits

The moral highground

Joined
06 May 04
Moves
34658
Clock
19 May 04
Vote Up
Vote Down

If they need money for drugs they should rob a bank as that money will be replaced. I cant replace my possessions.
If they want to ignore the law against stealing then they cant complain if someone else ignores the law against murdur.
I have created a algorithm to demonstrate:

I am peaceful to them.
They choose to be slightly more harsh by stealing from me.
I choose to be slightly more harsh by killing them.
They cant be slightly more harsh as they are dead.
I win.

Hovever the current law is this:

I am peaceful to them.
They choose to be slightly more harsh by stealing from me.
I choose to be slightly more harsh by killing them.
The police choses to be slightly less harsh by putting me in prison.
I lose.

That is why I would not kill someone who was trying to steal from me.

I would use the following algorithm in a real life situation:

I am peaceful to them.
They choose to be slightly more harsh by stealing from me.
I choose to be slightly less harsh by being peaceful to them.
They win.

DD

Joined
23 Apr 04
Moves
746
Clock
20 May 04
Vote Up
Vote Down

Originally posted by Brother Edwin
If they need money for drugs they should rob a bank as that money will be replaced. I cant replace my possessions.
If they want to ignore the law against stealing then they cant complain if someone else ignores the law against murdur.
Um, nobody in his right mind would try to rob a bank since the days of speakeasies. You just can't do it and get away. On the other hand, it is possible to rob a house and get away with it.

Not all crimes are equal, and it's not just a matter of law. Murder is a lot different from stealing. It's very easy to understand, if you care to think about it.

S
BentnevolentDictater

x10,y45,z-88,t3.1415

Joined
26 Jan 03
Moves
1644
Clock
21 May 04
Vote Up
Vote Down

Originally posted by Brother Edwin
As we know a farmer in England was put in prison for a long time because he shot and killed a young man who was trying burgle his house. However we have questions...

1) Should we have the right to defend our homes by whatever meens nessary?

2) Is there a lack of police efficency?

3) Is it ok to kill someone if it is the only way to stop them ...[text shortened]... rom commiting a mild crime(eg stealing)?

4) Why do we feel the need to invade someones house?
You ask a bunch of "in general" questions, but I can only answer for me.

1) Yes. But not to take the life of the attacker unless threatened with deadly force.

2) Yes. Cops serve civilization. Criminals don't. Same as the fight between coalition forces and the soldiers of terror. Those who care nothing for civiliztion will always have the advantage when force is evaluated. The answer to the lack of "efficiency" is "determination" and unyielding power of will.

3) No. The only proper application of deady force is in confronting same.

4) They have a bag of Oreo cookies?
😕😵😲🙄

Cookies help us deliver our Services. By using our Services or clicking I agree, you agree to our use of cookies. Learn More.