Texas-Style Justice in Nebraska?

January 12, 2010 at 2:05pm By: Mr. Wilson Posted in The Lincolnite Blog

Senator Mark Christensen wants you to be able to kill somebody if they break into your home, workplace, or occupied vehicle, even if you face no physical harm or you can escape. It might be fun to watch the debate on this one. Expect hysteria on both sides.

The bill itself can be found here.

Reply to this post

The Comments

Peter January 12, 2010 at 4:35pm

By the time a person has determined whether or not their live is in danger, it may just be too late.

As for home intruders…Kill ‘em all, let God sort it out.  smile

Actually, it would be (I think) rare for someone to be prosecuted for injuring or killing someone who crashed through a front door of a home or apartment.

beerorkid January 12, 2010 at 4:45pm

frothing over here

JT January 12, 2010 at 5:36pm

Mark Christensen introduced a controversial bill? I can’t believe it. I also can’t believe Mark McGwire did steroids.

Gene January 12, 2010 at 6:52pm

He also doesn’t want us to succeed.

Ed January 12, 2010 at 9:10pm

I wouldn’t feel sorry for an intruder if they got shot and killed but do we really need this bill?

Peter January 12, 2010 at 9:10pm

make that “life is in danger…”

Dave K January 13, 2010 at 3:39am

Give Christensen a gray t-shirt, a D by his name, and a North Omaha legislative district and he would be hailed as a hero.

beerorkid January 13, 2010 at 4:12am

oh please

What a twisted view you have.

Dave K January 13, 2010 at 4:19am

Hahaaa ... you know it’s true!

beerorkid January 13, 2010 at 4:21am

Remember back when the right could pretend the left was the party of death?  Well two wars of choice, a severe pro torture stance, and relaxing for responsibility of taking life is now the battle cry of the right.

Could you remind me of those traditional American values once again.  Seems they were just empty catchphrases.

Dave K January 13, 2010 at 4:52am

Each of your examples involves a confrontation with an enemy.  If you think the right grants its enemies a right to life, then please review the positions and philosophies of the right wing. 

I guess the ‘party of life/death’ distinction isn’t something I think about.  The left has their own segments of people they want to see live.  It’s unfortunate that those segments include murderers and terrorists, but that’s all water under the bridge I suppose.

beerorkid January 13, 2010 at 5:02am

How dare we give human beings basic rights?  The moral thing to do is….

Dave K January 13, 2010 at 5:11am

... administer justice. 

There are still a few people left whose main concern after a murder or act of terrorism is to punish the perpetrator of that act, not worry about their ‘rights’.

beerorkid January 13, 2010 at 5:23am

An excellent example of traditional values there.

Dave K January 13, 2010 at 5:27am

Otherwise known as ‘common sense’ in some circles.

beerorkid January 13, 2010 at 5:45am

Are you Jody P?

Gene January 13, 2010 at 3:04pm

I wonder how many bills introduced by Ernie Chambers were written by lobbyists. Probably zero.

Blaine January 14, 2010 at 1:03am

Agree with Peter.

To be judged after the fact by information that wasn’t at your obvious disposal during that critical moment is not fair or just.

In the moment: you don’t know that you can escape, and you don’t know anything about the intruder’s intent or state (rape, kill, kidnap, burgler, drunk, mistake). All you do know is that someone has violated your space, and that in a huge majority of cases such violations are with malicious intent.

Defend yourself and your property. Being passive only gives a positive reinforcement to those who haven’t been busted yet.

I’d rather be alive and wrong than dead/kidnapped/raped and wrong. If someone has violated my secure space, they’re on the wrong side of the statistics and my survival instincts, and I will react accordingly.

beerorkid January 14, 2010 at 2:56am

Frothing

Commenting is not available in this channel entry.

The Blogs

Syndication icon

Toolbox