Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/5/84; site reed.UUCP Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!mhuxr!ihnp4!zehntel!tektronix!reed!lydgate From: lydgate@reed.UUCP (Chris Lydgate) Newsgroups: net.politics Subject: Re: self defense, etc. Message-ID: <789@reed.UUCP> Date: Tue, 8-Jan-85 03:25:03 EST Article-I.D.: reed.789 Posted: Tue Jan 8 03:25:03 1985 Date-Received: Fri, 11-Jan-85 22:37:10 EST References: <177@tekred.UUCP> <4043@ucbvax.ARPA> Reply-To: lydgate@reed.UUCP (Chris Lydgate) Organization: Reed College, Portland, Oregon Lines: 36 Summary: In article <4043@ucbvax.ARPA> medin@ucbvax.ARPA (Milo Medin) writes: >If someone is on your property causing trouble, >as far as I am concerned they are dead meat if shot, and the owner >has a right to do it. If you are causing trouble then you have given >up your rights by not assuming your responsibilities from which >you get your rights in the first place. Thats the social >contract, and no one will force you to break it unless you choose >to do so yourself. Trying to make people figure out 'reasonable >use of force' under such stressful conditions is ridiculous. My first reaction to this was "Milo, get serious!!!"; and then I realized that he is. Some rights don't spring from responsibilities; I hold that the right to live in peace, the right to speak your mind and the right to worship what you wish, all derive from just being human. I do think that these rights imply that in order to protect them, we have to be responsible; i.e. we must speak out if we fear that we may lose the right to free expression. Milo, have you thought about what you're saying? Some transient may wander on to your farm and steal a chicken-- and you advocate a "Shoot first, ask questions later." attitude. Do you value your chicken more than the life of another person? If so, then I understand your feelings, even though I would disagree with you. But if not, then why are you saying this? I agree that requiring people to make complex decisions in a crisis is risky-- but I see that as an argument for restraint! To err on the side of caution, when a human life is concerned, is the only act of a responsible citizen. Chris