Why smoking remains so prevalent. I’m sure it’s not a majority that smokes, but it is massively more common anywhere I’ve been in Europe than here in the US. I live in a fairly large city and I will go many days in a row without seeing a single person smoking.
I just don’t really get it. It’s gross, it smells, it ruins your teeth and your lungs, and it’s expensive. Why do it?
In my case, and this the US, I had friends who smoked.
I was curious, bummed one, and once I got past the coughing I really enjoyed the effects, that said by the time you no longer get the “high” (for lack of a better word) you’re addicted.
Fast forward 20 years and I’m still trying to quit.
Quit for 5 years cold turkey, but… Shit went down in almost every facet of my life, and I went back.
But I’m down to about a pack a week.
One in the morning, one on the road to work, and one or two during my shift if time allows.
Just need to kick it for good.
Edit: To correct typos
Hey dude, I believe in you. You can do it again and do it for good! Don’t give up.
It’s not necessarily that smoking is a larger percentage of the population. It varies, but stats show a similar percentage more or less… it is a bit higher in Europe on average than in the US on average — but both places are large with varied amounts of smokers. It’s more that people are outside near each other more in Europe.
https://worldpopulationreview.com/country-rankings/smoking-rates-by-country
In Europe they’re walking down the street, sitting outdoors at cafes, hanging out in the city center, etc. Whereas in the US, people are often driving from place to place to go to a destination, so you don’t notice the smoking as much. Plus, smoking sections are a concept that exists in the US (even outside), whereas they don’t in Europe. Thankfully, in much of the US and EU, most places are finally non-smoking indoors now.
This is a gross overgeneralization. It’s different in different parts of the US and different parts of Europe, of course.
(FWIW: I totally agree with you that it’s gross. And it’s far too common to run into in Europe.)
Why smoking remains so prevalent. I’m sure it’s not a majority that smokes, but it is massively more common anywhere I’ve been in Europe than here in the US. I live in a fairly large city and I will go many days in a row without seeing a single person smoking.
I just don’t really get it. It’s gross, it smells, it ruins your teeth and your lungs, and it’s expensive. Why do it?
this is the same in asia. sometimes people don’t even smoke, they just smoke because their boss does it and they do it to fit in at work. it’s really awful.
Not the case in northern Europe by the way. I’m just as shocked when visiting countries in mid/south Europe
It’s way too broad a comparison. In my North Eastern US state, encountering smokers isn’t that common because it’s illegal inside and anywhere near a door. So to smoke, you have to pretty much hide. And it’s become uncommon enough, smoking makes you a pariah so people seem to be breaking the official rules less often as time goes on due to social pressure more than fear of enforcement. We were out at a bar the other day and a guy smoked on the patio and it very much stood out. You could feel the vitriol for this guy in the atmosphere and after a minute he walked in to the parking lot looking embarrassed. Not that long ago a waitress would have brought him an ash tray.
But go to Kentucky, there’s no rules about smoking anywhere. Last time I was there, we went to a grocery store with an ashtray between isles. Every building we went in to smelled like the 80s.
These are both the USA. And then in Europe, you do have countries like Bulgaria, Turkey, and Greece where more than 25% of the country smokes, which is higher than anywhere in the US. But then you have Sweden with only 6% and Norway with 7% which is a little bit better than anywhere in the US.
It really depends on the area, in some places smoking isnt really normalized anymore, in some places its the norm
In the USA less than 9% of the population smokes now. It’s probably around ~7% at this point. It’s crazy that we keep putting out laws like it’s a massive issue. The reality is alcoholism is way worse than it’s ever been yet it’s still allowed to advertise on the TV and they can sell fruity flavors…but think of the children when it comes to tobacco…
I’m hesitant to spin valid concerns about alcohol into de-vilification of smoking. They are both vices, both unhealthy, both dangerous to the user and those around them for different reasons.
So yeah, it’s valid to say we ignore the dangers of alcohol. But also yes, we should “think of the children” when it comes to tobacco.
What kid is picking up coffin nails these days? They vape or drink. It’s probably why the FDA dropped deeming regulations when the cigar manufacturers went after them, no kid is smoking a $10 cigar.
That is threadbare justification for deregulation of something we know has basically entirely negative effects and absolutely is something that kids have historically done.
