4 ms·

>How does the moral calculous work for Americans? Genuinely curious. Is it “something bad is being done to me, I am therefore justified to use any means necessa

>How does the moral calculous work for Americans? Genuinely curious. Is it “something bad is being done to me, I am therefore justified to use any means necessary” kind of thing, or there is something else/more? In the USA there is what in known as the castle doctrine. If someone tries to break into your home you may defend your home no different than a lord defending a castle. Pouring boiling oil on their soldiers scaling your walls ... Or more appropriately the modern equivalent action with your AR-15. Texas goes one step further, they allow you to use force to protect your property from nightime theft or criminal mischief. It's not about retaliation, it's a matter of protecting what is your property.

jdkee 5y ago
There is a deterrent effect against property crimes due to widespread firearm ownership. See https://chicagounbound.uchicago.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1150&context=law_and_economics https://chicagounbound.uchicago.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?arti...
conductr 5y ago
I’m a life long Texan. I’d agree with it being about property and it one’s right to protect at all means. In a sense, we feel it’s a Wild West mentality. We shouldn’t have to wait for cops to come, much of the state is rural and out of reach of first responders, or reasonable response times. I’m not sure most people would actually shoot someone outside their house, doing minor property damage/theft but they would pull their gun if they had one (many of us do) and it could escalate from there. However, saying that, I recall when I was a kid it was legal to shoot someone just for stepping on your real estate property (or was widely believed if not current law). I recall “exploring” in rural areas and being encountered with people with rifles telling us to “get off their land”. Usually with a “next time I won’t ask, shoot first” type comment. If I was an adult/POC, it could have gone any direction. I personally don’t like to agree with these laws, but I don’t see any reduction of crime and I’d like the ability to protect my home and property without having to think about whether I’d become a criminal if I did have to use my weapon.

jdkee 5y ago

There is a deterrent effect against property crimes due to widespread firearm ownership. See https://chicagounbound.uchicago.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1150&context=law_and_economics https://chicagounbound.uchicago.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?arti...

conductr 5y ago

I’m a life long Texan. I’d agree with it being about property and it one’s right to protect at all means. In a sense, we feel it’s a Wild West mentality. We shouldn’t have to wait for cops to come, much of the state is rural and out of reach of first responders, or reasonable response times. I’m not sure most people would actually shoot someone outside their house, doing minor property damage/theft but they would pull their gun if they had one (many of us do) and it could escalate from there. However, saying that, I recall when I was a kid it was legal to shoot someone just for stepping on your real estate property (or was widely believed if not current law). I recall “exploring” in rural areas and being encountered with people with rifles telling us to “get off their land”. Usually with a “next time I won’t ask, shoot first” type comment. If I was an adult/POC, it could have gone any direction. I personally don’t like to agree with these laws, but I don’t see any reduction of crime and I’d like the ability to protect my home and property without having to think about whether I’d become a criminal if I did have to use my weapon.