DIYbanter - View Single Post - Slo-Mo Looting

otforme (Charlie Self) wrote in message ...
Leon writes:

I suspect if the person being caught is a thief or not, he has a case if he
is badly injured. There are way too many liberal laws that go too far to
protect the guilty

Oh, come on. Liberal laws. If some asshole comes diving on a person from a
store doorway, and causes harm, then where is the political stance of the
person who gets to sue? There are other ways of stopping a thief, assuming the
person really is a thief, that do no include harming him physically.

But, hey, we have to remember. He stole property. Or MAYBE he stole property.
That's much more important than any injury that might be suffered.

Pfui.

Charlie Self

Hi Charlie,

I was with you at the first sentence, but by the time you finished,
the description sounded liberal as opposed to the classical definition
of conservative.

Both conservative and liberal have become meaningless terms, to me at
least, but the most lucid explanation I ever heard of conservative
principles was that they revolve around property rights.

Assuming that definition holds water, then privileging property and
rights to/over it, including aggressive enforcement, would indeed
appear to be a more conservative stance--and thus your stance would
apppear to be more liberal.

Similar arguments about a homeowner's right to defend his property in
a robbery typically divide along similar political perspectives.

For your consideration,
H