If you have a home robber at your mercy, should it be a crime to execute him?

[Tomservo]

Is it immoral to force them to do the chicken dance at gunpoint until authorities arrive?

[ohiostate124]

Well, it all depends on how they behave. If they shoot at me, i'm gonna fucking shoot back. If they get caught and they don't try to do anything, and they are very very sorry for what they have done, i'm just gonna call the police and let them deal with it. Or... if they have a gun pointed at them and they are acting like dickheads i'm prob gonna shoot their kneecaps off, and contact the police and then call selfdefense. It's all in the person/people....

Good luck arguing self defense after shooting their knee caps.

[Total Crica]

Executing is always wrong.

Killing can be OK (in self defense/defense of another), but never as anything other than a last resort.

Nope. Someone who poses a threat is given my resources so they can continue to live in seclusion in jail because I choose mercy, not because it would be wrong to execute them. Killing them would ensure my safety, giving them my resources to live off of doesn't. It only ensures I am merciful.

[Doctor Amadeus]

Should it be crime to execute them? Yes But not because I care about the robbers, it rare a situation I would say that, but your home your one place you should feel safe. You break IN to someones home you made your choice.

However it should be illegal because here is why. How do we know who broke in,what if the person was allowed in then killed. Without the buden of proving why you did what you did. What's to stop someone from shooting their husband and saying " I thought he was out of town on business" can she also still collect the issuance?


So NO in addition to the bad idea of sanctioning murder in general like say Florida.

[Dezerte]

If you fear for your life, is what I base it on. There's no perfect situation here, but that's not to say that there isn't limits to what you should be allowed to do - the fearing for life-defense is going to look pretty weak if you e.g. shot the intruder in the back of the head at short range, or shot a fleeing intruder etc.

[Doctor Amadeus]

Nope. Someone who poses a threat is given my resources so they can continue to live in seclusion in jail because I choose mercy, not because it would be wrong to execute them. Killing them would ensure my safety, giving them my resources to live off of doesn't. It only ensures I am merciful.

Yeah you might want to clear your browser history cause that's premeditated right there.

[Shadowferal]

Reminded of this: woman rushes out of bed and opens fire on three armed burglars who broke into her home

[Rolow]

It should be a crime, yes. But even if it wasn't, would you really want to clean up the room of all the remains after you blew them away?

[Mihalik]

I've read on stories where these scenarios did happen (the execute part) and, while the person that killed his assailants don't really ever get crazy punishments, they still go to jail for a time. Like, why?

Because YOU are not judge/jury/executioner. If there's no imminent danger and threat to your life, than you are just a murderer.

[Shadowferal]

It should be a crime, yes. But even if it wasn't, would you really want to clean up the room of all the remains after you blew them away?

Now this is thinking forward!

[Hctaz]

no it's fucking NOT. What is stopping these people from coming back?

Uh... going to prison for breaking into somebody's home with weapons with the intent to kill or steal? If they come back 20 years later to get revenge on you then... well I dunno what to say at that point. If they brought weapons in with them then I'm sure you could argue it was with the intent to kill and they would get severely punished. No, they don't deserve to be executed if they are subdued. If there's a struggle and your life is in danger and you shoot them and they die from the wounds you needed to inflict to subdue them then that's on them. If you get them on their knees and they're fucking done and the cops are coming to take them away you should definitely be persecuted for killing them at that point. That's just inhumane.

[Mihalik]

Nope. Someone who poses a threat is given my resources so they can continue to live in seclusion in jail because I choose mercy, not because it would be wrong to execute them. Killing them would ensure my safety, giving them my resources to live off of doesn't. It only ensures I am merciful.

Who appointed you Judge/Jury/Executioner? See the problem? If there's an imminent threat, then it is self defense. If there's no imminent threat then it's just plain old murder.

[razkah]

Because that is not up to you to decide. The entire law system is pointless if you were to carry out decisions like this yourself. That is why you are meant to pass them to the state, and it is a crime for you to do otherwise.

If you don't understand this, you don't understand the entire principle governments and (most of) modern societies are built on. Read a book.

Edit: unless the local law explicitly allows you to, that is.

[Mihalik]

Is it immoral to force them to do the chicken dance at gunpoint until authorities arrive?

No. Tho it would be funny as shit.

[Ghostpanther]

It should be a crime, yes. But even if it wasn't, would you really want to clean up the room of all the remains after you blew them away?

For one, it would be a crime scene and you would have to wait for permission from the police. But I certainly would rather it be their remains than one of my loved ones.

The Castle Law in Ohio states simply if someone breaks in your home*, you have the right to assume your life is in danger and the legal right to use deadly force. Now you do not shoot to wound a intruder, you shoot to stop them. Which means you aim for center mass and sadly, this can at times lead to a fatal wound. If for some reason the threat is stopped and they are not offering any more resistance, then of course you do not shoot them as that would be murder. You hold them at bay until the police can arrive.

* this also extends to your vehicle.

[Independent voter]

OP posts a lot of threads like this.

*sigh* No, we haven't executed thieves for a very long time, even like in the year zero AD they would imprison thieves or cut off their hand but they wouldn't kill them.

[Deleted]

if you want to shoot home invaders just shoot them. whats the point in asking/forcing them to surrender if you are just gonna shoot them afterwards.

[Alvito]

no it's fucking NOT. What is stopping these people from coming back? The moment they invade your home to hurt you, the moment they lose their rights as human beings and revert to wild animals for putting down.

That is the justifaction I recall for a man that heard noises and set bear traps in his home the robbers stepped on. After which, he showed up guns blazing and killed them. He was sent to jail.

Off your meds again? What stops them from coming back is the cops on the way to arrest them. You don't get to murder some people because you are a sick fearful person. Great made up bear trap story too. Like any sane person leaves fucking bear traps set in their house. Also if somebody had and a person was in one they aren't going to do anything to anybody at that point so shooting them is murder.

- - - Updated - - -

OP posts a lot of threads like this.

*sigh* No, we haven't executed thieves for a very long time, even like in the year zero AD they would imprison thieves or cut off their hand but they wouldn't kill them.

He is the same person that wanted to kill every dog that barks at him because they make him fear for his life.

[Hctaz]

Reminded of this: woman rushes out of bed and opens fire on three armed burglars who broke into her home

This is completely different. She came around the corner opening fire on people who broke into her house. That's fine. She didn't subdue them, have them on their knees, and then pop a cap in their brains.

[Nirawen]

OP posts a lot of threads like this.

*sigh* No, we haven't executed thieves for a very long time, even like in the year zero AD they would imprison thieves or cut off their hand but they wouldn't kill them.

Depends what you were stealing, cattle & horse thieves were executed for quite a long time.

As for the thread, yes it should clearly be a crime to execute someone.