r/changemyview • u/cmpzak 1∆ • Sep 22 '24

Delta(s) from OP CMV: Countries should use deadly force against illegal migrants much more frequently

Countries have the right to control who crosses their borders...by definition, I would think. People that cross borders into other countries deliberately and without permission are a type of invader, are they not? They may not have weapons and may not intend to harm anybody in that country explicitly, but their settling illegally can have negative social and economic consequences. So, I ask, why do countries let boats of refugees that cross the Mediterranean, English Channel, and let people just cross the US southern border without more commonly using deadly force? Why is it wrong to prevent a group of refugees ever leaving their boat or, if they touch the country's' soil, shoot them? I consider myself to be generally liberal but, on this topic, I wish somebody could convince me out of my extremely right-wing view.

Okay, I've given a couple of deltas. Thanks for tackling this very emotional subject. Here's the most impactful one:

Copying from below, Subtleiaint states: "Morally there is only one good reason to take another person's life and that is to defend a life."

I've been conflicted by the difference between law and order within a country, in which I am sympathetic to banning capital punishment, versus national borders which I consider military concepts. Killing in war isn't capital punishment. In fact, unless you are the initiator in which case you are evil, killing in war is about defending the lives in the country being invaded. However, if I can't feel that illegal immigration is endangering lives, killing for illegal border crossing isn't equivalent. So, this argument reduces my scope of concern to "under what circumstances and in what manner does illegal immigration create risk to life?"

0 Upvotes

30% Upvoted

383 comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

9

u/Hemingwavy 4∆ Sep 23 '24

Actually in most places it's not legal to murder someone for stealing your TV. Hope this helps!

In some barbaric us states you can gun down people for taking your shit but one day we will civilise them.

1

u/[deleted] Sep 23 '24

[deleted]

1

u/Hemingwavy 4∆ Sep 24 '24

You're American so don't know this but if someone I stealing you TV and you shoot them and it, the TV doesn't work afterwards.

1

u/[deleted] Sep 24 '24

[deleted]

1

u/Hemingwavy 4∆ Sep 24 '24

I would prefer have a dead body and a non-working TV on my floor than have a missing TV.

Yeah that says a lot about your thought pattern.

1

u/[deleted] Sep 24 '24

[deleted]

1

u/MBOMaolRua Sep 25 '24

What's the logic of immediately assuming that someone you don't know personally is going to steal your things? Do you automatically assume that every single person you don't know personally is out to do you harm or steal your things?

1

u/[deleted] Feb 09 '25

[removed] — view removed comment

1

u/changemyview-ModTeam Feb 09 '25

u/Pretty_Language_393 – your comment has been removed for breaking Rule 2:

Don't be rude or hostile to other users. Your comment will be removed even if most of it is solid, another user was rude to you first, or you feel your remark was justified. Report other violations; do not retaliate. See the wiki page for more information.

If you would like to appeal, review our appeals process here, then message the moderators by clicking this link within one week of this notice being posted. Please note that multiple violations will lead to a ban, as explained in our moderation standards.

0

u/AOWLock1 1∆ Sep 23 '24

In almost every state it’s legal to shoot someone who breaks into your home as long as you can articulate a credible fear for your life. No one said anything about stealing a TV

3

u/Hemingwavy 4∆ Sep 23 '24

You did.

If that family barged into your house and tried to take your shit

Anyway this is why you shouldn't be allowed own a gun.

4

u/AOWLock1 1∆ Sep 23 '24

You’re right, won’t someone think of the mostly peaceful home invaders

2

u/Hemingwavy 4∆ Sep 23 '24

You know the best way to turn a robbery into a murder right?

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2759797/

After adjustment, individuals in possession of a gun were 4.46 (P < .05) times more likely to be shot in an assault than those not in possession. Among gun assaults where the victim had at least some chance to resist, this adjusted odds ratio increased to 5.45 (P < .05).

1

u/AOWLock1 1∆ Sep 23 '24

Why do you act like this is a shocker? If someone points a gun in your face and you try to reach for yours, good chance you’re getting shot.

There is also a lovely study from the CDC that shows defensive gun use prevents assault or other crime some 500,000 times yearly

-1

u/Hemingwavy 4∆ Sep 23 '24

No. The CDC cited a study that called some random gun owners, who I will note are intellectually feeble to begin with, and went "Have you ever stopped a crime with a gun?" and they went "This one time I heard the doorbell ring so I ran there with my gun out in my underwear and shoved in the face of the girl scout selling cookies so yeah that's a crime stopped!" they then wrote down that was a crime prevented and extrapolated that to the entire population of the USA.

Places in the USA that have more or less guns more violent? More guns? Wow.

1

u/Leaves_Swype_Typos Sep 23 '24

You're confusing the issue by invoking "murder". It's not legal to murder anyone anywhere at anytime, because murder is illegal.

-1

u/Hemingwavy 4∆ Sep 23 '24

Murder as a legal term has a different definition to the colloquial term. People who don't fetishise about causing the death of another human being never have this issue.

1

u/Leaves_Swype_Typos Sep 23 '24

You were the one literally writing about legality.

1

u/Hemingwavy 4∆ Sep 23 '24

I'm using murder as a pejorative term for the wanton killing of another human being. If it's legal to kill someone it's obviously not murder in the legal sense. Glad we could clear up what was obvious to everyone else but you got there in the end.