The Firing Line Forums - View Single Post

MLeake · October 20, 2009, 04:46 PM

If I weren't carrying, and I saw somebody trying to break into my truck, I'd confront him.

I don't see any difference in the scenario if I happen to be carrying.

His reaction to being caught would determine what happened next.

Would I shoot him for breaking into the truck? No. Would I even draw on him for breaking into the truck? No. He'd only find out about the weapon if he chose to escalate things, instead of departing.

To me, the difference between that and Outcast's "circular logic" argument is that I wouldn't be attempting a citizen's arrest, just a "get away from my property" confrontation, which I'm legally allowed to do, so long as I don't use deadly force for that purpose.

If the thief decides to then launch a physical attack, he's changed the game to his own detriment.

Even then, he might not find out about the weapon; he might just hit the ground really, really hard.

At the risk of sounding really inflammatory, though, I think society took a turn for the worse when lawmakers decided that property rights didn't really mean the right to defend property. While I will comply with the law, and while I would really prefer not to ever shoot anybody, I do think that I should have the legal right to use deadly force against thieves and burglars.

It would cut down on such crime in a big way.

October 20, 2009, 04:46 PM	#63
MLeake Senior Member Join Date: November 15, 2007 Location: Outside KC, MO Posts: 10,128	At the risk of sounding inflammatory... If I weren't carrying, and I saw somebody trying to break into my truck, I'd confront him. I don't see any difference in the scenario if I happen to be carrying. His reaction to being caught would determine what happened next. Would I shoot him for breaking into the truck? No. Would I even draw on him for breaking into the truck? No. He'd only find out about the weapon if he chose to escalate things, instead of departing. To me, the difference between that and Outcast's "circular logic" argument is that I wouldn't be attempting a citizen's arrest, just a "get away from my property" confrontation, which I'm legally allowed to do, so long as I don't use deadly force for that purpose. If the thief decides to then launch a physical attack, he's changed the game to his own detriment. Even then, he might not find out about the weapon; he might just hit the ground really, really hard. At the risk of sounding really inflammatory, though, I think society took a turn for the worse when lawmakers decided that property rights didn't really mean the right to defend property. While I will comply with the law, and while I would really prefer not to ever shoot anybody, I do think that I should have the legal right to use deadly force against thieves and burglars. It would cut down on such crime in a big way.