# Do Europeans have different attitudes than Americans about the sanctity of property? **URL:** \ **Category:** In My Humble Opinion\ **Created:** [July 4, 2008, 6:01am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/do-europeans-have-different-attitudes-than-americans-about-the-sanctity-of-property/455271 "2008-07-04T06:01:38Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 7
**Author:** ![Spectre\_of\_Pithecanthropus](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/spectre_of_pithecanthropus/32/12343_2.png) [@Spectre\_of\_Pithecanthropus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Spectre_of_Pithecanthropus)\ **Post date:** [July 10, 2008, 7:15pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/do-europeans-have-different-attitudes-than-americans-about-the-sanctity-of-property/455271/121 "2008-07-10T19:15:01Z")
[QUOTE=Usram] I think **JoseB** was acknowledging that European history is not necessarily anything to be proud of, and cautioning that Americans might likewise, in time, have reason to be less than proud of their heritage. [/QUOTE] I believe he was joking, and I was going to come back and acknowledge that in my post but I missed the edit window. Still, I’ve heard people say that and similar things, in complete seriousness. I knew this one acquaintance, years ago, who got himself a Ph.D. in German literature, specializing in film criticism. He happened to be German as well, and was very fond of beer, as we all were. He used to say that Germany had 1000 years of beer history, and America had Prohibition. It struck me as particularly inane because German immigrants formed a big part of the population, especially in the U.S. Midwest, between 100 and 150 years ago. Before they came here they were actual Germans, and have as much claim on the 1000 years of brewing history as the ones who are still living there. And the same goes for all the Scandinavians, Netherlanders, and assorted Slavs that joined them. Now from my perspective, it’s too bad that it was exactly those parts of the country that were the strongest voters in favor Prohibition, and I’ve never been able to reconcile that fact with the high concentration of second and third generation Americans whose ancestors had come from Germany. ---
**Author:** ![Lumpy](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/lumpy/32/446_2.png) [@Lumpy](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Lumpy)\ **Post date:** [July 11, 2008, 12:05am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/do-europeans-have-different-attitudes-than-americans-about-the-sanctity-of-property/455271/122 "2008-07-11T00:05:55Z")
If you can, look up a short essay by C. S. Lewis titled “Delinquents in the Snow” (I have it in the collection “God in the Dock”). Lewis worries (back in 1957) that if the British justice system doesn’t start doing something about crime, the middle class will eventually revolt in vigilantism. This either means that people have been complaining about the same thing for a very long time, or else Lewis was more prescient than most people realize. ---
**Author:** ![carnivorousplant](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/carnivorousplant/32/3563_2.png) [@carnivorousplant](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/carnivorousplant)\ **Post date:** [July 11, 2008, 12:23am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/do-europeans-have-different-attitudes-than-americans-about-the-sanctity-of-property/455271/123 "2008-07-11T00:23:53Z")
[QUOTE=Lumpy] This either means that people have been complaining about the same thing for a very long time, or else Lewis was more prescient than most people realize. [/QUOTE] I imagine Socrates complained about that as well as how the younger generation was acting. ---
**Author:** ![constanze](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/f9ae1b/32.png) [@constanze](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/constanze)\ **Post date:** [September 28, 2008, 12:15am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/do-europeans-have-different-attitudes-than-americans-about-the-sanctity-of-property/455271/124 "2008-09-28T00:15:13Z")
> [@katpohl](#): > > I find it very hard to believe that if a European man woke up in the middle of the night to thieves breaking into his home where his family is sleeping that this European man would react much different than an American man would if he woke up to a break in happening in his home. While I’m not a European man with family in a house, but a single European Female living in an apt., I can tell you that the average person would react very differently to that standard “hear-noise-in-the-night-danger-to-life-shoot-to-defend” scenario that pro-gun advocates always love. For starters, significantly less Germans live in houses than apartments. Second, most