Morally and legally, how much force should be acceptable to use to defend yourself and your property?

Just enough so that they are incapacitated but not dead

Quote from Lulu_Key

But adrenaline rushes and sometimes you can't be a good judge of that

I also don't believe half asking anything

I agree but you know, try your best not to kill em. All for trying to take out the trash of course but yeah.

Also depends on what they are trying to do in the first place.

I’ll defend myself and my loved ones to the best of my ability. Morality and legality go out the window if my loved ones’ safety is at risk. If someone means anyone harm, I’ll assume they understand that there’s a high chance the other party will defend themselves indiscriminately.

It's called the "Castle Doctrine" and "Stand Your Ground" law

Castle Doctrine- You are not required by law to retreat and you can use reasonable or deadly force if you feel seriously threatened by the attacker (you feel you may suffer imminent bodily harm and/or death). This applies mainly to your house, but can apply to your vehicle and your workplace under certain circumstances.

Stand Your Ground- You are not required by law to retreat and you can use reasonable or deadly force if you feel seriously threatened by the attacker (you feel you may suffer imminent bodily harm and/or death). This applies to outside your house, no matter where you are (so it could include your house).

Note- these are general definitions and can vary in legality and meaning depending on what state you happen to live in. I cannot speak to the morality of this but personally (a I stated in the other thread) I would shoot and kill an intruder in a heartbeat, because god knows they would probably have no issue killing me or my family, so why spare them.

I'm too tired to have the reasonable force discussion rn. Someone remind me to bring it up tomorrow.

Source: i took Criminal Law, Court Functions, and many other related classes

Quote from Turnberry00

I live in Texas so you are basically allowed to shoot first and ask questions later.

basically this

morally I would never kill anyone

but in a life or death situation sometimes extremes for self defense are the only way but of course killing is not simple I hope the best for everyone here never face such a terrible situation...

Quote from MissBehave

you can use deadly force if you feel you are in imminent and grave danger. You can't if you obviously aren't i.e. you can't shoot a burglar in the back as he's climbing out your window with your laptop

imagine someone breaks in just to stop ppl from logging into AKP

Quote from MissBehave

you can use deadly force if you feel you are in imminent and grave danger. You can't if you obviously aren't i.e. you can't shoot a burglar in the back as he's climbing out your window with your laptop

Pretty much this

Quote from Lulu_Key

also Americans in this thread

yes get ur peace loving aussie b00ty outta here before I pop a cap in ur ass

Quote from Lulu_Key

wait ....wut.....I'm no bloody aussie

Tsk tsk

w8

I think I forgot where u live

All I know I'm gonna fight to the death whoever goes in my yard

Quote from QueenMaknae27

All I know I'm gonna fight to the death whoever goes in my yard

I just wanted to smell your roses

Quote from MissBehave

depending on who it is, that might be considered a public service...

agreed

Quote from Jichu

I just wanted to smell your roses

Oh don't worry it smells really gooood. Better than you expected

Quote from MissBehave

There was a case of a guy who got tired of people stealing stuff out of his garage, so he left the door open with a purse in plain sight and waited until it happened again. When it did, he gunned the teens down. Yeah, don't do that. He's in prison now.

Ooof…isn’t that some form of entrapment? Yeah he deserved to go to prison for that. Smdh

if you can prove a genuine fear of severe, incapacitating, or irreversible bodily or mental harm, deadly force is ok. Same goes with fear for life. includes things that can irreversibly damage livelihood (way to earn money) or independent living ability.

Unsecured property should only be to the level of deterrence necessary to demotivate a thief, shall not escalate to death or deadly force

Property within the home, abode, or legal residence is the same as unsecured property but home invasion is a very common citation for fear of life; your home is your castle and therefore one should have the right to feel safe and secure in their own home. (Castle Doctrine)

In the case of SA - well that goes for severe bodily and mental harm, and in your example, it is compounded by the fact that she was a minor and not even at the legal age of sex. She should be the plaintiff, not the defendant.

If someone invades my home and they don't go after I warn them, they're going to die before the altercation is over. No two ways. Either they're leaving or they die. I won't hold back either. They're going to have to take on Kataphract with all moral, physical limits removed.

Those of us who have undergone a lot of firearms training are taught to shoot to stop the threat. It isn’t about intentionally killing an attacker. Many of my neighbors are better equipped than the US Army, and my town is a remarkably peaceful place.

“An armed society is a polite society.” — Robert Heinlein

Quote from nahri

Ooof…isn’t that some form of entrapment? Yeah he deserved to go to prison for that. Smdh

yuup entrapment right there. and also a disproportional use of force.

Personally I think anything is fair game such as breaking bones, knocking out or even serious injury on the intruder. Maybe even killing them if you had no choice or it’s an accident. However the moment you actively go out your way to kill an intruder is crossing the line imo.

But that’s me, legally there’s stuff to consider but who the fuck considers legality when your life and family’s is in danger.

There was a national incident a few back where an elderly man and his wife had their home broke into by 2 men. The elderly man stabbed one of the thugs in self defence killing him. Police then fucking arrested the old man on murder charges. There was huge outcry how people weren’t allowed to defend themselves and he was eventually released. However the thugs family tried to twist the narrative by saying the old man intentionally killed their son. Coroner said he was lawfully killed (justified use of force). However due to the thugs family and shit the couple had to move away in fear of retaliation as police were unwilling to do anything about it.

unrelated but ya know those punch gloves that happened to be a thing that didn't really work in ww2 but they made it anyway

so basically my guy friend does boxing as a sport and he's shite at shooting or aiming anything really outside his fists. soooo

he made a shotgun glove a la RWBY Yang style I think they were called ember celica but don't quote me lmao

he got it ATF stamped and everything lmao

Quote from MissBehave

Yep, he basically lured them in and laid in wait. He even had been telling people for a few days that he was gonna kill some burglars. He argued Castle Doctrine since they were in his house but he got convicted of murder. It was a teen looking for beer.

https://www.usatoday.com/story…teen-trespasser/23309195/

Defending is one thing; luring is something else. And he was bragging about it beforehand too? Oy…I guess he didn’t think the whole thing through

well it scales based on the level of threat they pose. i dont live in a country where guns are legal, but lets say i do. if someone breaks into my house with a weapon, im shooting them in the leg, arm whatever to incapacitate them

Lets say im waling on the street and someone attacks me, im going to again try to incapacitate them using physical force and get away

Where I live, you're not allowed to attack an intruder unless the intruder attacks you first or threatens violence. It must be self defence. If the intruder is just stealing your stuff but not actively threatening you, you must call the police and wait for them to arrive. You ideally shouldn't follow them around the house either to avoid a potentially violent confrontation. You are however allowed to prevent them from escaping by blocking and locking doors.

Personally, I think we should be allowed to beat the shit out of whoever dares to break into our homes. No killing, but come on. In a country where the state pays for all your basic needs if you lose your job (housing, food, clothes etc) there's just no excuse.

Seeing such discourses here makes me feel like I live in a whole different planet, like I have literally never even seen a real gun my whole life, owning one is simply unthinkable.