Kids’ habits are fickle and unpredictable. Removing barriers to destructive behavior simply because they don’t do that behavior as often anymore (the current regulations seem to work??) makes no sense.
The issue is they’re not just leaving them in place, they’re adding more regulations, while ignoring alcohol. More people are alcoholics now than ever, and everyone is completely fine with it, but smoking is taboo and “omg think of the children”.
But… It’s still not bad that those smoking regulations are being put in place.
It weakens the argument for additional alcohol regulation when you keep insisting that the regulations being put on another similar vice are pointless.
How do you figure? Those of us who enjoy cigars/pipe tobacco/snuff are basically seeing our vices disappear because “think of the children”. Small makers are being forced to close because of the regulations on cigs. All while alcohol is completely allowed to do what it wants.
Well, the U.S. consumes a significant amount less alcohol than most European countries. So with both vices, Europe is doing worse than the U.S.
deleted by creator
Sure but both countries are pushing tobacco laws like mad, while not touching alcohol.
It’s literally prohibition all over again…
I’m one for letting people enjoy whatever vice they want, even if it’s hard drugs, but only because I know prohibition doesn’t work. We shouldn’t be telling adults what they can and cannot enjoy
Cigarettes are much worse for everyone around you than alcohol. Passive smoking is pretty dangerous and the main reason why so many laws exist against smoking in public places.
No it is not, the 2nd hand studies where flawed heavily. Smoking is bad for you period, but second hand smoke is as bad for you as sitting in traffic. Alcohol is bad for people around you as well, lots of DUIs were people are harmed and killed because of it.
To an extent, I see where you’re coming from, but if we keep cigarettes legal, most of the additives need to go. There’s no need to put tar and acytone in a cigarette.
They don’t put those things in cigs. It’s a by product of burning tobacco. Those lists of whats in a cigarette are bullshit, it’s just the chemical reaction of burning something.
There are laws against smoking in public places and cigarettes are expensive. Those who smoke are in it for themselves, not a European thing.
It’s definitly a thing in some places. I travel a lot between Switzerland and Germany and the difference in how much public smoking there is, is quite extreme.
deleted by creator
I’m not at a level of expertise where I can say for sure how much of an effect they’ve had, but part of the resolution of that lawsuit in the US where it was determined that the tobacco industry knew tobacco was addictive and caused cancer was that the industry had to establish a fund that was earmarked for anti-smoking advertisements. Those commercials by the Truth Initiative warning kids about the dangers of nicotine? At least partially funded by big tobacco.
I just don’t really get it. It’s gross, it smells, it ruins your teeth and your lungs, and it’s expensive. Why do it?
All those things are true but are countered by the fact that it’s also fucking awesome.
That’s not a fact, Jack. Also, you stink.
Sorry, but it is indeed a fact. Also, OK :)
Sounds like you’re addicted to smoking yourself
Why do they not want to go bankrupt from major health issues?
I was listening a podcast about cancer patient in France.
One talk was about the fact that the surgeon was planning on removing the breast tumor AND do the reconstruction directly after.
Except that by doing that the operation would have cost more than what the national social security covers, so it meant a big premium for the patient.
The “big” premium they were taking about was 600€ which is obviously outrageous. To make a cancer patient spend this much money on a life saving procedure.
The “big” premium they were taking about was 600€ which is obviously outrageous. To make a cancer patient spend this much money on a life saving procedure.
European here: I agree with this being outrageous. It’s not about the money, it’s about being a civilised society.
Now hospital parking on the other hand…
We do have some steep copayments for some treatments as well. For example, if I had to go to the hospital for a month I’d have to pay about 1000 EUR myself.
I was in the hospital for an outpatient procedure a couple of years ago here in the U.S. So not even overnight. I have good insurance. It cost me $2500.
I’m q
If I had to go into the hospital for a month, I truly would rather kill myself than have that shit looming over my for the rest of my life.
The trick is: Just don’t pay these fuckers, what are they going to do? Show up and kill you?
Maybe you get sued, but maybe they don’t even bother because it’s not worth the cost of lawyers.
Either way, money isn’t worth dying for, even in a fucked up dystopian system.
Except now you can’t buy a house or get a loan on a car because you have this massive outstanding debt…
Jokes on them I wouldn’t be able to buy a house or car that requires a loan anyways.
Beats dying.
Ouch, way to punch below the belt lol
I think that amount is way too high. Nowadays I could afford it without problems, but a few years back spending some time in hospital would’ve messed up my budget.
I might be fine with paying for elective procedures - but hospital stays for other reasons should be covered by healthcare.
I agree it should all be free for non-elective procedures, but that’s pretty much the cost of a few hours at an American hospital. The fact I thought you were being sarcastic and were not really reinforces how messed up our healthcare system is
hospital for a month I’d have to pay about 1000 EUR myself.
300 here.
Depends on the country. There are countries where everything is covered.
Monarchy. It’s the 21st Century and y’all still pay people to live a lavish lifestyle because they are distantly related to some warlord from the 9th century
Then again, the people in all countries pay for the lifestyle of the politicians… in addition to the bribes they get for deciding in favor of whichever corporate and/or rich person needs a specific law passed or vetoed.
At least the monarchs do what you pay them for … entertain you.
The King in the UK was caught with briefcases full of money declared as a ‘donation’. He has also interfered in our politics including encouraging the government to buy ineffective homeopathic ‘medicines’. They have also stopped the conviction of serious sex crimes royals have committed. Because the police get the power granted by royalty and can’t persecute them.
At least we can vote the politicians out. Fuck monarchies.
Politicians don’t do shit in America. Corporations govern the country and you can’t vote them out.
Your right.
I don’t want my tax dollars paying for politicans either.
I would be fine with it, if they were not allowed any other incomes during the time they get payed by the people.
Oh and of course they should be forced to do their jobs. If they don’t fully attend sessions, cut their pay.
Deswegen sind die ja auch nicht in der EU
Lustig, wie jetzt im Bezug auf das Mem sowohl Norwegen als auch Großbritannien nicht in der EU sind.
Edit: Context for those who merely translated, but didn’t understand. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UGlPbphlpBg
Nowhere in the question does it specify EU countries. It simply says European.
You’re taking this too serious.
I’m referencing crane driver Ronny in Norway (“Kranplätze müssen verdichtet sein!” : crane parking needs to be condensed (ground)), a reality TV icon in German language online communities and because the quote and context applies to both Norway and the UK which are both European, but not EU countries (that’s relevant because that’s part of the referenced joke), I posted that comment.
Neither does your comment. So pointing out that “y’all” in this instance is not actually meant to be taken literally is worth pointing out.
SPEAK ANGLO-SAXON YOU SON OF A BITCH!
Specific to Germany, but when a second cashier opens up, it’s a first come first serve rush for it, rather than letting the person next inline at the original cashier take the first spot in the new one.
Completely agree. I am German and it’s utterly ridiculous.
Demanding to have another cashier is so rude yet so many do it all the time.
Hun barbarism! Do Germans not know how to queue?
They do not
From what I heard about queueing practices in Eastern Europe and Northern Asia, no, not at all. For example, a long-time queue doesn’t need people, it just needs some belongings queued.
Oh my god I love this. Let the chaos begin
The Brits would never.
Queuing is a national pastime.
When I visit, I looooooove the civilized queues, but I can’t for the life of me understand why the slow lane on escalators is on the right (like you might find in big American cities) instead of the left (like you might find on a British highway).
German here, it’s slowly getting better. Slowly.
I belong to neither of these groups. But here goes it.
Europe: when ordering water, I have to specify for it not to have gas (non-carbonated). Also in places like Germany, people drink those before playing football. I don’t understand how you do it or even like it that way.
People in electric scooters are out of control. Specially in Spain. They’re the most egregious when it comes to disrespecting pedestrian crosswalks, dangerous overtaking in bike lanes and all around assholeness. You shouldn’t ride your fucking patinete in a train station crowded with people.
— —-
People from the US: Your tipping culture is out of control. It’s good for outstanding service on certain scenarios. But not for handing me takeout or pulling out a foamy beer from a cooler.
Also , don’t tell newly-aquatinted people from the south that you’re not religious. They’ll try to tell you it’s their duty to save your soul and try to make you go to their religious services, which antagonizes them if you try to set boundaries on your personal beliefs.
Btw. I still like you both.
- No ice in their water or soda
- No refills on fountain drinks
These are the things that stood out to me whenever I have visited.
