Balance between neutered citizens and overly violent citizens...?

[Kadagar_AV]

There were these guys 2 seconds ago who broke into a car.

I would go out and confront them, but the last one in my neighbourhood who did it got stabbed to death.

It only took them some 2-3 min, then they were off.

I did call the police (much good that does). But seriously I feel... Neutered? I think that's the closest word I can find. See, over here, if you hurt someone you generally end up worse than the actual offender in court. I could bring my dog, but if he bites someone bad, he will have to have one of those things around his mouth for the rest of his life, if he doesn't get put to death.

ALL my instincts yelled at me to go out and defend my neighbours property... My dog would have backed me... But instead I sit here typing this on .org.

I don't know what I like the least, Swedish immigration policy overflowing the country with people from trash cultures fresh out of a warzone, or Swedens strict laws on violence, and also dogs.

FML

Oh and yeah, the perpetrators are long gone.

[Kadagar_AV]

.. Murica .. ?

Not REALLY the answer I was looking for, mate... There must be some middle way...

*not that I would be opposed to landmines on my front garden*

[rvg]

There must be some middle way...

2-H axe? Chainsaw?

[Kadagar_AV]

2-H axe? Chainsaw?

Cutting them in half - and middle way - REALLY isn't the same thing, bro

[rvg]

Cutting them in half - and middle way - REALLY isn't the same thing, bro

If they're stupid enough to try to stab a man wielding a chainsaw, they MUST be purged from the gene pool. Like they say in Detroit: "niggas get shot for shit like that."

[Kadagar_AV]

If they're stupid enough to try to stab a man wielding a chainsaw, they MUST be purged from the gene pool. Like they say in Detroit: "niggas get shot for shit like that."

Yeah, I just don't want to spend 15 years in jail for having taken them out of the gene pool... That should be quite understandable.

[rvg]

Yeah, I just don't want to spend 15 years in jail for having taken them out of the gene pool... That should be quite understandable.

Aren't you allowed to defend yourself?

[Kadagar_AV]

Aren't you allowed to defend yourself?

Sure you are, with least amount of force. PROVING you were only defending yourself with least amount of force is a whole other matter.

As an example, some years ago, a lady around 70-80 or so years old had stopped with her car. A psychotic man opened the door, and started to strangle her.

All she could do was honk her cars horn...

A guy stopped, saw what happened, grabbed the nearest tool and beat the perpetrator unconscious.

Perpetrator went to a mental ward, the guy with the tool went to prison for "armed assault". Judge thought he could have used less force.

Sure, our version of supreme court cleared him after a public uproar, but that still goes to show where we are at legally.

[rvg]

...Perpetrator went to a mental ward, the guy with the tool went to prison for "armed assault". Judge thought he could have used less force.

This is horrible! Don't people have a problem with a law like that?

[Kadagar_AV]

This is horrible! Don't people have a problem with a law like that?

Well, we used to have quite low statistics on crime, so people were happy as is. You know, the "perpetrator" used to be someones son and neighbour..

These days, crime is sky rocketing and the perpetrator is generally some arab or negroe fresh out of a warzone...

Sweden these days accept more than 1% of their population as immigrants, generally from the lowest scum cultures. Guess what happens when that is a trend for 10-20-30 years.

[Seamus Fermanagh]

Castle law and stand your ground.

Property is an extension of the person, defending it is part of a person's right of self defense.

Maybe a courteous "Get away from my car or I'll shoot" first. I note that I believe that to be a courtesy, not a requirement.

[Kadagar_AV]

Sometimes I hate it when Americans make sense..

Still though, I DO NOT want Sweden to turn into some mini-USA where signs like "Trespassers will be shot, survivors will be shot again" seem reasonable.

[Husar]

IMO you should be able to defend yourself with what you have but if you can avoid killing the perp and do it anyway, then it's not okay. Before he is incapacitated or runs away, anything goes. Shooting someone in the back because he is carrying your TV is not okay. If the TV breaks from the shot or when he falls, you get the double sentence. Not that you would need a gun for self defense.

Any conflict is always problematic though. And these stories about Europeans favouring the criminals in court make their rounds here as well, heard about a guy who fell onto a knife while breaking in through a window and the homeowner was charged for not storing the knife properly. Just hearsay though, could be entirely made up.

In another story, a Hell's Angels member shot and killed a policeman through his front door when he saw shades outside and thought another gang was coming to kill him, he was let go because he claimed self defense. In Germany!

And don't come with the old "but the cops are so dangerous!", that's only true for the US, as fair and balanced news report: http://rt.com/usa/us-germany-85-shots-022/
(Another link: http://www.thewire.com/global/2012/0...le-2011/52162/ )

The only thing all the guns in the US seem to do is fill the air with even more lead, how that makes one more secure apart from a few single cases is anyone's guess.
So please excuse me while I enjoy my freedom in my superior country.

[HoreTore]

A car is replacable, a bashed skull is not.

Castle law is the dumbest idea in the history of the world, if you exclude peanut butter.

[Fragony]

Castle-law only applies to your own territory and peanut-butter is delicious. But let the insurance company handle this, why would you risk your life if there isn't someone in actual danger. If you witnissed a rape or a beating it would be different.

[HoreTore]

But let the insurance company handle this, why would you risk your life if there isn't someone in actual danger. If you witnissed a rape or a beating it would be different.

Indeed.

[Philippus Flavius Homovallumus]

Castle law and stand your ground.

Property is an extension of the person, defending it is part of a person's right of self defense.

Maybe a courteous "Get away from my car or I'll shoot" first. I note that I believe that to be a courtesy, not a requirement.

And this is where you need a MIDDLE GROUND.

The force you are allowed to apply should be comparable to the force the perpetrator is applying.

