Um, there were (and perhaps still are) times and situations where asserting ownership made it so. How do you think England, for one example, came to “own” the North American colonies? They came, said “It’s mine” and proceeded accordingly. A surprise to the natives for sure. The point I was making is that, without the relevant context we can’t know whether Zeke’s intentions were benign or malicious.
Asserting ownership only makes it so when backed by force, and in the case at hand, horse-killing Jake was the one with with the power, not Zeke.
Unless someone is literally preventing injury or death, the explanation, “he made me commit murder”, doesn’t hold much water in my estimation.
I thought it might be based on this. Many rich man/poor man stories follow this theme, the rich man’s arrogance results in a boon for the poor man and the rich man hobbles himself trying to replicate the poor man’s good fortune.
Sorry your dad was a psychopath and entirely missed the point of the story. Had to deal with that kind of crap myself.
I’m sorry you had to experience that.
I don’t even think the poor brother was wrong, since he was talking to the horses, and they were his to use at the time. I was wondering if “go horses” meant he was setting them all free, in effect, stealing his brother’s horses, but it seems that no, he was just talking to them as they plowed his field. Freaking out over what a man says to a horse seems wrong in pretty much any circumstance. Killing his horse for that offense is criminally wrong.
Why didn’t those natives merely say “mine” right back?
Because their culture made no provision for that, other than take it back by force. In some cases that was tried, with varying short term results.
I’m sorry; I’m not sure I’m following this. How do you think the English would’ve responded to hearing a quick “mine” right back? Do you figure that they’d have let it go at that, or replied with a quick “no, mine” right back, or what?
IMO Zeke wasn’t very wrong for saying “my” horses. He had been granted access to them and was in control of them at the moment. Jake was just a vengeful hothead.
It’s amazing that someone with the chip on his shoulder and anger issues as the father managed to stay out of prison long enough to have a wife and kids.
My friends, my countryman, my co-workers, my teammates, my family, my fellow Dopers…which of you do I own?
The fact that he claimed ownership without prompting is troubling.
If you loaned me your coat and I left it behind in a restaurant and the server ran after me and asked, “Is this your coat?” then I could understand simply saying “yes” and not going into detail about how you loaned it to me.
But Zeke here seems to be claiming ownership. It would be as if after you loaned me your coat, I simply stated, for seemingly no reason at all, “Ah, my wonderful coat and the warmth it brings me!”
Why did Zeke feel the need to claim ownership of the horses when he could have easily said, “Go forth, horses” or “Giddyup”?
For the record, I clicked the wrong one, so one of the Zeke votes should be a Jake.
My good man, this is absurd.
I’m not saying you should destroy all of my coats because I said that, but it wouldn’t bother you if you loan me something and I start calling it mine for no real reason?
For quite a long time in English law it was easier to get hanged for theft than for killing. I can only attribute this to extreme poverty, the sort of attitude where a toddler who innocently tries on the king’s crown gets drawn and quartered for treason, and possibly widespread lead exposure from pewter vessels.
(two of them)
My good man, it depends on audience and context. As you noted there are people who aren’t interested in the subtle distinctions of whether you legally own the thing you’re talking about - ownership as a concept actually expands to include things that you have charge of. For example I go home every day to my apartment - but legally speaking I don’t actually own the residence. And yet the renting office themselves refer to the apartment as being mine, because I have charge of it. The only case where this would become inaccurate is if somebody came specifically asking about legal ownership.
In the situation in the OP, I don’t think that the horses were concerned about that distinction.
Also I’ve now called you “my good man” twice, and if I say it a third time you officially become my property as a slave for life.
What if you are talking to the coat?
Also this. I think “my” usually refers to “the one I am am aligned with/using/in contact with” and “the one I own” is only a subset of that.
Although I did once get some funny looks for referring to “my subway car”, when of course I was referring to the car I happened to be riding in. So I guess usage varies.
Say you borrow your brother’s car, and you said something like, “My car is parked over there,” or “That guy ran right out in front of my car!”
I don’t believe that means you’re claiming ownership of the car; you’re simply referring to the car you happen to be using at the time. Surely you plan to return the car to your brother.
That’s pretty much how I view the OP’s story. On the surface of it, I see no foul play or trickery in Zeke’s turn of phrase, and no evidence that he wants the horses for his own. Jake overreacted.
As for the backstory, it’s almost as if TokyoBayer is wondering after all these years if it’s his fault that his dad beat him. I really hope you know that it’s not.