View Poll Results: Please Read the First Post

Voters
44. You may not vote on this poll
  • The woman in fact pattern one

    10 22.73%
  • The store owner in fact pattern two

    9 20.45%
  • They both have the right to kill

    17 38.64%
  • Neither has the right to kill

    8 18.18%
Page 4 of 6 FirstFirst ... 23456 LastLast
Results 31 to 40 of 53

Thread: Hypothetical: Who has the Stronger Right to Kill?

  1. #31
    Banned
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Last Seen
    10-16-11 @ 03:14 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Very Conservative
    Posts
    1,845

    Re: Hypothetical: Who has the Stronger Right to Kill?

    Quote Originally Posted by DashingAmerican View Post
    Didn't say he didn't have the right to shoot him and if he attacks the owner then by all means he has the right to kill him.
    The discharge of the firearm into the person in question is an exercise of deadly force, regardless if the person dies or not.

  2. #32
    Advisor GreenvilleGrows's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Location
    My version of reality
    Last Seen
    10-05-12 @ 04:51 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    566

    Re: Hypothetical: Who has the Stronger Right to Kill?

    Quote Originally Posted by Viktyr Korimir View Post
    The former clearly has the greater right to kill, being subject to violation of her body, but I'd argue that they are both entirely within their rights to kill. In the latter case, the dealership owner has no way of knowing the intruder's intentions, mental state, or whether or not he is armed. When dealing with unknown persons, one should always assume that they are armed and make no assumptions about their intentions.
    So, the store owner has the right to shoot the intruder. Agreed. But, if the intruder is interupted during the burlary and escapes accidentally leaving his 6 wk old in a baby carrier, the store owner has the right to shoot the child? No one would support that way of thinking.

    It's either life or it's not life. If it's not life, it doesn't matter because it's not killing. If it's life, then property rights issues don't justify the obvious over use of force against the obviously helpless.

    Children, after birth, are much more inconvenient, expensive, and destructive to personal property than children, before birth. But, few tolerate parents killing their children after they're born. They tolerate it before they are born because general society has deemed (consciously or unconsciously) that it is not life. The portion of society that deems it life, for the most part, realize that "anti-social" behavior will not provide acceptable results.
    The US is an odd ship. The captain yells out when he sees obtacles , but 535 individual propellers do the steering.

  3. #33
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    New England
    Last Seen
    05-01-14 @ 03:29 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Very Conservative
    Posts
    12,879

    Re: Hypothetical: Who has the Stronger Right to Kill?

    They both have the Right to Kill.

    IF the first scenario were the result of a drunken night with her boyfriend where she consented to the sexual act, then she would not have the Right to Kill in my mind, but since she was not consented about the act that created the pregnancy, she does have the Right to Kill so far as I am concerned.

    I've already commented in another thread that I have absolutely no issue with how the gentlemen protected the used car lot.

  4. #34
    Baby Eating Monster
    Korimyr the Rat's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Laramie, WY
    Last Seen
    11-23-17 @ 02:02 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian - Left
    Posts
    18,709
    Blog Entries
    1

    Re: Hypothetical: Who has the Stronger Right to Kill?

    Quote Originally Posted by GreenvilleGrows View Post
    So, the store owner has the right to shoot the intruder. Agreed. But, if the intruder is interupted during the burlary and escapes accidentally leaving his 6 wk old in a baby carrier, the store owner has the right to shoot the child? No one would support that way of thinking.
    The store owner can call someone else to come pick up the baby and take it off his hands. If this were not the case, I would absolutely support allowing him to shoot it.

    Quote Originally Posted by GreenvilleGrows View Post
    It's either life or it's not life. If it's not life, it doesn't matter because it's not killing. If it's life, then property rights issues don't justify the obvious over use of force against the obviously helpless.
    I support the use of deadly force in defense of property rights. And even if I did not, the unborn child-- helpless or not-- is directly inflicting bodily harm upon the woman carrying it. It should only be allowed to continue doing this for as long as she consents to it.

    Quote Originally Posted by GreenvilleGrows View Post
    Children, after birth, are much more inconvenient, expensive, and destructive to personal property than children, before birth. But, few tolerate parents killing their children after they're born. They tolerate it before they are born because general society has deemed (consciously or unconsciously) that it is not life. The portion of society that deems it life, for the most part, realize that "anti-social" behavior will not provide acceptable results.
    Children, after birth, can be removed from their parents' homes without harming them.

