Dying Criminals Last Thoughts : Damn, I never thought someone would shoot me for a car battery. There goes my faith in hum…
Well, I think the criminal did it WAY more so, and FIRST, in addition to forcing someone else’s hand in the process.
Talking about social contracts.
I didn’t want to get on this, but have you noticed how apart from certain sections of the criminal populace(Madoff, Lucky Luciano, Tony Soprano, etc ), the rest of them tend to be pretty hard up and desperate individuals?
Now, I guess you’ll probably think they are all lazy, good-for-nothings who you’d be hard pressed to piss on if they were on fire, but if the state ensured that every baby ended up with an education adequate enough to eventually find a way to make a living doing something they feel is worthwhile, I’d guarantee we wouldn’t have the problems we have now.
Considering up thread you said that you did it for the thrills, no, I didn’t notice that.
Assuming what you have been saying is true, that is.
Regards,
Shodan
We have police forces and laws in place to maintain order. We have people (like you, at one time) who fill the role of law enforcement. They are trained so the danger to others is minimized, and so that minimal force is used in apprehending law breakers so they can be tried in a court where punishment can be determined.
It might be legal to shoot burglars in your state, but it’s not legal here. It’s not legal in most states. It’s illegal because it’s dangerous and disproportionate to the crime of burglary. If someone is stealing my stuff, I don’t assume they are going to hurt me. I’m not accustomed to living my life in a perpetual state of “what if?” There’s no need to. My state and local laws agree with my opinion on the matter. There are people who are happy to claim the role of “enforcer.” That’s their right, should they fill the requirements for that job. But that role is not mine and I’m not going to pretend it is.
You can look down your nose at the pacifist outlook on life, but you are not on higher morale ground than I am, much as you’d like to think you are. There is no need for the majority of citizens to live in fear to the point that they keep guns in their bathroom (or anywhere else in their home). We all get along just fine in life. No need to worry about these contingencies. Life will continue roll along. We’re as safe as you are from the perils of society’s underbelly. And we don’t need guns to achieve that safety. Less aggressive? Certainly. I like it that way.
On the outside chance that someone wants to steal my VCR, I’ll do everything in my power to remove myself from the immediate danger. And should it get physical? Well, I’ll take my chances.
Oh, you sweet innocent chump. For all you know, the guy’s walking away slowly so that he can grab his gun over yonder, shoot you, and go rape your wife in the butthole. The only safe thing to do is shoot him in the brain as soon as you notice him stealing your car… after all, you’re not a mind reader. You have no idea what he’s REALLY there for or what he’s capable of. If you were serious about safety, here’s how it’d go down:
Criminal Stealing Car
Shooter Bob, pulling gun: He’s coming right for my wife’s butthole! Maybe. No time to decide! Blam!
I was 13 when I started, and 14+ when I got took into care for 18 mths, and learned all about burglaries from kids who had been at it longer than me! And yes, it was a thrill for an easily led, rebellious teenager. What of it?
We also have “a well-regulated militia,” which includes lawfully-armed civilians.
“What of it” is that just a moment ago you were blaming [anyone but yourself] the lack of “adequate education.” Because your part of the U.K. had . . . abolished public education? Geez, I know I had that Pit thread about how much the U.K. sucks, but I didn’t realize it had gotten that bad.
Bolding mine.
Don’t come into a debate forum and waste people’s time with the most fundamental fallacies. Causation can be a complicated concept at its margins, but this is one of the stupider examples of post hoc propter hoc anyone’s wasted my time on. Forget about blaming the victim (that’s par for the course with you). This is just inane.
Slimy opportunist entered my house because he’s a scumbag with no respect for the property or personal space of others, and he wants my crap, or wants to hurt me.
That’s causation.
I have a serious question: during your time in stir, did HMP ever provide you with any psych profiles you’d be willing to share with us? Some of this stuff goes beyond Khalhoun tiresome re-casting of everyone’s argument as “always shoot solely to protect property.” Some of this ideation is just . . . weird.
I have a theory.
Childhood exposure to clowns is what leads to criminal tendencies. Its a kind of defense mechanism, you know, like get THEM before they get you.
