Quote:
Originally Posted by redwitch
You're right, we don't know all the facts. We do know that the shooter was a bystander who decided to assist the Wal-Mart employee. The odds are that had he not got involved, there would have been no confrontation and no weapons fired. Wal-Mart employees are trained to go so far in apprehending a shoplifter. The normal course would have been to get the license plate number and give it to the police, not physically intercede in a three against one situation.
As I said previously, I'd have no qualms firing if a human were in danger. But I refuse to shoot someone for a non-living item. I'm glad you can justify putting a human life before a thing, I can't and won't.
|
Depends on the " thing ". Tangible, or intangible ? If intangible " liberty, justice, and freedom " come to mind. Thugs knocking on the doors in totalitarian regimes in the middle of the night, as well. Heck, they probably are not even considered " criminals ". There is no tangible thing worth protecting ? How about safeguarding tangible property which if misused presents considerable risk to others. What if someone takes the life of a criminal stealing guns and ammunition which are ultimately destined for the " criminal " community. Let's say our diaper thief was instead loading into his car all the guns and ammo from Walmart's sporting goods department ? When it come to criminality do not the dominos seem to stand in a line ?