Besides, there’s way too much margin for error in vigilante justice. That’s why we have trials, imperfect as even they may be. They’re certainly better than empowering everyone to be judge, jury, and executioner because they thought you might be committing a property crime.
I have medication I need to live. If I don’t take it regularly daily, a clock starts ticking. When the time is up, I die.
When I travel I treat my bags like my life. I recent had nasty run in with an airline that wanted me to check my bags. I refused to get on the plane.
When I took the next flight, my checked baggage didn’t make the connection.
I might have survived if I got to the ER fast enough. But those bags are my life.
In developing countries, petrol means access to medicine, food, etc.
“Property is more important than life” is a luxury belief for the wealthy and healthy.
If you don't mind my asking, what medication do you take?
Generally speaking, no, of course not. But, if someone's breaking into your home in the middle of the night, you don't know what their intentions are to just steal some stuff or to rape and murder your family. There's a reason so many states have castle doctrine and such, and it's because there really are bad people out there.
https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/florida-father-son-shoo...
Have you seen the film "Bicycle Thieves"? If someone's property is his livelihood one can have sympathies for those defending it with extreme measures.
"If it's not worth your life, then don't commit vehicle registration fraud."
If I catch someone stealing my car from my driveway at night, can I shoot them as they try to start the ignition?
If I see someone swiping my cell phone off my restaurant table while I'm turned around... shoot them?
What about my umbrella?
For instance, if I own a vehicle and it is my primary method of escape, and someone starts fucking with critical systems like say the exhaust with a sawzall, I woud definitely start fearing for my life and the life of my family. Particularly when automobile is absolutely critical for survival, access to grocery/medical care etc, escape from say criminals in your yard operating sawzalls in commission of felonies, in much of America. If someone is in my yard fucking with my way to get away in danger, and they're physically tearing it apart with a sawzall, then I think it would be reasonable to allow defense of my family.
If someone is just stealing a hood ornament with their hands, then no maybe it's unreasonable to fear for your life.
With a phone I think it would depend more on context. Intentionally and without consent stealing / disabling someone's method of calling for help and emergency could make a reasonable person fear for their life if that person was also in the process of commission of felonies in your immediate proximity with a dangerous sawzall.
When you infringe on the rights of another human being, you put yourself at their mercy. Some people are not very reasonable. Legal or illegal, you just might find yourself attacked by that person, possibly killed. Even if you make laws against it, there's always that danger. Every time you violate the rights of another person you're risking your life, and it doesn't matter what the law says.
