Quote:
Originally Posted by Pokesan
[You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]
you probably shouldn't be willing to murder someone over a television
that's just IMO though
|
This is true.
Killing someone who has invaded your home is generally not recognized as murder though. And for good reason. Why should any victim be forced bear the risk of an aggressive act perpetrated by someone else? The problem is uncertainty. First the invaders motives are unknown. Second even benign motives may change upon their discovery. The invader runs the risk of prosecution if caught, so the stakes are raised in any encounter. That makes the discoverer a threat to the invader whether armed or not. Inaction by the discoverer could result in tragedy. Of course the counter argument is that action could also result in tragedy. Tragedy is tragedy, plain and simple. If we are forced to favor one side or the other though (which we are), who ought we favor? The person who has already suffered an act of aggression? Or, the person who has perpetrated that act?
08-27-2015, 09:26 AM
Threaded Mode