So, if some guy is trying to strangle an old lady to death and you hit him, and he dies, then you shouldn't have to worry about more than a night in the cells while the cops get their facts straight.

I'm not in favour of Castle Laws when they allow you to shoot someone who steps on your roses.

Force should be a last resort - used in defense of life and limb. Generally speaking, you should not be allowed to use violence to protect your property. However, if you attempt to apprehend the culprit and he attacks you - well, see above.

[Fragony]

What if your property can't be replaced? A car can be replaced. I got some rare paintings and african webpons/artifacts, some hundreds of years old, they are worth a lot but I don't care as they aren't for sale. Should I settle for what the insurance company is willing to give me if I catch someone trying to steal them from me? Money isn't everything.

[HoreTore]

Capital punishment is still not a fitting sentence for theft of irreplacable paintings.

Especially not when the sentence is carried out extra-judicially.

[Husar]

What if your property can't be replaced? A car can be replaced. I got some rare paintings and african webpons/artifacts, some hundreds of years old, they are worth a lot but I don't care as they aren't for sale. Should I settle for what the insurance company is willing to give me if I catch someone trying to steal them from me? Money isn't everything.

If you shoot a cannister round into his rear, your irreplacable art will get shredded together with him.
If you just throw a lasso, he might as well fall right onto it and break it. How is that helpful in your situation?

[Seamus Fermanagh]

Capital punishment is still not a fitting sentence for theft of irreplacable paintings.

Especially not when the sentence is carried out extra-judicially.

If you believe, as I do, that property is an extension of person -- since it was your blood, sweat, and effort whereby you gained it -- then theft or damage to your property is threat or damage to you.

Insurance is a fine idea. There are risks to using violence in self defense and property -- as an extension of your person and not your physical person itself -- is more readily replaced. Choosing not to add further risk in defense of your property and relying on insurance compensation is a valid choice. It is up to you to decide if the risk to you is greater than the reward.

The "rights" of the thief are a matter of little concern to me during such as episode. They have forfeited some of the normal protections afforded them while engaged in dishonest behavior of their choice. On the other hand, if they put my property down and depart, I do NOT have the right to hunt them in vengeance. Nor do I have the right to resort to violence because I "think" my property is being threatened. Trespassers may simply be lost, for example, so "shoot on sight on my property" would be a little over the top.

[HoreTore]

If you believe, as I do, that property is an extension of person -- since it was your blood, sweat, and effort whereby you gained it -- then theft or damage to your property is threat or damage to you.

Insurance is a fine idea. There are risks to using violence in self defense and property -- as an extension of your person and not your physical person itself -- is more readily replaced. Choosing not to add further risk in defense of your property and relying on insurance compensation is a valid choice. It is up to you to decide if the risk to you is greater than the reward.

The "rights" of the thief are a matter of little concern to me during such as episode. They have forfeited some of the normal protections afforded them while engaged in dishonest behavior of their choice. On the other hand, if they put my property down and depart, I do NOT have the right to hunt them in vengeance. Nor do I have the right to resort to violence because I "think" my property is being threatened. Trespassers may simply be lost, for example, so "shoot on sight on my property" would be a little over the top.

So thieves should be given the death penalty?

[Fragony]

Capital punishment is still not a fitting sentence for theft of irreplacable paintings.

Especially not when the sentence is carried out extra-judicially.

Justice ha, if I catch someone in my house he's mine. Public secret, the police doesn't care as long as someone isn't laying on your property and you haven't called them. If you did call them they have no choice but doing their job, but they prefer it if you don't, case closed.

[Major Robert Dump]

Have you tried hanging books from the trees? That usually scares them off.

I can't believe the debate here is do nothing vs kill them. Situations like this are exactly what nunchakus are for. Or you could go outside and try to engage them in conversation, tell them you sympathize and support diversity, and them ask them inside for a cup of tea so instead they can steal your skis.

[Seamus Fermanagh]

So thieves should be given the death penalty?

Not quite the same thing, as you knew when you fired back.

However, the state should take measures to have the perpetrator provide restitution and MUST take efforts to minimize recidivism.

[HoreTore]

Not quite the same thing, as you knew when you fired back.

However, the state should take measures to have the perpetrator provide restitution and MUST take efforts to minimize recidivism.

Wealth redistribution is a glorious thing to reduce crime. More equality in society = less crime.

Anyway, I fail to see how shooting someone stealing from you is anything other than capital punishment dealt without a trial.

Also called murder.

[ReluctantSamurai]

Like they say in Detroit: "niggas get shot for shit like that."

Is that a fact

Sweden these days accept more than 1% of their population as immigrants, generally from the lowest scum cultures. Guess what happens when that is a trend for 10-20-30 years.

The United States?

These days, crime is sky rocketing and the perpetrator is generally some arab or negroe fresh out of a warzone...

I presume you have some kind of data to support this...?

[Kadagar_AV]

The United States?



I presume you have some kind of data to support this...?

Sure, lots. Pretty much all in Swedish though.

[Fragony]

Sure, lots. Pretty much all in Swedish though.

No different here. Almost all muggings are youth who are an enrichment to our culture, only the disabled and old have that problem though, they don't pick harder targets unless they hunt in packs. Cowards.

[Kadagar_AV]

No different here. Almost all muggings are youth who are an enrichment to our culture, only the disabled and old have that problem though, they don't pick harder targets unless they hunt in packs. Cowards.

Armed / unarmed robbery certainly is one of the crimes where immigrants are over represented in the statistics. Social factors can't explain all of it, no..

Rape statistics are out the window though. We also seem to have this new sport of "balcony jumping", that seams to be more than extremely lead by people from the Middle East / North Africa.

Balcony jumping = honour killing wifes / daughters who assimilate to Sweden, because they assimilate to Sweden.