Don't bother, we'll all be labeled "The thief's defenders" again by prag16 lol
And everyone who empathises more strongly with the woman will be labeled psychopathic monsters who are one bad day away from murdering people who give them the stink eye. The hyperbole from both sides is cringe-worthy.
Surely it's not impossible to understand that some people empathise more strongly with the man who was almost killed, while others empathise more strongly with the woman who was robbed?
I think the more constructive discourse at this point is trying to figure out how things
ought to work in a society that doesn't want to promote desperate, dangerous attempts to recover ones property like this.
I feel like compensating a victim for lost property is reasonable. While it would obviously be open to abuse, fraud is a crime with its own set of punishments. I think the vast majority of people on both sides of this debate would prefer a system that disincentivizes violent protection of one's property by mitigating the damage that loss might cause the victim. Would that be workable? Is this something that's done in other countries?
Obviously the best thing would be to replace the prison system with something designed solely to reduce recidivism, while working to eliminate poverty and provide better care for the most marginalised members of society; but that's a pipe dream in the US.