And extensive exposure to clowns lead to citizens actually arming themselves and getting twitchy trigger fingers.
I had a class in college. Philosophy of Art or some such thing. As a science major I thought it was going to be a real dung heap of a class. We spend a couple weeks on the “theory of clowns”. Seriously. That alone made the whole class worth the time, money, and effort. Seriously. I really should dig up those class notes 
If you say so.
No. Things might have changed drastically since my last sentence in '91, but once you were in there, you were under no obligation to undergo any form of counselling whatsoever. Another apparent failing of the criminal justice scheme, it seems. And you wouldn’t be the first person to think me weird. I wear it as a badge of honour though.
So you’re saying that when the burglar comes into your house, and is unplugging the VCR and you walk in on him, gun drawn, and ask him to stop…if he doesn’t, you’ll just let him go? VCR under his arm?
Here is what I would do IRL: I would tell him “drop that VCR and get down spreadeagled on the floor motherucker or I will shoot you in the head.” I would inwardly know that I would not shoot him in the head solely for taking my property, but I would not let him know that. If he complies, I don’t get all shooty on his ass.
The shooting him, if I did it, would never be about the VCR – it would be about my EXTREME DISCOMFORT that he has violated the bounds of my house and is, in at least one important respect, oblivious to what is right and wrong to do. It would be based on needing to allay the EXTREME FEAR that he has put me in of the safety of me and my family.
He is going to get down on the floor NOW if I have my way so that I can take control of my personal space. If he does not get down on the floor, but instead does something that I interpret as in any way menacing, that is further proof that he means no good to me and has not seen the error of his ways. If his non-compliance takes the form of leaping out the window and sprinting away in a tenth of a second, despite my saying that I would shoot him NO MATTER WHAT if he didn’t comply, he would have called my bluff effectively – if I’m sure he’s no threat anymore, except that he’s got my VCR under his arm, no, I won’t in fact shoot him. But – I am going to interpret “no threat to me anymore” in the way most favorable to me.
Tie goes to me.
No, what’s being said is that if he doesn’t stop moving, and put his hands on his head while we wait for the cops to show up, he potentially poses an imminent and immediate threat to the well being of the family.
I give everyone the benefit of the doubt. That’s why my doors have locks, because only my key works. Perhaps they just have the wrong house, and they try their key, it doesn’t work, and realize “Doh, not my house.”
Locks don’t keep criminals out, especially in an area like mine, where there are window panes next to (and within reaching distance of) the door locks. And the back door is sliding glass. Locks discourage criminals, and make sure that I’m the only one who can get in my house, without making it painfully obvious that you’re there with bad intentions.
Once your in my house, it’s clear that you have bad intentions. There can be no doubt about that. The extent of your bad intentions, however, has yet to be determined.
If your so determined to do harm to me and my family, that being told to “Freeze” by a person with a gun doesn’t deter you, I assume you that you have some pretty fucking bad intentions, and I’m going to shoot you until you stop expressing those intentions.
Due to the layout of my house, there are very few places a criminal could be standing and not have access to an exit, without going through me. That said, if, on the 1/100 chance that I couldn’t tell whether he was going for the exit, going for me, or going for a gun… I err on the side of “shoot him in the fuckin face until he doesn’t look threatening anymore.”
No, nothing menacing. No drama. A simple “no” and the junkie continues to steal your stuff, calmly and methodically.
I’m glad to hear you won’t shoot him.
I can’t see this being much of a likely IRL response to my threat to kill him, and his continued presence in my home, having acted most irrationally in response to said death threat, could rise to the level of sufficient fear that he’s a wack job that I might have to use force.
I’d probably pistol-whip him first.
well, once he reaches for my hummel that HAPPENS to look like a gun, then I guess I’ll have no choice but to defend myself
Battery Bob: Damn, I never thought someone would be so stupid to continue their criminal activity when I gave them full warning that I would shoot if they did not desist immediately. there goes my faith in the common sense of some people, but at least he got a Darwin award.
Ohh, bad idea.
Get in close enough for him to control the hand with the pistol in it?