burglariers happen during the day, when people are at work, not in the middle of the night. The burglars aren’t robbers, they don’t want to confront people, they want to make off with the stereo without meeting witnesses or trouble. Thirdly, normal people sleep deeply enough not to hear noises from downstairs (and there is no downstairs, anyway.) So if anybody would break in during the night with intents other than robbery, the average European would wake up once the intruders are already inside the bedroom. Fourthly, the average European doesn’t have a gun. We might find a heavy pan in the kitchen if we have the time, (which we don’t have if a noise wakes us up - and an alarm would drive the intruder away). We also don’t expect the intruder to be armed with guns. Maybe a knife. Lastly, if we call the police, we expect them to come quickly. In general, as some of the posters already said, we don’t find it acceptable to gun somebody down simply for coming into our house. If he’s making off with the stereo, he isn’t a low-life scum, but still a human being, and people are worth more than a stereo. We aren’t used to Wild West scenarios were armed people break in only for the fun of harming and killing people - it’s mostly peaceful over here. ---
**Author:** ![constanze](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/f9ae1b/32.png) [@constanze](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/constanze)\ **Post date:** [September 28, 2008, 12:25am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/do-europeans-have-different-attitudes-than-americans-about-the-sanctity-of-property/455271/125 "2008-09-28T00:25:08Z")
> [@Muffin](#): > > The American propensity for gun use when compared to Euros does not necessarily mean that Americans hold private property rights with greater sanctity. It is entirely possible that Euros and Americans both value their private property to equal degrees, with Americans chosing guns as one of many methods of enforcing their rights. No, I don’t think that’s the case. If you’d ask a 1 000 people on the street, “Do you find it ok to shoot an intruder into your house, regardless of the circumstances (to protect your property)?” and “Do you think defending any part of your property from robbery by killing somebody is acceptable?”, then, as the dopers posts here have already indicated, a certain portion of Americans would say “Yes, sure, no problem, okay, why not?” while the majority of Europeans would look at you and say “Are you crazy? Kill somebody for stealing? What are you, a bloodthirsty barbarian?” That’s the reaction, not because we don’t value our property - we dislike being stolen from, too - but because we value human life more than property, and we dislike classifying other people as worthless, ready to be killed (esp. because of our past we are wary of this attitude). ---
**Author:** ![carnivorousplant](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/carnivorousplant/32/3563_2.png) [@carnivorousplant](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/carnivorousplant)\ **Post date:** [September 28, 2008, 12:37am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/do-europeans-have-different-attitudes-than-americans-about-the-sanctity-of-property/455271/126 "2008-09-28T00:37:21Z")
> [@constanze](#): > > a certain portion of Americans would say “Yes, sure, no problem, okay, why not?” Not all of us. It is, after all illegal.🙂 ---
**Author:** ![bump](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/7c8e57/32.png) [@bump](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/bump)\ **Post date:** [September 28, 2008, 1:40am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/do-europeans-have-different-attitudes-than-americans-about-the-sanctity-of-property/455271/127 "2008-09-28T01:40:43Z")
> [@Happy\_Scrappy\_Hero\_Pup](#): > > No, you can’t. Speak for yourself, pal. If it’s after dark, I can protect my property with deadly force. In the past two weeks, there have been 3 robbers in the Dallas/Fort Worth area killed in two robberies by homeowners who fought back, and no charges were pressed by the police. From the Texas Penal Code: CHAPTER 9. JUSTIFICATION EXCLUDING CRIMINAL RESPONSIBILITY > [@](#): > > § 9.42. DEADLY FORCE TO PROTECT PROPERTY. A person is > justified in using deadly force against another to protect land or > tangible, movable property: > (1) if he would be justified in using force against the > other under Section 9.41; and > (2) when and to the degree he reasonably believes the > deadly force is immediately necessary: > (A) to prevent the other’s imminent commission of > arson, burglary, robbery, aggravated robbery, theft during the > nighttime, or criminal mischief during the nighttime; or > (B) to prevent the other who is fleeing > immediately after committing burglary, robbery, aggravated > robbery, or theft during the nighttime from escaping with the > property; and > (3) he reasonably believes that: > (A) the land or property cannot be protected or > recovered by any other means; or > (B) the use of force other than deadly force to > protect or recover the land or property would expose the actor or > another to a substantial risk of death or serious bodily injury. > > Acts 1973, 63rd Leg., p. 883, ch. 399, § 1, eff. Jan. 1, 1974. > Amended by Acts 1993, 73rd Leg., ch. 900, § 1.01, eff. Sept. 1, > 1994. > § 9.43. PROTECTION OF THIRD PERSON’S PROPERTY. A person > is justified in using force or deadly force against another to > protect land or tangible, movable property of a third person if, > under the circumstances as he reasonably believes them to be, the > actor would be justified under Section 9.41 or 9.42 in using force > or deadly force to protect his own land or property and: > (1) the actor reasonably believes the unlawful > interference constitutes attempted or consummated theft of or > criminal mischief to the tangible, movable property; or > (2) the actor reasonably believes that: > (A) the third person has requested his protection > of the land or property; > (B) he has a legal duty to protect the third > person’s land or property; or > (C) the third person whose land or property he > uses force or deadly force to protect is the actor’s spouse, parent, > or child, resides with the actor, or is under the actor’s care. > > Acts 1973, 63rd Leg., p. 883, ch. 399, § 1, eff. Jan. 1, 1974. > Amended by Acts 1993, 73rd Leg., ch. 900, § 1.01, eff. Sept. 1, > 1994. ---
**Author:** ![carnivorousplant](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/carnivorousplant/32/3563_2.png) [@carnivorousplant](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/carnivorousplant)\ **Post date:** [September 28, 2008, 2:25am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/do-europeans-have-different-attitudes-than-americans-about-the-sanctity-of-property/455271/128 "2008-09-28T02:25:51Z")
> [@bump](#): > > Speak for yourself, pal. I stand corrected. In Arkansas, I must be in fear of my life, although an intruder in my home legally puts me in fear of my life. Again, I am the Poster Child for fighting ignorance. 🙂 ---
**Author:** ![Vox\_Imperatoris](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/v/f9ae1b/32.png) [@Vox\_Imperatoris](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Vox_Imperatoris)\ **Post date:** [September 28, 2008, 2:51am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/do-europeans-have-different-attitudes-than-americans-about-the-sanctity-of-property/455271/129 "2008-09-28T02:51:39Z")
I thought the Alabama law was funny on this: > [@](#): > > Section 13A-3-25 > Use of force in defense of premises. > > (a) A person in lawful possession or control of premises, as defined in Section 13A-3-20, or a person who is licensed or privileged to be thereon, may use physical force upon another person when and to the extent that he reasonably believes it necessary to prevent or terminate what he reasonably believes to be the commission or attempted commission of a criminal trespass by the other person in or upon such premises. > > (b) A person may use deadly physical force under the circumstances set forth in subsection (a) of this section only: > > (1) In defense of a person, as provided in Section 13A-3-23; or \*\*[This covers anyone committing burglary, rape, etc. against you.] > \*\* > (2) When he reasonably believes it necessary to prevent the commission of arson in the first or second degree by the trespasser. > (Acts 1977, No. 607, p. 812, §620.) So you can shoot him either if he’s a threat to your life, or if he’s committing arson. 😛 It’s not allowed to use deadly force on anyone stealing property other than that on your premises, though. Valete, Vox Imperatoris ---
**Author:** ![Toxylon](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/f05b48/32.png) [@Toxylon](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Toxylon)\ **Post date:** [September 28, 2008, 10:49am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/do-europeans-have-different-attitudes-than-americans-about-the-sanctity-of-property/455271/130 "2008-09-28T10:49:34Z")
> [@ParentalAdvisory](#): > > If someone chooses to break into your home, that person has made a conscious decision to commit suicide with the possibility that they may not come out of the property alive. This is just the POW that is utterly incomprihensible to Europeans, by and large. Breaking into a house equals ending a human life? Here the sanctity of life goes way above material possessions, and you sure as hell don’t get to make the call who’s life is worth what. A burglar is a criminal and should be punished, but by death or even permanent disability? No way. The reports (ULs?)of foreign exchange students shot to death in Texas because they “trespassed” someones property not knowing any better make us think the Euro way is a better way. Practically speaking, the sanctity of life is deemed holy enough that you actually have to be in immediate, life-threatening situation (an axe speeding towards your face etc.) to be able to put a hole into an attacker and not get prosecuted afterwards. Better to live than to die, yeah. But in practise, better to run than to spend a couple years in prison, a couple dozen G’s in compensation for the family of the intruder, and receive a life-long stain of jailtime on your record. ---
