The idiotic concept of a fair fight in a life or death situation.

For the Left, if there is a battle and only one side takes casualties, then it was not fair. Somebody was cheating. Fair means both sides have people die, then and only then it is considered “valid.”

Possibly the dumbest/dangerous concept ever uttered by Liberals.

The problem is that the same principle is taken outside the battlefield and into civilian life: you cannot exercise your right to defend yourself until you have been injured in a life-threatening manner.

Don’t laugh, this is a very much alive legal doctrine in other countries. If somebody attacks you and you respond, you are obligated to wait and see if the other party continues the attack or decides to stop.  If the Bad guy shoots you and you shoot back, you can only use one bullet and must stop shooting to see what is the reaction from the other side of the conflict. If he withdraws, great. If he returns fire, then you can shoot one bullet again provided that he was a bad shot and you are not on the floor dying from the second gun shot wound.

I have spoken of this case before in the blog: A lawyer friend of mine from Venezuela called about a case she was handling as defense lawyer. A home owner heard somebody breaking in his house late at night, got his legally registered handgun and found an equally armed individual roaming the house. Shots were exchanged and bad guy died. The homeowner was charged with murder, why? He performed what we know as a Mozambique drill on the home invader and the judge investigating the case (Judges, not attorneys investigate cases down there) determined that shooting three times was “ensañamiento” (cruelty) and thus self-defense did not apply.

My friend explained to me that she think she could successfully argue to the judge that the second shot was just nerves and stress that affected the homeowner’s handling of the weapon, but she was trying to figure out how to explain the shot to the head within the jurisprudence parameters of the country. I sent her as much literature as I could, but at the end the case ended up pleaded down to Manslaughter with a sentence of 10 years and the man was released after serving 7 years.

I hope you understand the psychological effect that this has on normal people. First you have the fact that the last thing you want when your life is being threatened is to start thinking about the shit storm that will fall upon you when the event is over. second is that you wonder if just being a victim of crime is a better choice than defending yourself. You only get victimized once if you submit to a criminal, but you get a double dose of victimization if the government investigates your “act of violence” against the criminal you successfully defended yourself against.

I you think that does not transform people into willing victims, just look at England.

‘Nuff said.

12 Replies to “The idiotic concept of a fair fight in a life or death situation.”

  1. If you’re required to be strictly proportional in your response, the criminal continues to have the advantage. Anyone who advocates such garbage wants us dead, no matter any claims to the contrary. They are supporting criminals over honest people whenever they do such a thing.

  2. The Palestinians always have a higher body count because they use suicide tactics because it is a win-win. They kill Israelis they win. They die and become martyrs, they win.

    That last sentence by Linker is telling of his bigotry. The ones trying to commit a massacre are the Gazans. If the Israelis wanted to massacre the Gazans, they’s put a couple of M2’s and MK19’s on the guard towers and just open up indiscriminately.

    11
    1. No, if they wanted to commit a massacre, they could use artillery. A few mortars targeted, say, 30′-50′ on the Gazan side of the fence would shred the mob. And, if they held fire for when the mob made contact with the fence, it would be 100% moral.

  3. Just a thought, but I suspect that if that great liberal icon Kim Jong Un faced 40 to 50 thousand disaffected South Koreans “peacefully marching” to the DMZ with the intent of entering North Korea the body count would be in the tens of thousands. I know, ridiculous, No South Koreans want to get into North Korea.

  4. I’m Christian, but given the rabid and growing anti-semitism of the Left, I have this desire to put an Israeli flag sticker on the back of my truck next to my NRA sticker, just as an additional middle finger.

    1. If that’s accurate, then clearly a Good Thing has happened.
      Or as Niven & Pournelle put it, “Think of it as Evolution in Action”.

      1. https://www.timesofisrael.com/hamas-official-50-of-the-people-killed-in-gaza-riots-were-members/

        “A Hamas official on Wednesday acknowledged that 50 of the 62 Palestinians reported killed during Gaza border riots on Monday and Tuesday were members of the Islamist terrorist group, bringing the total number of known members of terror groups among the fatalities up to 53.”

        Ironic and sad that the American MSM lied their little rotten hearts out, only to have Hamas expose them.

    2. If you show up to an organized attempt to charge into another country, when you know you’re not welcome in the country, you’re a combatant regardless of your associations.

Feel free to express your opinions. Trolling, overly cussing and Internet Commandos will not be tolerated .

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.