"Jim Doyle" wrote in
:


"B2431" wrote in message
...
From: "Jim Doyle"


"Jim Yanik" wrote in message
. ..
"Jim Doyle" wrote in
:


No, the life of a criminal of the type you describe is
worthless. Genuinely. Yet there is a distinction between him and
some random hard-up opportunist burglar with a family to feed.
Granted, he's in the wrong - but not deserving of a death
sentence.

But it's the CRIMINAL'S risk.
OTOH,you would rather have the ODC bear the risks.

'ODC' - surely that would indicate a responsibility to preserve
life?

And once again,getting shot is NOT always a "death sentence".
Nice try at emotionalizing the issue,though.

The act of shooting at a person may result in their death. Luck of
the
draw
if it's not fatal, but the intention is to kill, is it not?
Otherwise
you'd
pursue a non-lethal method of self-protection.

So yes, you are engaging a person who could die as a result of your
actions,
and according to you they deserve to die for the situation in which
you
both
find yourselves - that's as good as sentencing them to death. In
fact -
it
is.

--
Jim Yanik
jyanik-at-kua.net

It is simply NOT a matter of being judge, jury and executioner.
Shooting
is not
the first choice. If the badguy doesn't retreat and you feel
threatened
then
it's the badguy's fault, no one else's.

The application of lethal force seems to be little else - this is the
issue I have with the use of firearms by untrained individuals for
home protection.

Let's try a nonlethal analogy. Badguy enters your house and threatens
your children. You break his knee cap with a 9 iron. Badguy will
never walk
normal
again. Whose fault is it? The badguy set up the scenario, the badguy
committed
a felony just entering an occupied dwelling (ever notice the
penalties are higher for occupied dwellings than for unoccupied?
There's a reason) The
bad
guy made threats. You have to act.

As an aside, I used to teach NRA courses including home protection.
The
word
kill is never used and part of the course is taught by a lawyer
and/or a
law
enforcement officer. We teach to "stop" the aggressor. If that means
you
have
to kill then do it.

In the United States laws suits are too common. The 9 iron scenario
above
would
most likely result in the home owner being sued with the bad guy
winning.

I understand what you are explaining. I think it a little odd that, it
at least seems, people can be prepared to kill to avoid court action.

Yes,that IS a sad state of affairs,that people defending themselves would
be prosecuted for injuries suffered by the criminal while in the act of
committing the crime.


--
Jim Yanik
jyanik-at-kua.net