**Author:** ![Toxylon](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/f05b48/32.png) [@Toxylon](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Toxylon)\ **Post date:** [September 28, 2008, 11:57am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/do-europeans-have-different-attitudes-than-americans-about-the-sanctity-of-property/455271/131 "2008-09-28T11:57:12Z")
ETA: After actually reading the thread, I realize the last sentence of my reply is out of place considering handicapped persons who can’t run for safety no matter how bad they wanted to. Still, I’d rather watch a burglar take off with my most valued possessions than risk ruining two lives (plus collaterals) by using deadly force on him. Even if acquitted, I’m not so sure taking a human life didn’t come back to haunt me bad as time goes by. So, firearms only when someone uses deadly force on me or my family (I actually have small-bore hunting arms at my city home - a rarity here). Home intruders ending up harming people is such an astonishingly rare occurence here that it ends up in the national headlines even if no lives were lost. The crooks here seem to know that burglary is a petty crime while homicide isn’t. ---
**Author:** ![Sri\_Theo](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/f04885/32.png) [@Sri\_Theo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Sri_Theo)\ **Post date:** [September 28, 2008, 1:26pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/do-europeans-have-different-attitudes-than-americans-about-the-sanctity-of-property/455271/132 "2008-09-28T13:26:23Z")
Hopefully more related to the OP, Scandinavians do seem to have different attitudes about the sanctity of property especially when related to the outdoors. They have a long national history of interacting with the wilderness - they are really “outdoorsy” people. In Sweden they pretty much bus school kids out into the countryside so they can experience nature. (Or so I’ve been told, it may just have been his school.) Which makes it much more reasonable that you shouldn’t be able to deny where people go. The land belongs to everyone, and as long as there’s no harm people should be able to enjoy it. Is someone that owns acre’s of land for cattle or whatever really hurt if someone else sleeps there? And because I feel the need to defend my country, here is a home office summary of current laws on self-defence. > [@](#): > > **Householders and the use of force against intruders > Joint Public Statement from the Crown Prosecution Service and the Association of Chief Police Officers** > > _What is the purpose of this statement?_ > It is a rare and frightening prospect to be confronted by an intruder in your own home. The Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) and Chief Constables are responding to public concern over the support offered by the law and confusion about householders defending themselves. We want a criminal justice system that reaches fair decisions, has the confidence of law-abiding citizens and encourages them actively to support the police and prosecutors in the fight against crime. > > Wherever possible you should call the police. The following summarises the position when you are faced with an intruder in your home, and provides a brief overview of how the police and CPS will deal with any such events. > > _Does the law protect me? What is ‘reasonable force’?_ > Anyone can use reasonable force to protect themselves or others, or to carry out an arrest or to prevent crime. You are not expected to make fine judgements over the level of force you use in the heat of the moment. So long as you only do what you honestly and instinctively believe is necessary in the heat of the moment, that would be the strongest evidence of you acting lawfully and in selfdefence. This is still the case if you use something to hand as a weapon. > > As a general rule, the more extreme the circumstances and the fear felt, the more force you can lawfully use in self-defence. > > _Do I have to wait to be attacked?_ > No, not if you are in your own home and in fear for yourself or others. In those circumstances the law does not require you to wait to be attacked before using defensive force yourself. > > _What if the intruder dies?