Defending yourself
Fight or comply? There’s an article about it herethat got me to thinking. I’ve said before to teach kids to fight back in case of a school shooting. I stand by that. That said, fight back whenever there’s a threat of physical harm (assault, battery, rape, if someone is trying to kill you, if someone is in your house, etc.). But here’s the rub, if it came down to just property, I’d let it go. If someone threatens me for my cash, it’s theirs. If they want my car, it’s theirs. I have insurance. That said, it’d be hard to determine if someone meant me harm or not. But, warranted or not, I would not use force merely to defend material things. It’s not worth it.
Rich relays a tale of a time he was robbed and emphasizes training.
November 21st, 2006 at 10:58 am
That’s the thing, though: Threatening you for your cash is the threat of physical harm. What assurances do you have that your compliance will assure your safety? The word of a criminal?
It’s a fine line that I’ve come down on both sides of before; I guess it all depends on how you read the individual and the moment, and isn’t something you can script out beforehand…
November 21st, 2006 at 11:00 am
It’d be a total judgement call.
November 21st, 2006 at 12:49 pm
+1 on what Tam said. I talked my way out of it once. I was coming out of the bar I moonlighted at late one night, and four young guys came up and asked to borrow some change for a phone call. Clearly they had the notion of rolling a drunk. Fortunately for me I was just a few months out of basic training and I was nothing but hard and rippling muscles teamed up with that invincible attitude you have at that time. After talking to me for a few moments and getting a good look, they chickened out.
Good for me because the only gun I owned at the time was a Marlin 1894, and the closest thing to a self defense weapon I had on me at the time were my fists.
It all boils down to two things. I don’t want to hurt anybody but I’m not going to let them do what they will with me. It is their choice.
November 21st, 2006 at 2:39 pm
It’s not just property. It’s the right to be secure. It’s not letting people get away with criminal behavior. If everyone let thieves get away without a fight, there’d be even more stealing going on.
Yes, I’d hate to get hurt/killed over a material possession, but there’s a principle involved that to me outweighs the fact that it’s just “stuff” and can be replaced.
Would you feel the same way if someone was walking up to your house (nobody inside) with a couple of gas cans and said he was going to burn it to the ground? Would you really be able to stand by and watch? What if you knew that your homeowners insurance had just lapsed?
There are laws in many places that actually specify that you can’t use deadly force to defend property, but I don’t entirely agree with them. Not sure where you draw the line. I don’t think your neighbor should be shot if you catch him stealing your paper. Maybe the difference to me is when you are being robbed personally.
Yeah, it’s mostly a case-by-case thing and I hope I never have to make the decision.
November 21st, 2006 at 3:25 pm
To follow up on what Tam says: Psychos are psychos. If he is in a position where he can do you harm, like three feet away and demanding your wallet, fight back. You don’t know that he won’t see giving it up as a sign of weakness and then demand that you do a “Deliverance”. If you’re safe inside your home and he’s trying to steal your car from your driveway, call 911. Don’t shoot at him. There, you’re right. (I had the same exact experience. Somebody tried to steal my car from the driveway and even though I had a gun in the house I reached for the phone. When I told my father, he approved. He said, “We’re not going to become killers over a car”.)
November 21st, 2006 at 11:58 pm
This is mine…. My life, my family, my property, my liberty…..you can’t have it! Period.
November 22nd, 2006 at 1:46 pm
If I see you driving away in my new car, I will not shoot you. If you brace me or mine in person, I will kill you, if at all possible, as quickly and efficiently as I can. If you get away for whatever reason and you leave me alive, I will come after you to discourage you with prejudice from designs on a return engagement.
November 22nd, 2006 at 1:55 pm
One way of looking at theft is that it is murder writ small. A portion of one’s life is spent in the earning of the wherewithal to obtain one’s possessions. Ergo, if murder is the ujustified taking of one’s life, is not the taking or negating of a small portion of it, by stealing the possession life was spent in acquiring, akin to murder, only written smaller?
Many societies throughout history have taken that view, and I certainly can find no logical flaw in it. Even though I personally have no possessions I value as highly as a human life, I do see the logic in not allowing someone to steal a portion of mine, either. Yet, I would be hesitant to kill over mere material, it isn’t material they are actually taking is it?