Legal Duty to Retreat vs. Moral Duty to Retreat

[Buzzcook]

Tennessee Gentleman, I think we can argue that there are occasions where stopping a theft would justify the use of deadly force.
What if old Jean Valjean wasn't stealing bread from a baker, but instead was stealing bread from a family that needed bread to keep their own children from starving?
Earlier someone mentioned that stealing a horse in the wilderness was the same as murder. If we accept that some possessions might mean life or death to their owner if stolen, then I think the use of deadly force is arguably acceptable.
But those instances would be very rare.

 

[Tennessee Gentleman]

If we accept that some possessions might mean life or death to their owner if stolen, then I think the use of deadly force is arguably acceptable.

Agree. Lots of latitude, however I am talking about things that could be replaced fairly easily but that is just my opinion.

 

[PT111]

I think too many people are trying to read too much into the question. If someone is breaking down your front door do you shoot through the door or wait until they break through the door to make sure it is not your wife who locked her keys inside. Or better yet you are cruising the neighborhood in your car and someone walking along beside the road pulls a gun on you. Do you stop and have a shootout or do you floor it and get away?

 

[spacemanspiff]

In my home, if my roommate doesn't immediately recognize the sounds of me coming as in the door as being me, I hear a hammer being cocked and a voice says, inquisitively, "John?"

None in my home are going to shoot at bumps in the night, unless we are positive its a threat, and we have visually identified them as such.

 

[stargazer65]

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
That's very wise especially considering that the "bump" might be a roomate curled up on the kitchen floor sleeping off a bender.

 

[easyG]

Okay here's a question for everyone who supports the notion that we should never take a life when it is not absolutely necessary....

Do you support the death penalty for certain imprisoned convicts?

 

[stargazer65]

Do you support the death penalty for certain imprisoned convicts?

I assume the "certain imprisoned convicts" are ones who have received a death sentence from the court. In that case yes, but that is unrelated to castle doctrine. Castle doctrine is not a license to dispense capital punishment in the legal sense.

If you are just asking what types of crimes I would support death penalty for, I actually have an extensive list, but I don't want to stray down that path right now.

 

[PT111]

Do you support the death penalty for certain imprisoned convicts?

There are some people that even from jail will continue to find ways to harass, intimidate and even kill. The only way you will ever stop them from being a drain on society is to either kill them or put them in Superman's Phantom Zone. Google Pee Wee Gaskins for example. He was finally executed for commiting murder while serving a life sentence for multiple murders. His known victims range somewher around 25 and his unknown victims could be another 25 if you believe him. Yes in these type cases (The Blind Sheik for example) i say fry them.

 

[Glenn E. Meyer]

The death penalty is not usually given to people stealing your VCR. If the argument is that the property criminal deserves to be executed for that specific crime, it is not a moral decision in my opinion.

The use of lethal force during a property crime, as someone in your house, is that they pose a threat to you, not because you are executing them as punishment for stealing your stuff.

We had several kids steal a sign from our lawn - while I wanted them caught and punished - they did not to be executed.

 

[Tucker 1371]

The death penalty is not usually given to people stealing your VCR.

Idk, antiques can be pretty valuable

 

[stargazer65]

Good point GSU, course it would have to be someone really desperate to steal a VCR. Someone that desperate might be dangerous Glenn.

Also Glenn, make sure you don't put all your valuable in one place. Don't keep the betamax next to the 8-track player.

 

[DonR101395]

Nope, big boy rules apply; for both the parties.
It doesn't really matter what someone else not in your shoes would do morally. In the end it will be a legal matter and that is the only opinion that matters.

 

[Glenn E. Meyer]

I still have an expensive VCR and a box of tapes of good movies. However, the cost of all that is far less than the financial hit of shooting someone in the house to save them (as compared to me).

Just talking to the lawyer is going to run $5K. Wait, the guy is going after my 78's and turn table - bang, bang!

We once did a thread about would you shoot to save the Mona Lisa? You are a guard at the museum and a nutso is running towards it with a spray can. Do you open fire? Is that moral or should you try to tackle him?

The reason I mentioned VCR - is that in the old days, those were prime targets for burglars. Today it would be your laptop or IPhone.

 

[Buzzcook]

Do you support the death penalty for certain imprisoned convicts?

No, I don't support the death penalty.

 

[Tucker 1371]

Okay here's a question for everyone who supports the notion that we should never take a life when it is not absolutely necessary....

Do you support the death penalty for certain imprisoned convicts?

Punishment and self defense are two very different things. When you shoot an intruder in your home it is not to punish that person (at least it shouldn't be) but to defend your life.

When a judge hands out the death penalty and the penal system carries it out it is for punishment. This serves two purposes: 1) to remove a dangerous individual from society 2) to create a deterrent to others who would consider the same path. They have the authority to do this because society has appointed them to their positions and charged them with this task. YOU do NOT have that authority... but if you live in a free state you DO have the right to defend yourself.

 

[KingEdward]

Life in prison without parole keeps one out of society.

If the death penalty were any kind of a deterrant, why are there thousands
on death row? They don't seem to deterred.

Now if tomorrow, every death row person were executed (electric bleachers) then maybe a deterrent would exist.

The penalty of death is for justice to be carried out based on the crime.

Some crimes warrant it. Others do not.

All this has nothing to do with duty to retreat.

 

[Playboypenguin]

Here is another wrinkle.

It might even be deserving of it's own poll.

If you have a way to retreat during a home invasion, and have chosen to do so for reasons of your own, does it affect your decision to retreat if doing so would leave your pets at the mercy of the invader? If you could get out but could not take your dogs and/or cats would that cause you to stay and defend your home instead of retreat?

 

[Brian Pfleuger]

If you could get out but could not take your dogs and/or cats would that cause you to stay and defend your home instead of retreat?

Too easy for me. Risk MY life, the life that is responsible for my wife and 2 kids, for a dog/cat? Not just no, HELL no.

 

[KingEdward]

pets are not in the equation for me and home invasion.

my beagle will howl and then get under the bed.

i will not be taking focus off of intruders while retreating or not

to bother with animals. People come first.

I can get another beagle for $75.00 and give him a good life
for 13 years (current dog's age)

 

[Playboypenguin]

Too easy for me. Risk MY life, the life that is responsible for my wife and 2 kids, for a dog/cat? Not just no, HELL no.

I probably should have answered my own question so I will take this chnce to do so.

I would see it totally differently. I would see it as "would I harm a human invader to protect my dog?" My answer would be "Hell, yes."

I like my dogs way more than most law abiding people I meet...much less criminals.