Deadly Force

[tinybear]

I see. So you'd leave the criminal law out of it but let the civil law deter people from booby trapping their homes. Hmmm, OK, I see your point.

[Korgmeister]

Hmm, this is a very interesting dilemma.

I'm definately in favour of using lethal force to protect lives and property. But Waychel brings up a good point about the indiscriminate nature of spring guns and booby traps. For instance, attack dogs are generally allowed to mess up people who invade someone's property. However, they're not indiscriminate becuase they can be trained to attack some people and not others. This allows some sort of precedent for automated defense systems for the protection of property.

Spring guns, booby traps and land mines, however are not discriminate since they're unthinking automatons.

I can't really make a judgement on this matter yet. Although I'm leaning more towards "they should be legal" since I believe private property is sacrosanct.

[tinybear]

That's my first reaction too, but I must admit Waychel's arguments are beginning to make me think again.

[bishop]

Provided that clear warning was provided, I see no problem with booby-trapping a house.

i'll agree with you on this one dunedan.. although i still maintain that these booby-traps should be reasonable. when it comes to using something like a firearm, i firmly believe that it should only fire when its owner pulls the trigger - not from some mechanical device.

[Lou Minotti]

You can't just take someone's life for being on your property. Booby traps shouldn't be illegal, but killing someone with one to protect your glass jars should be.

[tinybear]

But you can't have it both ways Lou.

[Lou Minotti]

What do you mean?

[tinybear]

Either the law allows and condones booby traps within private homes or it discourages it. If the former, the defendant wins. If the latter, the defendant loses. Which do you choose?

[Lou Minotti]

Wrong. It's not one or the other. Sometimes things aren't just apples and oranges. Owning and bearing arms is legal, correct? Killing someone for stealing glass jars is not. It's pretty simple. I can kill you with my hand. When do we start cutting people's arms off? The use of a booby trap becomes illegal only when it's used illegally. See? If this man's home was being invaded and he set up a booby trap in self defense, he is well within his rights.

[tinybear]

I see. So you support a case by case consideration of the issue of booby traps at home. Sometimes defendant wins, sometimes defendant loses. It depends, right?

[Lou Minotti]

Not case by case. If a crime hasn't occurred there isn't a case. Glass bottles are legal, correct? Breaking them in half and stabbing Tinybear while she is sleeping isn't. Breaking them in half and stabbing Tinybear while Tinybear is sticking a knife into my 4 year old? Perfectly legal.

[Starboy]

As usual Freeman you have not thought the whole thing through. As much as ensuring instant death to any that would besmirch ones little piece of heaven on earth may seem appealing it is not a very good idea. There are all sorts of people that must trespass on your property all the time. There is the meter reader, the post man, FedEx, UPS, Police, fireman, emergency medical responders and maybe your neighbor trying to put in your mail box the mail that was accidentally delivered to their address. Now I suppose one could work very hard on the robotics to try to discriminate for such people and not kill them but then what do you do if you decide to have a family? Then you have the various relatives and if you happen to have a child and she is a little girl who subsequently grows to become a bigger girl then what about all the suitors? As much as you would like to shoot them it is not allowed. So there is it Morgan. You have done it again. Taken what you think is a reasonable idea and just completely ignored the practical and pragmatic side of it.

Starboy

[Morgan_Freeman]

Don't jump to conclusions, Starboy. I'm not talking about putting these up in suburbia.
Think 500-acre compound in Wyoming.

[Starboy]

You still can't do it for very similar reasons. Only in the case where you were completely cut off from the entire planet would it be possible. But in such a situation it is not necessary.

Starboy

[tinybear]

Quote by: Lou Minotti Not case by case. If a crime hasn't occurred there isn't a case. Glass bottles are legal, correct? Breaking them in half and stabbing Tinybear while she is sleeping isn't. Breaking them in half and stabbing Tinybear while Tinybear is sticking a knife into my 4 year old? Perfectly legal.

You misunderstood me. I asked you if you support considering each individual case on its merits and particular circumstances and then determine if the defendant should be held liable. Geez!
:rolleyes:

[Morgan_Freeman]

If I was cut off from the planet, then I wouldn't need the turrets, would I?

The question isn't whether it's necessary, but whether it's legal.

[Starboy]

Quote by: Morgan_Freeman If I was cut off from the planet, then I wouldn't need the turrets, would I? The question isn't whether it's necessary, but whether it's legal.

Ahhh, you are right. I never considered the completely superfluous argument. You got me there. That is your forte.

In any case if you are completely cut off from everyone else then you become your own law. If you want it to be legal then so be it. If you make it illegal and then still do it you will be forced to arrest yourself, try yourself and then lock yourself up. I suspect that you would do that.

Starboy

[Lou Minotti]

A "defendent" is only a "defendent" if a crime has been committed. Booby traps aren't illegal. Killing someone with one, other than in self defense, is murder. Case closed.

[tinybear]

A defendant is a defendant when he is being sued in a civil court or prosecuted in a criminal court.

[Lou Minotti]

Thanks for proving my point (obviously, I was referring to criminal cases).