Reply #37: That's a big post. [View All]

[AtheistCrusader]

You continue to make assumptions; that someone using a firearm to defend life or property actually has to pull the trigger for it to be effective. I don't see much difference between your suggested plan of action, and mine, except that if it fails, I have a better fallback option.

I'll paint a scenario using that article for you.

Someone is banging on my patio door, meaning they are on my property, and have climed up to get on it.
I head to my bedroom to retrieve a firearm. (You have mis-represented the facts stated in the article, the bedroom was AWAY from the intruder, not towards, the intruder had to pursue.)
I obtain the firearm and return to the hallway.
The hostile realized the victim in the story had a gun, so I can assume at this point I can see the bad guy.
That means I can probably identify the hostile, and give his description to the police, thereby helping prevent any future malfeasance.

Lets digress from the end result of the article, let's assume I get back to the kitchen and he's stealing my favorite coffee pot. I really love that coffee pot. That's MY coffee pot. What can I do? Exactly what the victim in the previous article did, order him to leave, or surrender. (Civilians can arrest people here, though the laws are kind of sticky, and I don't know Canadian law on this point, so I don't think it would be productive to elaborate further)
So now the hostile takes my favorite coffee pot and starts to flee. What can I do? Exactly what the victim in the previous article did, allow him to leave. If he's leaving, even with my property, I cannot shoot him. Standing your ground doesn't include shooting someone in the back that is not a threat to me. I cannot and would not kill someone, even to save my favorite coffee pot. That would be immoral.

Lets say he does not flee, does not surrender, and instead, attacks me. Now, and only now, do I have cause or legal reason to use deadly force. You cannot assume that just because someone takes up arms, they are going to kill someone. The victim in that article didn't. I wouldn't. Most people wouldn't. I would not kill for my favorite coffee pot, or my tv or anything else. However, I will stand my ground, assert my right to my property, gather evidence for the police, if possible, detain the criminal, and if pressed, protect my life, and the lives of people around me.



As for assuming intent, yes, I assume the worst. That the invader is there, not for my coffee pot, but for the absolute worst case scenario. It might just be some punk kid after my liquor cabinet, that's why I wouldn't go in guns blazing. But I have to assume it might be some deranged lunatic, after all, whoever it is is already breaking the law, invaded my property and giving me cause to fear for my safety.


Rough analogy: A fire in my house. If I smell a whiff of smoke, I don't bail immediately out the nearest window. I INVESTIGATE and if possible, combat it. I have fire extinguishers in ever major room in my house. I would get one, and go find out where the fire is, and can it be dealt with. Fires start small, but get big quick. A residential fire can double in size every minute. Something I could have dealt with myself might destroy the house before the fire department arrives, if I do not investigate it. So I have the appropriate tools, and a plan of action. I have three separate means of summoning the fire department. If I can't handle it, then I will take the appropriate next step. Same methodology, different threat.


The point I made about legal liability is not a straw man, and certainly not meant to offend. If she ran, without arming herself, and the hostile was more worst-case-scenario, she might have been killed. Yelling for neighbors and police may not awe the intruder, and those 3rd parties may not save her. They have no legal obligation to. I can certainly cite some instances here in the US where neighbors completely ignored people in need. Hell, last week, people ignored an injured man lying in the street, after being run over by a hit-and-run. A couple witnesses called the cops and then did nothing. I don't think it's unreasonable to assume you are on your own, and do what you can to prepare yourself for 'bad things', whatever they may be.

I realize there are some people in this forum that will resort to direct personal attacks at the drop of a hat. I don't intend to 'white knight' for you, you seem fully capable of handling the problem yourself. Just want you to understand, I will not treat you that way, no matter how much I may disagree with your position. I'm not trying to score points, 'own someone' or any of that silly debate crap, I'm trying to have a rational conversation with another human being. Who knows, I might learn something from you.