Often we hear the anti-rights cultists tout how you should just give an attacker what they want. We hear them claim, “Nothing is worth taking someone’s life over.” While most could sympathize with that statement it ignores a couple very basic fundamental things with regard to someone attacking someone else.
It is also known that the blogosphere is one big circlejerk or a reverberation chamber. Consider this a reverberation in F# to the tune of:
- The attacker is looking to steal only property.
Property has a monetary value and you can easily make that comparison except for one serious flaw. The attacker has ruled your life worth less than the monetary value of the object they’re stealing. You have worked a portion of your life to purchase that object and they are stealing that part of your life. Not only are they stealing your life, but in attacking you they are willing to take the rest of your life to obtain it. What if the attacker stealing your property also has a rule of leaving no witnesses.
- The attacker is only seeking monetary gain for his personal benefit.
If this were true the following stories would have never occurred.
This woman reacted in defense of her children. The man wanted not just something of monetary value, but the woman’s child as well. What would the anti-rights cultists suggest she do? Let her child be kidnapped by someone of such high and impeccable moral character as a man who would rob a convenient store and steal a child? Odds would greatly weigh against the safe recovery of the child at that point, but I guess the criminal’s life is worth more than the child right!? Just let the cops do their job and your child will be fine.
Or this story, where again the subject of the attack was nothing of monetary value but that of a woman’s virtue.
There’s the numerous methods from the antis about how a woman can defend herself against rape. My personal favorite was telling women to vomit on themselves. There is a much better solution and it results in a safety improvement for women everywhere. Shoot the bastard. A cops response averages about 88fps(60 MPH) at best from a distance measure in miles. A .45 ACP will be there at 850fps from a distance measured in yards at most. Guess which will reach the attacker first. It will also make for damn sure he can never do it to another woman ever again. Many times though the mere presence of force will cause the attacker to seek a new victim. Attackers want easy prey that is safe for them, the are out to inflict pain on others, not to have their victim fight back.
Which brings me to my third story that seems right out of Kubrick’s A Clockwork Orange.
These kids went out and assaulted and beat an old man because they knew him to be an easy victim, unable to defend himself unarmed against people a 1/4 his age. Their victim selection in this case was lucky because when the elderly man is armed, all the sudden the field is leveled
.
All three of those cases there was nothing to give the attacker but the life of their child, their virtue, or lastly their own life. When one attempts to execute harm to another unprovoked, the attacker has stated that their victim’s worth is 0. They have no value on your life, so why are you attempting to provide a value to theirs? The lives of your family, your virtue, and your life should be weighted as priceless. A person attacking you is not worth more than your own life.
These cases illustrate the absurdity of the assumptions and their complete lack of understanding. They are attempting to take a very large complex subject and provide a black and white lens to view it through. Not only that though they are trying to state there is no black in their world, only white.
In all three of those incidents our criminal occupational hazard reduction organizations would wish that the attacker succeeded with their attacks. The victim has less rights than the criminal in their world view. The problem is, a criminal has surrendered all his rights in attempting to violate the sovereignty of another human being. A citizen has the right to defend themselves from attack using any means of force possible. If the criminal would rather remain unventilated, I invite him to stay his ass home and leave people alone. If he continues to prey upon the citizenry, may he one day make a victim selection failure and pay the permanent irrevocable costs for his sins and transgressions against his fellow man.
The myth that giving an attacker what they want will be safe for you is totally false as people have died doing just that. The myth that it’s not just worth killing someone over is false, your attacker feels you’re worth killing for it. So remember, when someone tells you to just give them what they want and you’ll be fine, they’re lying. Not only are they lying, but the care more about the criminal than they do you. That’s a really friendly thing to do right there, side with the person who wishes you and your family harm.
TMM is the owner, editor, and principal author at The Minuteman, a competitive shooter, and staff member for Boomershoot. Even in his free time he’s merging his love and knowledge of computers and technology with his love of firearms.
Many know his private name and information however due to the current political climate, many are distancing themselves due to the abandonment of Due Process.
Raw Feed
FeedBurner Feed
Subscribe by Email
I read a book “Facing Violence” that pointed out something that I had not considered directly before. Anti-social violence can be broken down into two categories, Resource crime and Process crime. A resource criminal is willing to kill you to get your stuff. A process criminal is willing to kill you in order to enjoy killing you. They have different motivations. If you give up your wallet to a resource criminal, you’re probably going to be ok. If you mistake a process criminal for a resource criminal and hand over your wallet, you’re still going to get killed because your wallet wasn’t what he was after.
We sometimes forget that there are some really disgusting people in the world that don’t operate by any normal set of behavior rules.
And that’s the problem. No one provides a magic key to spot one group from the other. My assumption is that anyone willing to violate some of the basic rules of society is in the “Process” group. Because ultimately both are willing to do the same thing to me. Just one of them though have that as their sole goal.
Thanks for the heads up on the book. That’s one that will be added to the list to read.