  5. #35
    Anti-Hypocrite
    molten_dragon's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    Southeast Michigan
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 06:20 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Slightly Liberal
    Posts
    9,351

    Re: Hypothetical: Who has the Stronger Right to Kill?

    I support the woman having a right to an abortion.

    I don't support killing someone in defense of property only.
    If you build a man a fire, he'll be warm for a day.

    If you set a man on fire, he'll be warm for the rest of his life.

  6. #36
    Banned
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Location
    Everywhere and Nowhere
    Last Seen
    03-07-12 @ 03:28 AM
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    3,692

    Re: Hypothetical: Who has the Stronger Right to Kill?

    Since we're dealing with a theoretical situation only, I will address this in a philosophical way. If it were happening in front of my face, my reaction could be completely different.

    People need to be careful when they talk about the "right to kill". No such right exists, not even in natural law. Rights are assigned to intellectual and social forces only, and they tend to deal with collective relationships, i.e. a bunch of humans living together.

    I've heard people talk about "natural rights" when it comes to killing, such as when protecting a child. The only natural right that really exists is: do what you want - you really do have complete freedom. There is no one around to enforce your "right" to kill, other than yourself. If you live in a tribe, then there are other social forces at work, but ultimately this is about your own relationship to the concept.

    If you want to kill someone for any reason, no justification is necessary. Yes, you will likely deal with consequences if you live in a tribe, but the notion that it's sacrosanct is self-created. Humans kill all the time and for arbitrary reasons. Not saying it's a good thing, but it's the truth.

    When placed in a survival situation, all this sophistry disappears. Instinct is pure action, and the actions don't usually respond to the concept of rights. Violence and killing are the most unconscious of all acts. They just happen. If someone is defending their child to the death, they are not thinking about rights. They want to protect their kid and they will kill anyone who defies that.

    So... to summarize all this neatly... no one has the right to kill. They just kill.

  7. #37
    Global Moderator
    Moderator

    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Last Seen
    @
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    36,913

    Re: Hypothetical: Who has the Stronger Right to Kill?

    Quote Originally Posted by Goshin View Post
    Too many problems with this attempt. For one, it is comparing an innocent party to a guilty party. For another, too many unproveable and/or unknowable assumptions.

    No thanks, I'll pass.
    That's my problem too--trying to compare an innocent party with a guilty one.

  8. #38
    Professor
    Luna Tick's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Nebraska
    Last Seen
    04-05-13 @ 05:48 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    2,148

    Re: Hypothetical: Who has the Stronger Right to Kill?

    The store owner has the right to rape the burglar.

  9. #39
    warrior of the wetlands
    TurtleDude's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    Ohio
    Last Seen
    Today @ 01:49 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian - Right
    Posts
    180,715

    Re: Hypothetical: Who has the Stronger Right to Kill?

    Quote Originally Posted by Luna Tick View Post
    The store owner has the right to rape the burglar.
    that's really out there



  10. #40
    Sage
    jamesrage's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    A place where common sense exists
    Last Seen
    12-10-17 @ 09:23 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Slightly Conservative
    Posts
    31,067

    Re: Hypothetical: Who has the Stronger Right to Kill?

    Quote Originally Posted by Luna Tick View Post
    The store owner has the right to rape the burglar.
    You might find this amusing.

    Hairdresser turns robber into sex-slave — RT
    "A nation can survive its fools, and even the ambitious. But it cannot survive treason from within. An enemy at the gates is less formidable, for he is known and carries his banner openly. But the traitor moves amongst those within the gate freely, his sly whispers rustling through all the alleys, heard in the very halls of government itself. For the traitor appears not a traitor; he speaks in accents familiar to his victims, and he wears their face and their arguments, he appeals to the baseness that lies deep in the hearts of all men. He rots the soul of a nation, he works secretly and unknown in the night to undermine the pillars of the city, he infects the body politic so that it can no longer resist. A murder is less to fear"

    Cicero Marcus Tullius

Page 4 of 6 FirstFirst ... 23456 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •