“You’re the who determines the value of your life when you break into somebody’s property.”
When Democrats ask homeowners if property is worth taking someone’s life, they are asking the wrong person. They should be asking the thief if the property he is going to steal worth getting shot and possibly dying. The methhead and his wife should have thought about their eight lovely grandchildren BEFORE deciding to steal from the truck. Was it worth it?
In the video of the media interview above, the journalist hugging the methhead wife at the end was very touching./s
I did some work out in a rural area. One of the places had a tall fence all around it. A big old 4x8 piece of plywood had “Nothing back here is worth your life” scrawled on it in red paint.
Here in Washington State the law states that deadly force is allowed in defense of a felony upon the slayer or anyone in the slayer’s presence. HOWEVER - that is what is written in the LAW. I guess that CASE LAW (not easy to look up) has determined that deadly force is only allowed in defense of fear of death or great bodily harm.
While it would suck to see somebody drive off with my truck with all of my tools that I make my living from, I’m not going to shoot them as they drive away or are just standing there. That’s not how it should be, but it is how it is.
From 20 to 30 years there are articles where law enforcement are quoted saying things like “This is the second shooting of a car thief in the county. Best not steal cars down here.” Not anymore.
There was a radio talk show host years ago in the Seattle area that spoke of theft as “life energy”. A person spends how many years to acquire that wealth. Yeah it might be insured, but it isn’t going to cover most of the cost, and the time to deal with it all. How much of one’s life energy has been stolen? And the criminal gets a slap on the wrist and is set free.
THE LAW:
Homicide—By other person—When justifiable.
Homicide is also justifiable when committed either:
(1) In the lawful defense of the slayer, or his or her husband, wife, parent, child, brother, or sister, or of any other person in his or her presence or company, when there is reasonable ground to apprehend a design on the part of the person slain to commit a felony or to do some great personal injury to the slayer or to any such person, and there is imminent danger of such design being accomplished;
or
(2) In the actual resistance of an attempt to commit a felony upon the slayer, in his or her presence, or upon or in a dwelling, or other place of abode, in which he or she is.
I’m not sure why that law is STILL on the books if it isn’t really true anymore.
Back in the early 60s while attending a University seminar in political studies the assembled faculty made it clear to us students that in a system of relative values property was of little consequence compared to human life. Indeed, the impression was clearly laid that regard for the rights of property was somehow classist or racist.
Not long thereafter I personally witnessed the race riots in Newark, New Jersey in 1967 and I heard the cries from the left not to shoot arsonists and looters in mere defense of property. Since then we have progressed to the point that businesses today so fear our legal system that they will fire their own employees if they physically resist shoplifters in defense of their owners property.
Over these decades the defense of property has ceased to exist in many jurisdictions and in many situations.
While an individual's right to defend his own property has been increasingly diminished over these decades, that individual has commensurately been unable to look to his government to defend his threatened property. Worse, an individual who protects his property through self help might well find himself at the wrong end of the law.
As a green student in the 1960s, I instinctively felt that I was being pressured to accept a line of values which could lead to bad results. Marxism is a virus which certainly leads to pain and tears, sometimes it takes decades but eventually the cancer metastasizes.
