Would You Kill To Protect Property?

[Revoltingest]

First, I'll acknowledge that the poll options won't please all.
They're imperfect. But I chose them to keep things clear
& simple. So no complaining about them. Everyone has
an option.
Second, this is a controversial issue. Be civil.
Keep it about the issue, & don't make it personal.
Answers are neither right nor wrong.

Imagine....
You have a business selling artisanal frubals made of natural
conflict-free materials. You take great pride in them, & this is
your life's work. It supports your family. You own your place
of business, which holds your workshop & entire stock.

Rioters & looters approach your property, giving you the stink eye.
There is a trail of fire & mayhem in their wake. They arrive.
You ask that they leave you in peace, but they cointinue advancing.
You warn them that you are a peaceful person, but that you're
prepared to use deadly force in defense of your business.

Legality....
Such defense is legal if the person remains on one's own
property, & the malefactors' approach is a threat to life & limb,
not merely to property. There is no duty to retreat & abandon it.

 

[Revoltingest]

I voted <yes>.
But I'd first exhaust all my diplomatic & negotiation options first.
I'll even tolerate a little damage.

 

[lewisnotmiller]

No. I'd use deadly force to defend my family and probably myself.
But not property.

 

[PoetPhilosopher]

The best my mind can wrap around it is to maybe treat it like someone breaking into your house. So this answer won't please everyone. But there may be additional legal issues I'm not aware of that don't apply to a person breaking and entering your home, but apply here, I don't know.

 

[Revoltingest]

The best my mind can wrap around it is to maybe treat it like someone breaking into your house. So this answer won't please everyone. But there may be additional legal issues I'm not aware of that don't apply to a person breaking and entering your home, but apply here, I don't know.

One complexity I imagine is if one stands in the way of the perps.
This is peaceful resistance, but it can provoke violence against one.
In this instance, defending oneself melds with defending property.

Legal issues are complex.
We have de juro vs de facto law, & great subjectivity.
As I see it, give'm every opportunity to leave &/or be peaceful.

 

[Secret Chief]

Are the frubals GM free?

Glad to see it's in this sub-forum; in the UK for the scenario described, the legality issue may be different, I suspect.

 

[Secret Chief]

No. I'd use deadly force to defend my family and probably myself.
But not property.

But think of the frubals!

 

[Revoltingest]

Are the frubals GM free?

I considered adding that, but the certification is too difficult.
Btw, there are solar panels on the roof, & the toilet is the composting variety.

Glad to see it's in this sub-forum; in the UK for the scenario described, it's not legal I believe.

As I understand RF, the laws of Californiastan apply.
But I'm sure my scenario is legal in Michiganistan, Revoltistan, & many other states.
Trying to comply with the rules here.
We'll see if I get dinged or not.

 

[Dan From Smithville]

I voted <yes>.
But I'd first exhaust all my diplomatic & negotiation options first.
I'll even tolerate a little damage.

I voted no, but only to the extent that it was property being damaged. However, if someone is in your house, and since we cannot read minds and only see evidence, their unwelcome and unlawful presence is an unknown. If they respond to warnings and retreat, they can leave unscathed. If not, one must consider that the threat to physical harm for oneself and others has increased and requires defense.

 

[lewisnotmiller]

But think of the frubals!

Heh...made me chuckle.

But to address a couple of things in the @Revoltingest OP a bit more seriously...

1) to me it's possible to talk about this without worrying too much about the legalities. My actions probably wouldn't change if the law was different.

2) it'll sound pithy, but I don't have a ton of pride in 'stuff'. Even a business I've built up. I'm not telling others what they should be proud of, but my pride lies in other areas. Acting in a violent manner to defend property would not fill me with pride. Acting in a violent manner to defend my family would, but only if I'd done everything I could to avoid the violence in the first place.

 

[lewisnotmiller]

I considered adding that, but the certification is too difficult.
Btw, there are solar panels on the roof, & the toilet is the composting variety.


As I understand RF, the laws of Californiastan apply.
But I'm sure my scenario is legal in Michiganistan, Revoltistan, & many other states.
Trying to comply with the rules here.
We'll see if I get dinged or not.

I think you could just spell out how you want the hypothetical to work.
It's not like you're inciting illegal action, etc.

I say that as me...not as staff.

 

[Stevicus]

First, I'll acknowledge that the poll options won't please all.
They're imperfect. But I chose them to keep things clear
& simple. So no complaining about them. Everyone has
an option.
Second, this is a controversial issue. Be civil.
Keep it about the issue, & don't make it personal.
Answers are neither right nor wrong.

