Subject:
|
Re: Tony Martin case: You can't {make up} better criticism of Liberals!
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.off-topic.debate
|
Date:
|
Fri, 25 Jul 2003 15:48:31 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
614 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Dave Schuler wrote:
> In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Mike Petrucelli wrote:
>
> > I am still baffeled at the 'logic' of punishing someone for defending thier
> > own property/lives.
>
> Doh! Straw man!
>
> No one is punishing anyone for "defending their own property/lives." Instead,
> people are being forced to accept the consequences of their actions when they
> choose to kill someone. Unless there is no way to defend yourself short of
> killing the intruder (which you must demonstrate), then you've acted with
> excessive force.
> To extend your logic, I could justifiably kill just about anyone in my house,
> as long as I make the claim that I thought that the person was an intruder, or I
> thought that I was in danger. The problem is that, once the "intruder" is dead,
> it's hard to ascertain his side of the story.
>
> What is your intent in killing the supposed intruder? Is it to stop the
> intruder from posing a danger, or is your goal instead to punish the intruder,
> thereby appointing yourself judge/jury/executioner? Would you undertake an
> action of lesser force, if that action would have stopped the intruder? For
> example, if you're upstairs and you hear an intruder downstairs, would you rush
> down the steps, guns blazing? Or would you consider announcing that you are
> armed, perhaps loudly cocking a shotgun for emphasis?
> The reason I ask is because I perceive that your intent is to open fire
> without considering other possibilities, and you seem not to want to accept the
> responsibility for such rash action. I know from previous posts that you
> embrace the idea of personal responsibility, so I confess that I'm puzzled at
> the apparent shift.
Well in this case "personal responsibility" falls on the person that breaks into
someone elses home and winds up dead for it. The fact that the person was killed
by the homeowner (who in my view is only defending their lives from the
possibility of attack by intruder) does not mean the homeowner is responsible
for that person breaking into their home and dying. The only one responsible is
the person that risked their life by breaking into the home of someone else.
This is a case of the law not equalling what is morally right.
-Mike Petrucelli
|
|
Message has 1 Reply:
Message is in Reply To:
73 Messages in This Thread:
 
 
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
This Message and its Replies on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
