The Glade 4.0

Note that copyright infringement does not legally or morally equate to theft, in any way at all. It's more akin to trespassing. (Which, incidentally, if you do it physically, can also get you shot, but that's a side point.)

However, other than that, I agree. I've never stolen anything in my life, and to my knowledge nobody in my circle of friends would have, either.

_________________
Well Ali Baba had them forty thieves, Scheherezade had a thousand tales
But master you in luck 'cause up your sleeves you got a brand of magic never fails...
...Mister Aladdin, sir, What will your pleasure be?
Let me take your order, Jot it down -You ain't never had a friend like me
█ ♣ █

I stole several packs of MTG cards from the local store as a teenager. The store owner was an ******* and that's how I justified it to myself. I also had no compunction against cutting across other people's property if I was walking somewhere, and if someone's garage had been open with something interesting looking inside I probably would have gone in to look at it.

Like I said, this guy shouldn't be prosecuted, because from a legal standpoint I think the property owner should get the benefit if the doubt if there is any chance that the intruder could be out to hurt you. However, if I had kids in that neighborhood I would definitely be telling them to stay away from the psychopath. 10:1 odds this guy wasn't afraid of getting hurt, he was pissed over getting burglarized before and decided that this time he'd be ready with a trap for them. "I'm gonna shoot anyone who messes wit muh stuff" is exactly what happened in this case.

Which does not make him a psychopath. Contrary to what a lot of people like to think, property is often more valuable than human life - particularly when the life in question has decided to risk itself to gain that property. If you're willing to risk your life to steal a $150 dollar VD player, your life is worth no more than that DVD player.



You don't need to be a sociopath at all. There's nothing "terrifying" here at all. This habit people have developed of throwing "sociopath" and "psychopath" at every social attitude they don't like and pretending other people are somehow frightening for their attitudes is absurd.

And no, I didn't do anything of the sort as a teenager. Some of my classmates did, however, and probably should have been shot. Some of them needed to learn that daddy's $300,000 dollar a year salary doesn't mean they can't bleed out like anyone else.



You calling bullshit does not magically make it true. If this behavior is common among teens, more teens need to get shot.



No, it doesn't. It speaks to you being unable to deal with positions you don't like without diverting the topic onto the other person. "Sociopathy" is fast becoming the same as "racism"; a term people just throw at things they don't know how to deal with.

_________________
"Hysterical children shrieking about right-wing anything need to go sit in the corner and be quiet while the adults are talking."

Most of the western world has gotten used to the idea that they are supposed to be protected from harm by someone else. They maintain tiny militaries, expecting the U.S. to come rescue them, and use the surplus to run socialistic governments that create the idea you are supposed to let people victimize you if the police can't get there in time.

On pretty much any social issue, we're doing it right, and the "rest of the western world" is doing it wrong, if there's any significant difference. Most of the western world is run by benevolent authoritarianism that's feasible only as long as U.S. bomber crews are ready to scramble.



The homeowner is not inflicting a consequence, nor is justice really relevant here. He's defending himself and his property. The kid is not being punished; he's suffering the effects of the force necessary to stop him.

_________________
"Hysterical children shrieking about right-wing anything need to go sit in the corner and be quiet while the adults are talking."

Yes it was.

_________________
"Hysterical children shrieking about right-wing anything need to go sit in the corner and be quiet while the adults are talking."

By this logic, anyone who ever commits any kind of property crime has a life with no value. Is there a way to steal that DVD player without risking your life?



On the contrary, baiting a lethal trap, and then springing it on a teenager demonstrates a severe lack of empathy, which is what sociopathy is.

I feel sorry for this guy's kid, one of these days he's going to have to explain to them how he baited a trap and then killed a kid over a few cases of beer. Gonna be a great childhood for that kid, worrying about whether Dad is willing to kill over whatever minor childhood transgressions he's guilty of.

