Saw this on the book of faces:
First off 19 year old. That’s a legal adult. Old enough to vote, to join the military, to sign binding contracts and basically do anything except drink alcohol (legally) or buy handguns (legally).
Second, mugging is not just “theft.” Theft is when someone sees something they want, nobody around, and they take it and walk away. Theft is breaking into an unoccupied car and boosting it’s stereo. Theft is a pure property crime. Mugging is a subset of robbery. It’s a violent crime. It’s using the threat of death or serious bodily injury to induce someone to hand over their personal property in a face to face confrontation.
After the fact, our judicial system uses whether the criminal actually caused death or serious bodily injury as part of determining the appropriate penalty. But the person facing the mugger doesn’t have the luxury of an after-the-fact determination. They have to go with what they have in front of them right then with no crystal ball to see how it will turn out.
The mugger might say “hand over your wallet and you won’t get hurt” but, really, how much can you trust that? After all, the mugger is robbing you. Is it really that much of a stretch to consider that he might lie to you too? While some people advocate cooperating with the criminal, statistics show that resistance reduces the risk not only of property loss but the likelihood of injury.
And that, right there, is the crux of the matter.
I have a daughter at home. I am her sole means of support. I have not only a right but a duty to return home safely to my daughter so I can care for, provide for, and protect her. That means that I have not only a right but a duty to do whatever is necessary to stop someone who threatens my ability to do that. A mugger might, might be satisfied with the contents of my wallet. But I have no way to know that.
Thus, I have not just a right but a duty to treat any face to face confrontation with a criminal as a potentially violent, potentially lethal threat. And when you consider the vast majority of violent criminals, including muggers, don’t stop with just one, it’s not just me and my daughter at question, but all the other fathers, mothers, daughters, and sons who could be victimized after me. I may not owe them a specific duty, but they remain part of the consideration as to why I can, and indeed must, treat that confrontation as a threat not just to me and mine but to them as well.
And if the criminal doesn’t like that he has a simple way to avoid it: don’t put me in that position.
Don’t start none, won’t be none.