Be smart, be the one in control of the situation.
Meanwhile, in Texas you'd just shoot the laptop thief, either as soon as aware of the imminent theft or as the thief flees. It's fully supported by the law:
https://lawofselfdefense.com/statute/texas-sec-9-42-deadly-f...
Law enforcement in many communities would congratulate you for a job well done.
You being killed by a criminal over an iPhone or laptop is not going to change anything. Fund your police, vote to change laws enough that they’re spending their time on things that are relevant, and if you’re honestly willing to die for the rule of law, become a police officer.
Otherwise your body will be one more on the list of “people that died for no reason.” It’s not tough, righteous, or whatever else to die for no reason - and even if it were, if you’re going to make a stand and sacrifice your life, make it over something more than a laptop.
Not GP, but your assumption is wrong.
It's not about the laptop. It's about standing up for yourself and doing your part towards society. You obviously don't agree with this stance and that's fine, but it's not your place to dictate what values are worth standing up for and what aren't.
I, like GP, fully intend to go after a thief. If he goes after my life, then I go after his. Either he gives up the laptop, or one of us gets killed.
It's as simple as that.
Nothing is ever as simple as that. Not only is it a foolish, immoral and illegal, you've also just communicated murderous intent. Have fun spending 20-to-life in a cell because you thought ultraviolence would be a good way to do your part towards society.
I've had more than my fair share of violent confrontations, and I assure you, no matter how well you think you are prepared, once the metallic taste of adrenaline hits you, all your plans and delusions of grandeur go out the window.
A bit of violence can be acceptable. Murder over property is not.
No I have not. It's your bias that colored it that way. Reread my comment. I never said I want kill a thief for stealing. I simply stated that I will take back what is mine. If, and only if, the thief tries to kill me will I respond in kind.
Again, it has nothing to do with grandeur and everything to d with doing what is right. I will take back what is mine, and threatening my life wont stop me.
It's always irrational to risk oneself for a principle, that might (or might not) be for the benefit of society.
If you aren't going to do it, fine. I'm not inclined either. But have the grace not to gratuitously criticize those who do. Try not to see them in the dichotomy of heroes or idiots, just as people who provide some leavening to society.
Obvious loss of life is extreme and trivial things is subjective, but I think the point stands. There is a practical consideration to be made about what the risk profile is and what the degree of crime is. Clearly charging a man holding a loaded gun because he swiped some gum would be silly. Charging a man with a loaded gun because he’s about to shoot a kid, different set of equations.
I do, thanks. I just think it's distasteful, dare I say boorish, to call other people's sacrifice "trivial" when it probably benefits me, even if slightly.
I don't think we live in a world where armed robbers are categorized as gum-stealers and child-shooters and never the twain shall meet. Some people are suspicious of even non-criminals having or using guns, believe it or not.
I'm not saying worship every vigilante as a hero, just accept that disproportionate reactions to antisocial behavior are never going to go away, are a fundamental part of human behavior, and can be stupid from an "economically rational person" perspective and beneficial to society, including you and me, some of the time.
If you call something another person is willing to risk their life for "trivial", you really don't care about their life. It's transparently an insincere reaction to feeling badly about being passive.