Most European countries are way past the point of being able to afford a military. Americans don't know how good they have it with taxes when they complain about them. In the US, if you live in a conservative state, its still possible to have a gross income of $100k a year and pay less than 30% of that income to all levels of government.

In Germany, if you have a gross income of 60000 Euros, you're giving 60% of that income to the government at a minimum and your burden only goes up from there. Germany is even one of the better countries, at least there you get 0 government debt with your taxes. Other countries will tax you at 70% and run gigantic deficits on top of that.

My dad's company brings people over from Germany all the time and they are astounded that I can afford to own my own place on $60k a year. "How do you do it? You'll barely have twenty thousand left after taxes and the mortgage has to be close to half of that!"

For Germany to spend the same % of total government spending on military that we do would entail every German giving up at least 25% of their net income.

Different world today, back when $20 was a lot of stuff to be walking off with. I never invaded anybody's home, burgled, or garage hopped and very few of my friends would have either. Amusingly, my brothers were the bad boys there and they did, but not me.

_________________
The U. S. Constitution doesn't guarantee happiness, only the pursuit of it. You have to catch up with it yourself. B. Franklin

"A mind needs books like a sword needs a whetstone." -- Tyrion Lannister, A Game of Thrones

I have performed minor crimes as described above, and I'm very glad I did. It was an excellent life lesson, and while I'm saddled with the guilt (I often wish I could find the victim and make amends), that is my burden and punishment for the crime. I think it makes me a better man to have regrets - it's motivation to do better in the future. But more importantly, it prevents me from developing a holier-than-thou and callous attitude toward minor offenders, particularly those who have not yet gained the wisdom of adulthood. It helps me keep things in proper perspective.

This has nothing to do with justice or law. Proportionality when it comes to acting in the moment when confronting a criminal invasion of your rights is an insane concept.

_________________
"...but there exists also in the human heart a depraved taste for equality, which impels the weak to attempt to lower the powerful to their own level and reduces men to prefer equality in slavery to inequality with freedom." - De Tocqueville

Really? Its okay to shoot someone who you find keying your car? Or a 6 year old wandering onto your property?

I also didn't.

Hell even when my neighbors told me I could just walk right into their house anytime I always knocked before entering.

_________________
"...but there exists also in the human heart a depraved taste for equality, which impels the weak to attempt to lower the powerful to their own level and reduces men to prefer equality in slavery to inequality with freedom." - De Tocqueville

Kids have aren't in control of their rights - their parents are. Keying my car? I wouldn't personally shoot someone for it but I wouldn't want to prosecute someone who did.

_________________
"...but there exists also in the human heart a depraved taste for equality, which impels the weak to attempt to lower the powerful to their own level and reduces men to prefer equality in slavery to inequality with freedom." - De Tocqueville

Would I shoot someone who I found in my garage when I was stupid enough to leave the door open? Probably not. While they are on my property and highly suspicious, I don't think they would be posing an immediate threat. Though, I'd say they were on the border of doing so. But, leaving your garage door open with access to a refrigerator full of booze is like leaving a jar of money out on your porch and cursing the world when you find it's been taken. Sure, it's on your property but you're the dumbass who made it easily accessible.

Would I shoot them if they were inside my home? Absolutely. I would put them down on the ground, and I would put them down hard. I would not politely ask the criminal if he was armed, nor should I be expected to believe they would be 100% forthright and honest with me if I was naive enough to do that. I am going to take ZERO chances when it comes to the safety of my wife and daughter. You forfeited your rights the second you invaded my actual domicile.

Would I feel terrible if it turned out to be an idiot, unarmed teenage kid? I'd feel bad that his dumb mistake got him killed. But I wouldn't regret my decision in the instant it was made.

_________________
Les Zombis et les Loups-Garous!

If everyone jumped off a cliff would that make it okay?

_________________
I prefer to think of them as "Fighting evil in another dimension"

Most European countries could easily afford a larger military than they have if they did not have such absurd social programs and policies. American's "don't know how good they have it" because we don't have it good - just less bad than most of our allies.