_ > If you have acted in reasonable self-defence, as described above, and the intruder dies you will still have acted lawfully. Indeed, there are several such cases where the householder has not been prosecuted. However, if, for example: > > ``` > * having knocked someone unconscious, you then decided to further hurt or kill them to punish them; or > * you knew of an intended intruder and set a trap to hurt or to kill them rather than involve the police, > > ``` > > you would be acting with very excessive and gratuitous force and could be prosecuted. > > _What if I chase them as they run off?_ > This situation is different as you are no longer acting in self-defence and so the same degree of force may not be reasonable. However, you are still allowed to use reasonable force to recover your property and make a citizen’s arrest. You should consider your own safety and, for example, whether the police have been called. A rugby tackle or a single blow would probably be reasonable. Acting out of malice and revenge with the intent of inflicting punishment through injury or death would not. > Will you believe the intruder rather than me? > > The police weigh all the facts when investigating an incident. This includes the fact that the intruder caused the situation to arise in the first place. We hope that everyone understands that the police have a duty to investigate incidents involving a death or injury. Things are not always as they seem. On occasions people pretend a burglary has taken place to cover up other crimes such as a fight between drug dealers. > > _How would the police and CPS handle the investigation and treat me?_ > In considering these cases Chief Constables and the Director of Public Prosecutions (Head of the CPS) are determined that they must be investigated and reviewed as swiftly and as sympathetically as possible. In some cases, for instance where the facts are very clear, or where less serious injuries are involved, the investigation will be concluded very quickly, without any need for arrest. In more complicated cases, such as where a death or serious injury occurs, more detailed enquiries will be necessary. The police may need to conduct a forensic examination and/or obtain your account of events. > > To ensure such cases are dealt with as swiftly and sympathetically as possible, the police and CPS will take special measures namely: > > ``` > * An experienced investigator will oversee the case; and > * If it goes as far as CPS considering the evidence, the case will be prioritised to ensure a senior lawyer makes a quick decision. > > ``` > > It is a fact that very few householders have ever been prosecuted for actions resulting from the use of force against intruders. It’s really not as bad as people make out, and that’s from someone thats lived and grown up in some of the shittiest areas of East London/Essex ---
**Author:** ![grey\_ideas](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/dfb087/32.png) [@grey\_ideas](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/grey_ideas)\ **Post date:** [September 28, 2008, 1:47pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/do-europeans-have-different-attitudes-than-americans-about-the-sanctity-of-property/455271/133 "2008-09-28T13:47:16Z")
> [@Shagnasty](#): > > The man that owned the supermarket where I worked in high school walked into his house to find his wife sleeping with another man. The man wanted to argue instead of leaving right away. He was shot and killed and my boss was acquitted largely because the man was threatening him in his own home. Oddly, he and his wife stayed together. To me, this is utterly mind boggling and I can only hope that it represents a statistical anomaly so far off the charts you couldn’t see it with a set of high powered binoculars on a clear day. I’d be really curious to see the evidence he gave in court to prove that the other man was threatening him in his own home. To the general topic, as has been stated here, I do have a different attitude to the sanctity of property, I value it lower than the sanctity of life. I’d rather help a burglar pack up my TV into it’s original box than shoot him/her. There is just no way that my stuff equals to a life. Now if we’re talking about someone physically threatening you with harm, sure, use minimum force to make them stop. ---
**Author:** ![carnivorousplant](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/carnivorousplant/32/3563_2.png) [@carnivorousplant](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/carnivorousplant)\ **Post date:** [September 28, 2008, 2:50pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/do-europeans-have-different-attitudes-than-americans-about-the-sanctity-of-property/455271/134 "2008-09-28T14:50:19Z")
> [@grey\_ideas](#): > > I’d rather help a burglar pack up my TV into it’s original box than shoot him/her. Perhaps there is a happy medium. > [@grey\_ideas](#): > > Now if we’re talking about someone physically threatening you with harm, sure, use minimum force to make them stop. I don’t know that I would be able to judge minimum force. Does he just want to hurt me so that he can leave, or does he want to kill a witness, or is he acting out of fear as I am? I’m large enough to restrain someone, or a good enough shot and judge of anatomy to disable him with a firearm. ---
**Author:** ![enipla](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/54ee81/32.png) [@enipla](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/enipla)\ **Post date:** [September 28, 2008, 2:52pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/do-europeans-have-different-attitudes-than-americans-about-the-sanctity-of-property/455271/135 "2008-09-28T14:52:45Z")
I live in a rural mountain community in Colorado. 1 acre lots. Maybe 10 percent are developed. I have no full time neighbors. In fact I am the only person that lives full time on our road. I have never heard of a ‘hot’ burglary/robbery near me. You’d have to be nuts to try it seeing that I would guess that at least 90% of those that live up here are armed in some way. So, if someone where to break into my home while I was there, I have to consider that they are off balance, or they have specifically come to do me harm. Like I said, you be nuts to break into an occupied home around here. ---
**Author:** ![grey\_ideas](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/dfb087/32.png) [@grey\_ideas](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/grey_ideas)\ **Post date:** [September 28, 2008, 3:17pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/do-europeans-have-different-attitudes-than-americans-about-the-sanctity-of-property/455271/136 "2008-09-28T15:17:55Z")
> [@carnivorousplant](#): > > Perhaps there is a happy medium. I know 🙂 Just to show a point, but the principle stands. > [@carnivorousplant](#): > > I don’t know that I would be able to judge minimum force. Does he just want to hurt me so that he can leave, or does he want to kill a witness, or is he acting out of fear as I am? I’m large enough to restrain someone, or a good enough shot and judge of anatomy to disable him with a firearm. Either of the last two options are certainly better than just killing someone although there are a number of posts in this thread that have suggested it was very unlikely that someone would be able to use a gun to incapacitate someone. It was either an all or nothing approach. I mean, there is a quoted instance of a JP student being shot and killed for being on someone’s property…not even in their house! Even taking this as a statistical anomaly (which I am sure it is), how can there be a law that says you can start blasting when someone is just on your land? Fair enough if he’s walking down the garden path armed with a Terminator style minigun, but just for being on your land? I think in the UK the armed police units even have to declare that they are armed since it is not the norm. It gives people a chance to think “oh shit, this isn’t a good idea” and give up. If I was at home and had a gun to hand to defend myself I’d start shouting my head off if I heard someone first, giving them chance to have a think about things, realise that I was armed and that they might well want to leave now…before I started shooting. ---
**Author:** ![carnivorousplant](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/carnivorousplant/32/3563_2.png) [@carnivorousplant](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/carnivorousplant)\ **Post date:** [September 28, 2008, 3:33pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/do-europeans-have-different-attitudes-than-americans-about-the-sanctity-of-property/455271/137 "2008-09-28T15:33:19Z")
> [@grey\_ideas](#): > > I mean, there is a quoted instance of a JP student being shot and killed for being on someone’s property. How many laws of that sort were written in the 19th century, an Owen Wister sort of thing? I would suggest that is the sort of thinking behind trespass laws in the United States. I remember seeing an ad from the 1920’s for Thompson submachine guns that showed a guy going after rustlers with one. ---
**Author:** ![grey\_ideas](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/dfb087/32.png) [@grey\_ideas](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/grey_ideas)\ **Post date:** [September 28, 2008, 3:38pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/do-europeans-have-different-attitudes-than-americans-about-the-sanctity-of-property/455271/138 "2008-09-28T15:38:20Z")
> [@carnivorousplant](#): > > How many laws of that sort were written in the 19th century, an Owen Wister sort of thing? I would suggest that is the sort of thinking behind trespass laws in the United States. I remember seeing an ad from the 1920’s for Thompson submachine guns that showed a guy going after rustlers with one. True, not like there aren’t enough damn odd European laws still kicking around from centuries past (and some damn odd ones developed recently!). But it does seem, when life and limb come into the equation, that it might be time to have a look at the fine print again 🙂 ---
**Author:** ![Spectre\_of\_Pithecanthropus](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/spectre_of_pithecanthropus/32/12343_2.png) [@Spectre\_of\_Pithecanthropus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Spectre_of_Pithecanthropus)\ **Post date:** [September 29, 2008, 4:19am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/do-europeans-have-different-attitudes-than-americans-about-the-sanctity-of-property/455271/139 "2008-09-29T04:19:39Z")
> [@constanze](#): > > No, I don’t think that’s the case. If you’d ask a 1 000 people on the street, “Do you find it ok to shoot an intruder into your house, regardless of the circumstances (to protect your property)?” and “Do you think defending any part of your property from robbery by killing somebody is acceptable?” I doubt if that many any out of 1,000 would approve the killing or shooting of an intruder under absolutely any circumstances. If the intruder is menacing your life or limb, or that of a family member, then obviously more would say using violence to defend you and yours is acceptable. I imagine that’s true in most places. [Minor nitpick] Your use of the word robbery is a little unclear. Native English speakers will use the words “rob” or “robbery” to mean any theft of property, in casual conversation, but strictly speaking this is incorrect. Robbery by definition does include violence or the threat of violence; a sneak thief or burglar might not be a robber. So whether the intruder is attempting to rob you, or only to burglarize you, would be a key factor in how acceptable a violent response is. [MN] With regard to the larger topic of property rights, and people’s perception of them, I think there may be significant differences between much of Europe including the UK, and the US. In much of Europe, property rights were once vested in a monarch, and those who acted functionally as property owners held their land in fief from the Crown–or from another landholder who himself held land as a royal fief. So nobody except the King actually _owned_ land, and the King, and by extension the state, could theoretically withhold and extend to others, including the public, some of the rights that went with property, such as the right to pass over or enter land. In America, this wasn’t the case, and property owners have always owned property outright. Different proprietors are different as to how tolerant they are of those who casually enter their land, without ill intent, but the right of them to forbid entry to all has rarely been questioned. With that said, I believe that there are cases when a property owner in America may not have complete rights of control. For instance, in some cases they may not enjoy mineral rights. Speaking of mineral rights, the legal term for revenue from an oil well on your property is ‘royalty’–I wonder if that had something to do originally with the rights of kings. ---
**Author:** ![ParentalAdvisory](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/53a042/32.png) [@ParentalAdvisory](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ParentalAdvisory)\ **Post date:** [September 29, 2008, 5:24am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/do-europeans-have-different-attitudes-than-americans-about-the-sanctity-of-property/455271/140 "2008-09-29T05:24:33Z")
> [@Toxylon](#): > > Breaking into a house equals ending a human life? Here the sanctity of life goes way above material possessions, and you sure as hell don’t get to make the call who’s life is worth what. Here’s where your crowd and I disagree. You see, it’s not about the material possessions in the slightest, it’s about what a petty thief would do to get what he wants. Someone breaking into a home equals unpredictability about MY own life and LOVED ones. I am really not that concerned with a thief’s future life status, but I am with mine. We’re talking about thieves that wouldn’t think for a second about stabbing you or me for said possessions, _no matter the value_ of those possessions. Do you get it now? [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/do-europeans-have-different-attitudes-than-americans-about-the-sanctity-of-property/455271.md?page=6) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/do-europeans-have-different-attitudes-than-americans-about-the-sanctity-of-property/455271.md?page=8)