HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Forums & Groups » Topics » Justice & Public Safety » Gun Control & RKBA (Group) » Lives and possessions: pe...

Wed Apr 18, 2012, 04:50 PM

Lives and possessions: personal morals or public policy? [View all]

I've heard it said quite often that using a handgun (or any weapon, for that matter) in the case of robbery is morally wrong, because "possessions aren't worth killing over." I hope everybody agrees with the quotation, but I wonder how y'all feel about codifying it. Should a self-defense plea be rejected if the defendant refused to comply with an unlawful demand (with or without threat), and was subsequently attacked? Should compliance be considered a means of escaping danger in a strict "duty to retreat" jurisdiction? It is often an effective strategy for avoiding violence, but it also necessarily means that the robbery is successful. What's a more important goal: preventing a nonviolent criminal act from escalating into a violent encounter, or protecting the people's right to refuse an unlawful demand, and subsequent defense?

23 replies, 2655 views

Reply to this thread

Back to top Alert abuse

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum
Replies to this discussion thread
Arrow 23 replies Author Time Post
Reply Lives and possessions: personal morals or public policy? [View all]
Glaug-Eldare Apr 2012 OP
TheWraith Apr 2012 #1
Hoyt Apr 2012 #6
ManiacJoe Apr 2012 #8
X_Digger Apr 2012 #10
Remmah2 Apr 2012 #17
SATIRical Apr 2012 #21
hack89 Apr 2012 #23
Atypical Liberal Apr 2012 #2
Clames Apr 2012 #3
AtheistCrusader Apr 2012 #4
Hoyt Apr 2012 #5
Glaug-Eldare Apr 2012 #11
Hoyt Apr 2012 #12
AH1Apache Apr 2012 #13
Lizzie Poppet Apr 2012 #14
PavePusher Apr 2012 #15
hack89 Apr 2012 #22
Remmah2 Apr 2012 #18
Lurks Often Apr 2012 #19
PavePusher Apr 2012 #7
ileus Apr 2012 #9
Remmah2 Apr 2012 #16
Glaug-Eldare Apr 2012 #20