Hacker News Reader

Comment by dashdashu | Hacker News Reader

lethal force against a thief of your smartphone seems disproportionate to me

I always agree with your statement when people discuss it from a purely theoretical philosophical/moral standpoint.

But when it actually happens to you, as I have been violently mugged several times. Oh, would I push that button - pull that trigger and I'd rewind time so I can do it a few times over. Cathartic.

These little fuckers hide out in alleyways late at night and they've made a career of it. They do it so often they embellish their muggings with other bits like choking and mock stabbing or slamming people's heads against pavements. So fuck 'em.

So your stance is that it’s wrong, but you should be allowed to do it because it makes you very angry?

What exactly would you think of anyone else applying that reasoning to anything in society? Would you think that they belong in society?

No, I'm saying it's only human to retroactively want to do extreme fantastical violence against people who have physically harmed you when you live in a society that a: does not care that you were hurt because you're a man and b: pressures men into fending for themselves, sorting out their own problems and "manning up".

I'm not the type, myself. But damn, no wonder downtrodden men end up snapping - because they most often have nobody to turn to and are forced to exist within a bubble that analyses their weakness and victimhood as much as women are for beauty standards, etc.

Okay, that is a lot more understandable and I do agree. Sorry for the uncharitable take!

It's fine. Even re-reading what I'd said it does seem a little extreme, but I still believe the core idea of it. I'm just watching violent criminals in UK get early release while the hapless government and public cannot rub two neurons together to just build more prisons + address problems at the root (income inequality, rising prices, lack of things to do in smaller towns/villages).

Addressing the root of the issue needs to happen for sure, but I can tell you from here in the prison capital of the world, building more prisons does not help. Rehabilitation needs to be the core of the justice system, or all you do is create lifetime criminals.

Maybe, but these thieves might do more damage than just needing to replace the phone. Some of them will attempt to use the information on it for extortion or blackmail (which is why such a feature exists in the first place).

Don’t forget the lifelong trauma you get from a robbery. I know people who stopped using public transport after getting their bag violently snatched from them.

Whereas killing someone for stealing your phone will come with no trauma whatsoever?

Violence begets violence. A theft of a thousand plus dollar item is grand theft in the US. Ending a continual threat to society should be lauded not threatened.

How many thefts, by a single individual, is tolerable before society is allowed to remove the threat with permanence? Ten? A hundred? A thousand?

Some would answer one, single instance is enough for a weapons discharge. I would ask. How many times is allowable?

The criminal has no care for society, or its lives, so why should society care about that life?

Every life is sacred? Why?

Reply on news.ycombinator.com