palmetieri2000

People dont choose the circumstances they are born into, most of us non-US folk consider criminals as victims of their environment who need guidance to recognize that there are better ways to go about their life. We tend to believe that there are some criminal that are doing what they need to survive, and some who like doing their crime but that both, with genuine rehabilitation, would prefer to NOT be engaging in crime.

This does not absolve them of responsibility for crimes or harm done to others (In the cat converter discussion, this is the punishment a court would give them if they were prosecuted. Not a citizen executing them.) , but it does grant them the same humanity as everyone else. This is a part of why we don't believe in court ordered execution in Australia.

You conclusion feels very representative of the US on killing each other, clearly the superior option to being a psycho or being the victimized 'decent folks' is to improve the quality of life for the thief and create disincentive for criminality by providing opportunities.

Instead you focus on the retribution/threat element, using your almighty constitutional rights to enforce the protection of a car part. Look, it has been many many many years now in which US citizens have had guns and the right to shoot motherfuckers, how's that violent crime rate? what about thefts? muggings? any less cat converters getting stolen? Funnily enough, yes! Just in others countries that aren't so focused on punitive bullshit that they think its at all ethical to kill anyone for a car part.

'Wake up in the middle of the night to strangers at your home - you just caught a bunch of people in the middle of committing a felony and maybe they are not the type to leave witnesses behind.' Literally every country deals with this problem, the vast majority of us do without using firearms.

Do you think that 'visceral fear'? only exists in the USA? Normal people in England, Canada, Australia, Ireland, Spain, France, Germany, Sweden, etc have had their home invaded or the car broken into and have dealt with the situation without guns.

This is an argument that the system in which you are operating is flawed, society should ensure that you are not so vulnerable that a vehicle failing will make you end up jobless and homeless. This is not a good argument that criminals disabling your vehicle for profit is an acceptable justification for killing them.

actually dont think I'll need a response from you unless its about working from an ipad full time or other thought provoking insights.

nah this guy sucks, he has a career as a contrarian crypto critic and seems fundamentally okay with ignoring any of the positive developments in crypto technology and more than willing to falsify or be deliberately obtuse in his articles to make crypto look bad which gives him both attention and profit. and your tldr is untruthful.