3 ms·
It's not incumbent upon me to spend money to protect against the crimes of others. The reason I questioned your answer is that a potential practical solution d
by mmm_grayons 6y ago
It's not incumbent upon me to spend money to protect against the crimes of others. The reason I questioned your answer is that a potential practical solution doesn't answer the moral framework I proposed: property represents part of one's life and therefore can be defended as such.
- pmiller2 6y ago> It's not incumbent upon me to spend money to protect against the crimes of others. Then, don't cry when you lose your stuff.
- mmm_grayons 6y agoNo, I'm not losing my stuff (as I might in a natural disaster), my stuff is being stolen/burned/whatever. You still failed to address my point that I believe it's justifiable to defend my property with any amount of force necessary. My perspective is simply that if one attempts to steal or damage the things of another, "Then, don't cry when you get shot." Or they could just not loot/steal/burn.