In theory. In practice, countries like Greece that do this pay people to do essentially nothing, have extensive socialized areas of the economy, even extending as far as the Orthodox Church, and people essentially ignore the tax burden they supposedly have; hence the debt. During the Greek budget crisises of the last few years the Prime Minister was at one point practically BEGGING people to pay their taxes. Per capita, those countries ALSO te4nd to have more men under arms than Germany, France, or the UK, although the state of training and equipment is probably questionable.



Germany doesn't need to spend as much as we do; either in absolute numbers or percentage-wise. They do, however, need to spend MORE than they are spending, and it needs to come from their social programs if they're to avoid raising their already-outrageous taxes even higher.

All of these countries were able to afford considerably large militaries during the Cold War; they just convinced themselves that they didn't need to defend themselves any more and they could afford to have token forces that are fat and untrained and in some cases have the equivalent of UNION RULES where they don't work past 5 in the evening, even in field environments!

Robert Gates called attention to this nonsense before he left office.

Anyhow, the fundamental issue is that Europe is able to maintain this social spending because the U.S. assumes a disproportionate amount of defense burden, and then they have the gall to pretend there's something wrong with the way we run our country.

_________________
"Hysterical children shrieking about right-wing anything need to go sit in the corner and be quiet while the adults are talking."

No, and so what? If you don't value your life above $150, why should the person you're stealing it from?



Leaving your garage door open isn't "baiting a lethal trap", and even if it were, there's nothing "sociopathic" about wanting to trap people for invading one's home. This isn't just a matter of someone cutting across a lawn; it's an invasion of the person's home, even if it is just the garage. Burglaries are not just property crimes - Burglary is the invasion of occupied structures, regardless of purpose. It's one of the most serious crimes there is; about the only crimes more serious are rape, murder, treason, and varients on those crimes. If you burglarize someone's home and snatch a hundred dollar bill off the table, the theft itself is probably only a misdemeanor, but the fact that you took it from their home makes it a first-degree felony. Going into someone's home is, in many states, and should be everywhere, considered an assault on the people inside and should justify immediate resort to lethal force without further warning, at least until the person is incapacitated or fleeing.



Other than the fact that he didn't set any traps, of course.

_________________
"Hysterical children shrieking about right-wing anything need to go sit in the corner and be quiet while the adults are talking."

So killing a kid in a garage after you've left it open makes you a sociopath, but killing one in the womb after you left it open is an acceptable social view?

_________________
I prefer to think of them as "Fighting evil in another dimension"

On its own, its not, but this guy left it open with a CCTV camera pointed at it, left out bait (the alcohol in the fridge) that he knew from past experience would be a target of thieves, and had a loaded weapon within easy reach so he could run outside within seconds of seeing something. Can I prove he was baiting a lethal trap? No, I can't, hence why I said he shouldn't be prosecuted. It's certainly possible that all these things were a coincidence. However, the most likely explanation by far is that he was setting a trap for potential thieves so he would have an excuse to shoot them.

Also, first-degree felony? Really? I'm pretty sure that the teens from my high school, even the seniors that were 18 years old, that got caught garage hopping weren't facing 15 years to life and a felony record for that.

Imagine if you're a store owner and you see a customer stuffing some merchandise into their clothing. Instead of saying anything, you pretend you saw nothing. You cheerfully ring up the actual minor purchase they're making to cover up their shoplifting. Then as soon as they take one step out the door, you draw your gun and shoot them in the back. You feel no remorse at all, and actually feel good as there's now one less waste of humanity in your neighborhood. This is pretty similar to what happened, don't you think someone that can do this seriously lacks empathy?



The actual shooting by itself doesn't, but planning beforehand how to set up a lure so you can have an excuse to shoot a kid, and/or feeling good about what you did and how you "made the neighborhood safe from subhuman scum" even after you find out that it was a teenager stealing beer does make you a sociopath. Similarly, just having an abortion doesn't, but having one and then thinking to yourself, "Man I really dodged a bullet there, think of all the cool stuff I wouldn't have been able to buy if I'd had to take care of this stupid kid" is pretty sociopathic as well.

