In the news today

[XanBcoo]

So a desperate crack addict breaks in to your house to steal your TV so they can get their next fix. They don't need to be shoot and killed, they need to be rehabilitated and given the ability to straighten their life out (uhg. I hate the sound of that phrase. it makes me sound like I'm some superior human who has the right to judge other people's life choices...). You might say "so what, it's just some insane crack addict who doesn't contribute anything to society anyways," and I'd say so the person made some bad calls when they were younger.

Actually, you know? druggies don't contribute anything to society. We should definitely just eradicate them. And mentally retarded citizens? they aren't worth the resources it takes to sustain them, we just kill them too. And anyone who isn't a proud white college-graduating patriot shoudn't be allowed in this country. Since this is the country for the privileged, and only real people who should be allowed to label themselves human.

Hey man, better put some gauze on that heart.

It's bleeding.

Edit for real response: In a world where someone can morally justify American soldiers murdering civilians in Iraq, shooting a kid in the back for stealing your Twinkies is a perfectly reasonable solution. I mean, you weren't there, so no questions asked. Fire away.

However, Ryll and Animeniax are absolutely right about jail. Go through some links from the search I posted. Our criminal justice system doesn't work.

Not complicated: You break into a home, you pay the consequences.

*puts on batman mask*
*shoots teenager in the face*

Sure, surrender would be ideal, but you don't know what's going on through their heads. You don't even know what they're carrying or what they're capable of. Unless you're going out there with a weapon, I highly doubt they'll surrender, so you need to be in a position of power before you can even challenge them. Now you have a weapon, and the targets might also have weapons, and now the situation escalades.

Then don't escalate the situation? I don't see what you're trying to convince me of with that example. If you recognize the danger in going into a confrontation where someone will almost certainly wind up dead, you should be smart enough to choose the less drastic option. If I had to decide between letting my tv get stolen or inciting a firefight I would be ok with the former. It has nothing to do with naivete or cowardice and everything to do with not murdering another human being or risking getting killed myself:

It is said that if you know your enemies and know yourself, you will not be imperiled in a hundred battles; if you do not know your enemies but do know yourself, you will win one and lose one; if you do not know your enemies nor yourself, you will be imperiled in every single battle.