Forum about Debates - Society
- Optional filter -
Text search :

modify delete 18184 - from Régine , 51 y.o. (France) - 2018-06-02
Society : "SELF-DEFENSE"

In France an old man, owner of a jewellry, has been taken to Court because he had killed with a gun a bugglar who robbed him and had a knife. What is your opinion ?

18184 -
modify delete 18254 - Reply from Abram , 16 y.o. (United States) - 2019-01-10

Hi Asta!

I agree that your suggested method for dealing with robbers is much more peaceful than the method chosen by the jeweler and far more desirable because it would not result in death. However, neither of us no the circumstances of the robbery or what threats the robber made against the jeweler. It is very likely that the robber threatened to kill the jeweler if he did not hand over his goods. In that case, the action that the jeweler took is certainly justifiable as self defense. Maybe the robber tried to kill the jeweler first just to make it easier to take what he wanted.

Using lethal force should always be a last resort, but it is necessary in some circumstances. I hope this helps!


Abram Leyzorek

18184 -
modify delete 18216 - Reply from Asta (Denmark) - 2018-09-07

So, the law is there so that we don't decide what is rigth or wrong ourselves. The robber was there, not to kill the man, but to steal. The man should have given the robber what he wanted, waited to he left and then called the police. He would probably had had his stuff back and the robber would probably had gone to prison, but it would have been by the law. If we just start to kill each other, by proclaiming our own rigth and wrong, society will collaps into anarchy.

18184 -
modify delete 18206 - Reply from Régine , 51 y.o. (France) - 2018-08-20

I add that nothing goes right here and the government will have to make new laws to replace the existant ones that often give more rights to the riff and less rights to the victims. I remember that last President François Hollande had made the best he could for security. I think HE WILL BE OUR NEXT PRESIDENT.

18184 -
modify delete 18205 - Reply from Régine , 51 y.o. (France) - 2018-08-20

I completelly agree. I wonder why things are like that, it seems like an occult conjuration TRYING TO DESTROY FRANCE.

18184 -
modify delete 18204 - Reply from Lily (Great Britain) - 2018-08-19

I think this is simply self-defense. The man would probably have been badly injured if not. I think that law about the same weapon is pretty ridiculous, even if it is to prevent murder.

18184 -
modify delete 18203 - Reply from Régine , 51 y.o. (France) - 2018-08-10

In France self defense exist only if the defender uses the same weapon than the attacker.
Everything is made for the riff !!! (racaille)

18184 -
modify delete 18192 - Reply from Abram , 16 y.o. (usa) - 2018-06-12

"I am confident that this is the rule in France as well," but please correct me if I am mistaken.


18184 -
modify delete 18191 - Reply from Abram , 16 y.o. (usa) - 2018-06-12

Bonjour Laura!

The robber was making threats on the jeweler's life; Was the jeweler to wait till he was killed? It was probably not the jeweler's intention to kill the burglar, incapacitation would have been sufficient to protect himself and his goods. But if the jeweler had intended to kill, then he is at fault because thievery does not carry the death penalty nor is it justifiable to take a life only to defend possessions. However, the burglar did wield a knife and it is easy to imagine how the jeweler may have feared for his life and taken measures to neutralize the threat.

Is that what they teach you in France, that it is wrong for an individual to take initiative and do what is right? Must it be a government institution decides what is right, acts as the sole instrument of justice? What the founders of the United States held was that the true legitimacy of the law comes from God, not from the government. And government institutions are (1) made up of people and (2) not above ordinary citizens in interpreting God's law. They laid upon ordinary individuals great responsibility in keeping order and preventing tyranny by affording the right to keep and bear arms and reemphasizing their God-given rights to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.

Christianity has influenced many man-made legal systems around the world, and in almost all of them violent actions that would otherwise be considered crimes are justified in the context of self defense when (1) the threat to life is imminent and (2) the fear of harm is reasonable. In this situation, the defender may take violent actions proportional to the level of threat to defend himself or other people. I am confident that this is the rule in France as well.

It is, however, up to the court to decide whether or not the danger was imminent and whether or not his response was proportional to the threat. There is also a doctrine called imperfect self defense which applies when the latter criterion is not met, i.e. the person had an irrational fear for their life. In this situation the person will still be charged with a crime, but the sentence will be less severe.

What do you think? And thanks for your input!

18184 -
modify delete 18188 - Reply from Laura (France) - 2018-06-05

The burglar did not kill him. Simply robbed him. And the basic rule in justice is that you can't do justice yourself... So yeah of course he's got to go to court!

18184 -
modify delete 18187 - Reply from Lillian , 13 y.o. (usa) - 2018-06-05

he shouldn't be charged in court. He was defending himself and his store.

I was about to say he was protected my the seccond amendment then I realized it was in france. XD

Forum about Debates - Society - (c) Etudiants du Monde / Students of the World
if any remark / question, please contact the webmaster: