Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Darvi]

Unless you're an accomplished martial artist, and the mugger happened to be stupid enough to come unarmed. In other words, never.

Unless you're a TV protagonist, I guess?

[majikero]

I overheard a former police say something about this kind of topic.

"If a man steals, ask him why he steals. If a man rapes, ask him why he rapes."

Its something like that. I can't translate the exact thing into English. Anyways, he said that he'll arrest the thief but he'll shoot to kill the rapist.

The thief will mostly have a reasonable excuse but rape has no excuses.

[GlyphGryph]

And now we come back to our point!

Maybe it is not preventing harm that makes killing the rapist acceptable, but a rapist is worth so little that preventing harm is a good enough reason to kill him, barring equally assured alternative prevention techniques?

Not saying it makes them worthless, of course - most people would agree that once he can't rape you anymore, you'd have no more cause to kill him. But rather that he is worth less than the victim, such that harm to the victim is worth more than him.

[Realmfighter]

If you're in a situation where your life and your ability to fully live it are in danger you do whatever it takes to end that danger. If you can end a situation by giving in and you consider this option superior in the long run to the chance or injury faced by fighting back then do so. But if you do decide to fight back you do absolutely everything in your power to end it before the other person can hurt you back. If the only fast and effective way to stop someone from raping you is to kill them then do it. But if you've neutralized your attacker without killing them then it stops being a matter of life or death and instead a matter of societies laws.

[kaijyuu]

This is a minor pet peeve so don't consider this too big a deal, but on the topic of rape...

Please don't automatically assume a rapist is male and the victim is female. It goes both ways. Statistically men are more likely to rape, but both genders get victimized and female rapists aren't exactly unheard of.

/end pedantic derail

[Hanslanda]

If you're getting mugged then it's in your own best interest to hand over your cash. Fighting back vastly increases the chance of you getting hurt.

This. On the flip side, in the case of rape, there is already a large chance they will kill you to cover it up. If someone wanted my money or my car or my things they can have them. I can always get more things. If someone is threatening my life I will kill them first, twice as hard, with no mercy, regret or remorse. If I attempt to kill them, and they are instead merely severely injured and incapacitated, then the threat has passed and I will attempt to get them medical treatment, because the justice system exists for a reason, and as much as killing someone who wanted to kill you is justifiable, it is not justice. And also, super illegal. It is 'necessary force' in the case of self defense.

So basically, I value my life more than my things, so I'd let someone take my things and leave my life. But if they want my life, I will fight them for it, because it is worth more to me than theirs at that point. Because survival instincts.

[Glowcat]

And now we come back to our point!

Maybe it is not preventing harm that makes killing the rapist acceptable, but a rapist is worth so little that preventing harm is a good enough reason to kill him, barring equally assured alternative prevention techniques?

Not saying it makes them worthless, of course - most people would agree that once he can't rape you anymore, you'd have no more cause to kill him. But rather that he is worth less than the victim, such that harm to the victim is worth more than him.

I view it more as a temporary forfeiture of the social contract we implicitly keep with each other because they themselves seek to violate it in an unconscionable manner. If they do something like that, they should accept that one possible consequence is death as their target defends themselves. If the attacker survives then hopefully they'll have learned their lesson (or at least be too scared to try something again) but their well-being should damn well not take precedence over the victim.

Stealing of property is iffier. If such a theft would effectively cause great harm to the victim's ability to enjoy what remains of their life (only really plausible if they're poor / lack safety nets) then I would sorta lean towards a stronger response but even then it's possible to recover from these situations with generosity (or a sane government), and theft itself can be driven by actual need, so I'm less certain in these cases of which level of response would break the moral threshold.

[LARD]

I overheard a former police say something about this kind of topic.

"If a man steals, ask him why he steals. If a man rapes, ask him why he rapes."

Its something like that. I can't translate the exact thing into English. Anyways, he said that he'll arrest the thief but he'll shoot to kill the rapist.

The thief will mostly have a reasonable excuse but rape has no excuses.

This. By killing someone, you are saying that there is no hope for them. Even a rapist will have been hurt sometimes in his/her life, in many cases, abused as children. I agree that there is no excuse for rape, but the line between good and evil, if you believe in that kind of morality, does not run between people, but down the center of each person. Rape isn't just a case by case basis, for one case will create another.
On a single case like the original, though, I have to say I would not shoot him. Not just because I'm a pacifist, but because there are ways of emotional healing, we have yet to figure out a way of healing dead people.

[Zangi]

What about someone who is robbing you? Is it still true, and how often? Does the dollar amount matter, or just the method of robbery? (obviously a mugging has a much higher chance of you could getting physically hurt, and could be argued on that end)

Hmm...  for material things...  I probably have much more leeway to not popping the fellow with the 'kill-em dead no matter what' gun.  This would probably have to do with how hostile/calm I feel in the given situation, which can vary in the course of daily life...  +Considering the legal and afterwards problems as before.

[lordcooper]

The only reasonable reason to use violence is to prevent a greater amount of violence from occurring.  Even then I'd prefer someone other than me does it.

[Loud Whispers]

So basically, I value my life more than my things, so I'd let someone take my things and leave my life. But if they want my life, I will fight them for it, because it is worth more to me than theirs at that point. Because survival instincts.

How do you decide if your life is in danger when someone breaks into your house at night and starts rummaging around? Do you let it slide, leaving the assailant be until (if?) police arrive, defend yourself or try to chase them off?

[Hanslanda]

If someone breaks into my house, they are a threat to my life. Don't violate the boundaries of my home and you don't need to fear for your life. I would defend myself. If I had a gun, I'd probably just say, "I have a gun and the police are coming. Move and I will kill you." Regardless of whether the police were coming. If they weren't, I'd probably restrain him somehow until they could be summoned.
Honestly, I'd really rather not kill someone. But if they've so severely violated my privacy as to enter my home at night, I'm going to consider them armed and dangerous and willing to harm me.

[kaijyuu]

* kaijyuu makes a note not to throw Hans any surprise parties and wake him up at 3 am.

[Hanslanda]

You honestly wouldn't make it in. I'm pretty crazy paranoid about noises at night. Unless I was in deep deep sleep and you were very quiet, I'd probably notice your entry. Plus, I don't own a gun, being an almost felon.

[pisskop]

Yay!  wait...almost felons can have guns.  Unless you on probation or something.  Take it from the ex-military DUI guy himself.