THE DOC 44
Member
If you want the strict ethical answer rather than the emotional then according to philosphical ethics it is wrong to shoot .
Under pragmatic ethics....drill the bum .
Under pragmatic ethics....drill the bum .
For me its not the value of the items stolen that is at issue ... its the egregious violation of social contract. That is what you're really shooting someone over.
I grew up I Maine knowing that the lobstermen and fishermen kept arms on their boats. Granted that many slept there so one could assume that that is his "house" for the night.
To down play the violation of social rights that occurs durring a theft is criminal and leads (as leftists want) to the dissolution of individual rights and property. To maintain individualism and self-determination we must condemn any action, no mater how petty, that violates the sanctity of a person and their property.
The punishment the thief faces should be appropriate to the level of harm inflicted.
Shoot someone for stealing my car that took me 5 years to pay for and will take another 5 to replace? If it weren't for my state laws oh hell yeah.
You didn't work 24 hours a day for 5 years to pay for the car, though. Would it be reasonable to speculate that your net pay for 60 hours a month would cover the car payment? That comes to 3,600 hours. How is taking a thief's life (possibly hundreds of thousands of hours) be appropriate to the harm inflicted to you?
I wouldn't shoot, enraging as it is to be stolen from. And its not as if I wouldn't shoot because the scum who robbed me deserves some sort of protection.
I wouldn't shoot him for me. I don't want any person's death on my hands over material posessions, even if those posessions represent time and money spent by me.
If someone breaks into my house and steals my stereo, I'm not going to shoot him. Not because that's really such a bad thing, practically speaking, but because unfortunately, I believe human life really does have some intrinsic value and that killing isn't to be taken lightly (shooting a man over a stereo is taking it awfully lightly).
I see a world of difference between a person who NEEDS to be killed and a person whom one WANTS to kill. And I refuse to attempt to justify what I want by distorting my values until killing a person over material posessions fits inside my ethical beliefs.
If you live by the standard you so boldly profess from behind your keyboards, you are certain end up dead or jailed. Fortunately, I believe that most all of you are merely puffing
FIRST let me say that THIS IS NOT A DISCUSSION OF WHAT THE LAW OF THE STATE OF __________ SAYS IN REGARDS TO THE USE OF DEADLY FORCE. This is a discussion of right and wrong. This is a discussion of what used to be, what should be, not what necessarily is today in 2006 in the state of Ohio or Louisiana.
If a man takes your wallet, is it right for you to chase him down, recover your wallet
and then demand his as well?
Yes either via jail time or for restitution for any financial loss