Exactly. You can't, so not only should he not be prosecuted, you should stop pretending he was. Lots of people keep their booze in a second refrigerator; I used to do that when we had one back in Ohio, and sometimes that one is in the garage. It wasn't "bait"; beer takes up a lot of room so lots of times your wife doesn't want it in her main fridge. As for the CCTV, that's a logical response to repeated burglaries, and while leaving the garage door open was dumb, that doesn't mean he was baiting a trap.



Except this is the LEAST likely explanation. These are all perfectly normal things to do. Your assumptions about his motivations are not evidence.


Technically, they'd be looking at one to five years, not 15+ since it'd be burglary, not aggravated burglary, which is what I was thinking of, but a third-degree felony is still a quite serious crime, and a homeowner has no way to know (nor should he be required to care) if your intended course of action at his residence would make it burglary or aggravated burglary.



This isn't remotely similar to what happened at all. A) a store is by default open to the public, so the person's presence in the first place is entirely different B) the homeowner didn't "pretend not to notice" anything, or anything even remotely similar, nor did he shoot anyone in the back; the kid was not fleeing or retreating.



Since he didn't set up any lures, you're out of luck, and even if he did he isn't a sociopath. You need to just stop using that word. It makes you sound dumber every time you use it.

_________________
"Hysterical children shrieking about right-wing anything need to go sit in the corner and be quiet while the adults are talking."

Xequecal:

Sociopath, as a term, isn't even in vogue among clinical psychologists, psychotherapists, and other behavioral specialist; it's "Antisocial Personality Disorder" and near synonymous with "psychopath". As there are so few neutral and hard moral data points and there exists a great number of studies showing broad spectrum moral placement among "known" sociopaths, recent trends in psychological thought (academically speaking) tend to eschew the word entirely as overused and mishandled by popular use.

_________________

Sociopath = someone not acting according to your personal belief system

In hindsight, shooting the kid was quite probably an excessive response. The kid was quite probably not going to take much.

Thing is, with the way things are these days, if you find someone in the garage attached to your house, it's possibly someone with a gun, they're possibly going to do more than just take beer from your fridge, and it's possibly a situation where they'd shoot you first.

Just 'cause the kid was taking chances doesn't mean the home owner should. He had a woman and child's safety, as well as his own, to consider.

Thing is, I've read more about this case and Markus Kaarma doesn't come off as innocent in a lot of the reports.

http://www.nydailynews.com/news/crime/d ... -1.1782604

_________________
In time, this too shall pass.

This assumes an embryo or fetus is a "kid".

The more I think about so-called "gun nuts" and "self-defense" shootings, the more I think Tom Cruise's line in Jack Reacher about the three types of guys who join the army is apropos. In the context of gun nuttery and home/self-defense, the three types would be:

1. For most guys, having a gun for self-defense is just a utilitarian thing. In their minds, it's just a prudent, mundane precaution, like buying insurance or wearing a seatbelt.

2. Some guys are a lot more gung ho about it. They see themselves as protectors, shepherds guarding the sheep. That can make them a bit trigger-happy, and kind of obnoxious or callous-sounding when talking about this sort of thing (*ahem*), but for the most part, they're just decent if somewhat overzealous people.

3. And then there are the guys looking for a legal means of killing someone.

Of course, there tends to be a fair bit of blurring of the lines between categories, and I think the controversial cases that make the news are frequently the ones involving guys who skirt the line between 2 and 3. I also think a lot of the controversy tends to arise because (i) people who aren't even in category 1 (i.e., they don't believe owning a gun for utilitarian purposes is reasonable) tend to conflate categories 2 and 3 (and sometimes even all three) and (ii) people in category 2 tend to have difficulty recognizing or admitting that category 2 people can be trigger happy and that the extreme end of category 2 can blur into category 3.