Printable View
in America they have some states that belive if someone breaks into your house, you have the right to shoot them dead on the spot. the rest of the states believe you must run or use no more force than the intruder, ie if the intruder has a knife, you could not use anything more than a knife to stop them from harming you or your family. what are your views on the situation?
We are going to have to be very careful with this thread, as the site tries very hard to distance itself from any type of violent behavior, 'justified' or not.
That being said, the concept of using 'no more force than the intruder' is going to be very difficult to apply in a courtroom. While on the surface, the two weapons may be compared side by side; however, it's impossible to tell in a dim or dark area whether what the intruder is holding is a CO2 pellet gun or a stolen service revolver. I can hardly imagine in that situation saying, 'oh well hang on just one sec, I see that you are far out-gunned; shall I get my duelling pistols out so we can settle this like gentlemen?'.
I would not want to live with having killed someone, no matter what the reason. There is a certain hubris to it, and it sits badly with me on moral grounds. I think the equal force idea is intended to say that in an emergency situation, one should use the absolute least force necessary to prevent injury to the home occupants.
Here in Washington they are very liberal about using deadly force. If they are inside the house its completely justified. If someone has made a verbal threat against you and you feel immediately threatened you are allowed to use deadly force. I've had 2 opportunities to use deadly force and elected not to. One was a break in of a business and I happened to be there with my 45. The guy chased me with a 2X4. I just got in my truck and dialed 911 and blocked the driveway. The 2 guys were stealing food and I just didn't think stealing food was a death penalty reason.
If someone broke into someones house I think that the victim has every right to shoot the robber. They should have thought about that shit before they went into someones house and posed a threat to their family.
The equal force idea is a nice one, but it doesn't work in reality. The idea that if someone has a knife, you can defend yourself with a knife is just plain idiotic. You are a law abiding citizen and he is a streetwise criminal. The facts of the matter are he is likely to kill you. It is your house, if someone comes in and threatens you with a knife I think you have every right to shoot the bastard in the face. You did not ask him to come and threaten you, so why should you have to defend yourself with the same level of threat?
That being said, if the threat is less serious (like a guy running off with a tub full of food as per the example above) then I don't feel that person deserves death. I guess what I'm getting at is I agree with proportional force, but I think this should be exercised in a manner of "if he threatens death (ie carrying a lethal weapon), you can respond in any manner that could result in his death" or "if he threatens injury of some kind (non-lethal) you may respond with injury (ie if someone comes at you with a 2X4 you could wing a bat at him or something)".
That is my opinion on the topic.
(homeowner confronts intruder in house) why excuse me kind sir, while you have managed to break into my home wielding a deadly weapon, alas your firearm is vastly inferior to mine. please take this gun of equal size and caliber, (hands gun to criminal) and let us have a fair du....BANG (homeowner drops dead)
if someone were to break into my house, i'd laugh at them.
if they pulled a knife on me, i would disarm them and laugh even harder.
If they pulled a gun, i would die of hysterical laughter before they could pull the trigger...
and if i didnt die, i'd disarm them.
Then i'd chat with them and laugh about life and prevent them from stealing anything... n_n
You are living in a fantasy world.Quote:
Originally Posted by Stoner Shadow Wolf
This isn't the first thread in which he's proven that he is detached from reality. I sincerely hope that he gets it together before he either gets hurt or hurts someone else.Quote:
Originally Posted by Breukelen advocaat
Quote:
Originally Posted by RevoCWN
The perpetrator is the causal agent. He set the chain of events in motion and is responsible for what may happen, even his own death. In my weapons training, we were not taught to shoot to kill, rather you shoot to stop. The target is the center of body mass with the objective of achieving a hit or hits. When you are in a stressful situation your fine motor skills are diminished and your ability to shoot in a pin-point fashion is greatly compromised. I would not want to live anywhere that didn't allow me to defend myself and my own.