05-16-2009, 01:40 PM
Unfortunately the way the law sits in many areas the victim of home invasion fights two battles.
Once, for his or her family, against the immediate threat of someone--and a someone who regardless of the context of 100000 years of human history that is ignorant that nobody, anywhere, in any human culture has the right to be screwing around in the dark with other peoples stuff in their own private space without permission
Isn't sensible to assume that a person who is ignorant of the commonly held and understood boundaries of private space--boundaries held by everyone in the world and for the duration of human history--or just doesn't give a damn--represents a real danger, either from a mad man or a psychopath?
The SECOND battle, unfortunately, will be against a court that wants to second guess all that for ideological reasons.
I'd suggest that's unfair. Many people understand that, and this topic is indicative of a backlash against such foolishness. Expect the trend to strengthen.
Once, for his or her family, against the immediate threat of someone--and a someone who regardless of the context of 100000 years of human history that is ignorant that nobody, anywhere, in any human culture has the right to be screwing around in the dark with other peoples stuff in their own private space without permission
Isn't sensible to assume that a person who is ignorant of the commonly held and understood boundaries of private space--boundaries held by everyone in the world and for the duration of human history--or just doesn't give a damn--represents a real danger, either from a mad man or a psychopath?
The SECOND battle, unfortunately, will be against a court that wants to second guess all that for ideological reasons.
I'd suggest that's unfair. Many people understand that, and this topic is indicative of a backlash against such foolishness. Expect the trend to strengthen.