Quote of the Day
NOBODY deserves to be fucking MURDERED, fucking SHOT in the head, just because they’re trying to break into your home with a fucking crowbar. Stop perpetuating gun violence.
Neily Dan @neily_dan
Tweeted on April 25, 2023
Defense of your home from someone forcibly entering your home with a lethal weapon is murder. I’ll have to think about that….
Hmmm… No. And I’ll just keep saying no until I run out of ammo.
“Till the target changes shape or catches on fire” They are getting deaprate when self-defence is murder. Just because he it breaking in with a crowbar???
This sure feels like winning and they are going crazy in desperation. I like it.
I wonder what neily Dan would say if he was beaten half to death w a crowbar?
Probably blame the police for not preventing it…
The homeowner didn’t consent to being involved in the home invader’s suicide plot. Not only is ammo expensive and sometimes hard to find, it’s rather traumatic to have your role in this scenario sprung on you out of the blue. Even if you did give them a lot of warning, a chance to plan, time to work out a safe backstop, arrange for an easy clean up, etc, you can’t just assume that everyone is willing to do that role in your assisted suicide at your convenience! If you push them into a rushed job, you could get a unsatisfactory outcome, like paralysis and lifelong pain. Think about the probabilities, too: getting shot is not a guaranteed method of suicide, it’s not guaranteed to be fast, and it is definitely not even remotely alleged to be pain free.
Look, before you do something that will result in something you may regret for either a long long time, or maybe for a lifetime’s worth of regret over ten minutes, consider: if you go up to Canada, they’ll off you for free, possibly painlessly, so quick that there won’t even be time to notify your family or reconsider, and they’ll tell you things to make you feel good about the decision that they happily rush you into. Everyone involved in the process is consenting and prepared, and none of them believe in the “soul” or any notion of a hereafter, so no hard feelings as you dissipate into the nothing they believe that follows death.
So, what I’m saying is: it’s not worth rushing your suicide with unprepared people following a very abbreviated announcement of the situation that is all too easy to misunderstand. Either don’t do it, or go to a professional.
virtue signaling merit badge seeker.
Spot on Tirno, it’s not murder. It’s assisted suicide.
As much time as that guy took. He would have got the doors of my house opened, and his last thought would have been. Why is this part of the house covered with plastic?
I reject your reality and insert my own.
Don’t break into houses.
Exodus 22:2
[2] If a thief is found breaking in and is struck so that he dies, there shall be no bloodguilt for him,
Quote the next verse please. Don’t take Scripture out of context…
Yeah, I checked the KJV, and the phrasing of the next verse didn’t make sense. So I checked another translation more direct from Hebrew, Orthodox Jewish (which is still generously populated with transliterated Hebrew):
“22 (21:37) If a ganav takes a shor, or a seh, and slaughter it, or sell it; he shall restore five cattle for an ox, and the seh.
2 (1) If a ganav be caught breaking in, and be struck down so that he die, there shall be no guilt of bloodshed for him.
3 (2) If the shemesh be risen upon him, there shall be guilt of bloodshed; the ganav should make full restitution; if he have nothing, then the ganav shall be sold to make restitution for his theft.”
So: if he’s breaking in during the night and he’s killed, well, FAFO. You can’t really see what you’re doing in the dark, so you didn’t mean to kill him, so it isn’t murder.
If you catch him during the day, don’t kill him, because he can’t make full restitution if he’s dead. If he can’t make up the debt, sell him as a slave to recoup the loss.
Exodus is a little light on details of the force continuum your typical post-Exodus Jew should use to capture the thief/vandal/despoiler of virgins/negligent borrower-renter of farm animals. The operative word from the Commandment here is “murder”, not “kill”, and murder requires the mens rea to kill when it is not necessary to do so. I think the presumption here is that your post-Exodus Jew will be able to identify the guilty party in the light of day, and unless the guilty person is going to flee his community on foot (or donkey) and live amongst the goyim as a fugitive foreigner, he’s not going to go beyond the reach of the Jewish Law, so he’s going to pay back the damage, one way or another.
The rest of the chapter just gets down into restitution details. The best the thief or vandal makes out is to pay back double the value. Also, apparently Jewish law is “loser pays” when you take it to the judge.
So, @Bookstooge, while I appreciate the appeal for context, there is no way I’m going to say on a blog open for anyone to see that, once you turn the lights on, aim carefully to wound so he can recover and be sold into slavery. I don’t care if involuntary servitude is explicitly allowed as a punishment for a duly convicted crime in the 13th Amendment. It’s not a good look.
And we can always go with what Jesus said about that sort of thing.
“And if the goodman of the house knew what hour the thief would come. He would have watched, and not suffered his house to be broken through.”
The thief and friends will call it murder.
The homeowner will call it self-defense.
But it’s obvious who’s responsible for starting the mess in the first place.
Penalty theirs. Homeowner none.
We use to have a golden rule in construction that would help the world at large avoid this kind of situation.
“You may not know who’s it is, but you certainly know who’s it ain’t.”
Or my personal favorite in Ghetto parlance. “Don’t start noth’in, won’t be noth’in.”
The Bible commentary I have about Exodus 22.2 considers that if the breaking and entering occurs during the day, an unarmed thief, the goniff or ganav, is not assumed to have homicidal intent. There is a sentence in the Talmud, writen later, that “If it is as clear to you as the sun is shining that the burglar is not a physical threat to you, then you will bear guilt for killing him.”
A daytime intruder who is armed and obviously willing to murder should be confronted, and if necessary, killed, or in KJV language, slain.
The devil is,as they say, in the details, so the few minutes between the homeowner being awakened without warning and the burglar meeting his just reward will be reviewed, examined, interpreted and argued over in more excruciating detail than anyone except trial lawyers could imagine.
There are other, more important reasons why I don’t commit crimes.
But “I don’t enjoy getting shot” is also a reason.
I don’t see the problem with “self defense”. The perp still votes Democratic, probably by convenient mail-in voting.
I agree with him. Justifiable homicide. What’s his point?
Don’t argue with them. Acknowledge and agree with them! They don’t know what to do when that happens! Guns are designed to kill? Yup. Didn’t invent them to shoot plates off a fence but holes in plate armor. You’re murdering someone breaking into your home? Sure. Homicide is murder and the law says it is perfectly ok to kill someone under specific conditions.
Throw it in their faces. They wander off gibbering and confused. You’re not supposed to agree with them! It works.
I find this troubling. Not because, it was said, or because that fool actually believes it and he votes….. It troubles me because that is a common view. Think about what the state of society and it’s institutions needs to be to produce such a person. A person who elevates the criminal over the common man and society writ large. A person who has no regard or concept of individual rights – including the right to be secure in one’s own home and the right to defend the same. A person who is incapable and/or unwilling to see how this will harm him or his in the future.
This is a sign of moral rot, philosophical replacement, and a failing social order.
This the result of a long march.