4 ms·

And how you make sure bailiffs/repo men succeed? For example I know a case in Brazil, that happened in the 70s, where repo men tried to take a Capoeira Master c

And how you make sure bailiffs/repo men succeed? For example I know a case in Brazil, that happened in the 70s, where repo men tried to take a Capoeira Master car, and he just grabbed his huge "Peixeira" knife and chased the repo men away. Justice then decided to just let him break the law, because the other choice was send heavily armed cops and hope they would survive the confrontation with the guy and his students. Nevermind cases where people don't even have a bank account or anything you can take. Or they protect it well enough.

Vegenoid 1y ago
If a criminal uses violence to escape the law, then yes, violence is usually permitted against them (and they have now committed a violent crime). Physical force is permitted against nonviolent criminals so they can be apprehended, but lethal force is usually not permitted unless the criminal has used or is about to use violence. Yes, there are of course instances where nonviolent criminals have been killed, with that act of killing being legal under that framework. For example, if a criminal is escaping in a vehicle recklessly and putting the lives of others in danger. Or cases where enforcers are given overly broad latitude in determining what constitutes a threat of violence. Or tyrannical regimes that authorize lethal force for minor infractions. But it is not the case that most legal systems say “a criminal can be killed if they refuse to submit to punishment, regardless of the severity of their crime”. That is a misconception. People don’t get killed for not paying fines, they get killed for trying to shoot the person that comes to take them to jail for not paying the fine.