Imagine....
You have a business selling artisanal frubals made of natural
conflict-free materials. You take great pride in them, & this is
your life's work. It supports your family. You own your place
of business, which holds your workshop & entire stock.

Rioters & looters approach your property, giving you the stink eye.
There is a trail of fire & mayhem in their wake. They arrive.
You ask that they leave you in peace, but they cointinue advancing.
You warn them that you are a peaceful person, but that you're
prepared to use deadly force in defense of your business.

Legality....
Such defense is legal if the person remains on one's own
property, & the malefactors' approach is a threat to life & limb,
not merely to property. There is no duty to retreat & abandon it.

I've seen some stores in the rougher areas have steel bars, gates, or large metal doors to protect the entire store. They seemingly have the ability to quickly fortify the entrances, like some kind of mini-fortress in an urban nightmare.

Or maybe you could have a moat and fill it with alligators.

 

[Samael_Khan]

First, I'll acknowledge that the poll options won't please all.
They're imperfect. But I chose them to keep things clear
& simple. So no complaining about them. Everyone has
an option.
Second, this is a controversial issue. Be civil.
Keep it about the issue, & don't make it personal.
Answers are neither right nor wrong.

Imagine....
You have a business selling artisanal frubals made of natural
conflict-free materials. You take great pride in them, & this is
your life's work. It supports your family. You own your place
of business, which holds your workshop & entire stock.

Rioters & looters approach your property, giving you the stink eye.
There is a trail of fire & mayhem in their wake. They arrive.
You ask that they leave you in peace, but they cointinue advancing.
You warn them that you are a peaceful person, but that you're
prepared to use deadly force in defense of your business.

Legality....
Such defense is legal if the person remains on one's own
property, & the malefactors' approach is a threat to life & limb,
not merely to property. There is no duty to retreat & abandon it.

I voted other because there are fates worse than death...

 

[Secret Chief]

As I understand RF, the laws of Californiastan apply.
But I'm sure my scenario is legal in Michiganistan, Revoltistan, & many other states.
Trying to comply with the rules here.
We'll see if I get dinged or not.

It seems a lot more cut-and-dried in the USA, certainly more than in the UK:

"He was sentenced to life two years ago for shooting dead teenage burglar Fred Barras and wounding his accomplice Brendon Fearon as they raided his Norfolk home in August 1999. Last year Martin had his life sentence reduced to five years on appeal.

Farmer who shot intruder walks free | Daily Mail Online

 

[beenherebeforeagain]

I answered no, but it would also depend on whether or not there was any immediate threat to self and family...

 

[esmith]

I read here some saying that they would only use deadly force to protect their family not their property.
Do these people realize that if ones property is used to provide for the family and the loss of this property means harm could come to the family would they not use deadly force to protect their property that protects their family? And no to the point that property can be rebuilt because it can only be rebuilt it there is the money to do so.

But to answer the question......I would use deadly force to protect my property, but I agree with the Rev only at last resort. Once you step into or onto my property you have crossed the line since I do not know what your intentions are and I would fear for my life and my spouse's life.

 

[ADigitalArtist]

No, I would focus on escaping and aiding anyone else in escaping.

 

[lewisnotmiller]

Or maybe you could have a moat and fill it with alligators.

If you're going to chuck big predator things in a moat, don't stuff around with alligators. They're straight out of the kiddie section. Stock it with saltwater crocs.

Or give the alligators laser-beam hats. One or the other.

 

[Revoltingest]

Heh...made me chuckle.

But to address a couple of things in the @Revoltingest OP a bit more seriously...

1) to me it's possible to talk about this without worrying too much about the legalities. My actions probably wouldn't change if the law was different.

2) it'll sound pithy, but I don't have a ton of pride in 'stuff'. Even a business I've built up. I'm not telling others what they should be proud of, but my pride lies in other areas. Acting in a violent manner to defend property would not fill me with pride. Acting in a violent manner to defend my family would, but only if I'd done everything I could to avoid the violence in the first place.

We have pride in one's property, but we also have livelihood.
But about pride.....
Have you ever seen the movie, Do The Right Thing?
There's an interesting scene.
Caution: Profanity

 

[Secret Chief]

My actions probably wouldn't change if the law was different.

Thankfully neither of us have been in this situation. I would not deliberately try to kill to defend material things. But if awoken by burglars breaking in, in that short scary time I would be aware that one cannot simply do what it seems an American can, assuming I wanted to. (See the case I referred to above). I'm pretty sure if I calmly walked downstairs and killed the intruder, that would be considered murder. "Reasonable force" is argued over in court, after the event.