I spent a good while in Berlin once and one of my favorite restaurants was this Australian themed place by the IMAX theater just because I could get a nice big Diet Coke with ice in it. Their kangaroo sandwich also wasn’t half bad.
We’re not getting refills anyway, I’d rather not have 80% ice with a bit of soda
The process of a soda fountain makes already it cold.
Ice is completely pointless and without it you don’t need refills
Ice keeps the soda cold throughout your meal.
In Europe my soda was often pretty close to room temperature by the time my food arrived. Not great if you like your beverages “ice cold”. But I get the impression Europeans don’t like their drinks as cold as we do in the US to begin with.
We also use larger glassware in the US, which offsets much of the volume displaced by ice.
So no, ice is not “completely pointless”, it’s just a cultural difference 🙂
larger glassware
Thinking of a typical US fast food soda cup: understatement. For comparison, a German McDonald’s “Large” (the largest available) is 0.5 liters (17 oz). In the US, a “Medium” is 18 oz (0.53 l) or 21 oz (0.62 l) depending on who you ask, and, it goes to 30 (0.89 l) or 32 oz (0.95 l). And I’ve seen complaints that Wendy’s shrank their large from 40 oz (1.18 l) to 35 oz (1.04 l). That’s not a cup, that’s a bucket!
A sit down restaurant in Europe will typically have soft drink serving sizes from 0.2 to 0.4 liters. The 0.2 is… unsatisfactory.
I just usually order 2 or 3 right away when I see that shit. What am I, an ant?
Ice holds it at 0°C though. For drinks that are delicious at 0°C but aren’t as good at 5°C, that ice makes a big difference, especially if you’ve got a cup that’s supposed to last 10+ minutes outdoors.
I drink 2 pitchers of tea with a meal. I will need refills with or with out ice in my glass.
Have you considered that that may be a lot of tea?
🤔 maybe
According to Google, 1 pitcher has a volume of 1.89 liters. If we assume they’re mostly full (1.8l), that would be 3.6l of tea. It’s recommended that you don’t drink more than roughly 1l per hour.
You either eat very slowly, or you’re doing bad things to your body.
It’s a thing cause its not really as normalized, people don’t really drink enough to get free refills in some places (although many places have free refills) and people here are generally used to warmer colas, although many people and places do add ice
No ice is because it’s cold as balls here most of the time anyway
Fountain drink: Depends on the restaurant. Some Burger Kings and McDs did have it, some removed it (probably exploited)
I don’t want ice in my damn soda or ice.
If you like it, ask the staff for some. They will usually give it to you.So dang euro you don’t even want ice in your ice.
lmao. I meant to writer water but accidentally wrote something way better. Keeping that now.
Idk about Berlin, but I’m from the french riviera and we do put ice cubes everywhere.
Fait trop chaud dans le sud, c’est pr ça.
And by “everywhere” you mean in the pastis.
Indeed. The
is the best seller when it comes to beverages in France. More than the bottled water Cristaline. Isn’t that surprising
McDonalds did refills for a while but then stopped again, idk why ¯\(ツ)/¯
I don’t know for Germany but free soda refills are illegal in France
Why?
Why does France seemingly propose/executes the worst and/or weirdest things.
This is almost on this level: https://blog.mozilla.org/netpolicy/2023/06/26/france-browser-website-blocking/
Because sugary drink are one of the leading cause of obesity, so rather than inciting people and children to drink more soda it’s much healthier to offer free water and paid drinks.
With the same idea vending machines with soda or sugary snacks are not allowed in schools anymore.
On the other hand everything that France government is doing around internet and privacy law is pure nonsense, I agree with that.
I’m a fucking fiend for ice in my water, like I literally will fill the cup full of ice first, then put water in the space that’s left. When I visited Europe it was fucking rough getting used to never having ice. And if you asked for it (which I tried not to do, but I caved a few times) they’d give you like 3 cubes
I absolutely hate ice in my drinks and have to always request it without or it gets added, this is in the UK
I see I’ve met my opposite
Ice cubes kinda suck.
But some places in the US have crushed ice and it’s seriously the nicest thing ever.
Or the fact that you have to pay for fucking water. It’s a God damned human right but you have to pay the same for water as any other drink at restaurants in Europe. By the glass. And the glasses hold exactly one to two mouthfulls of water.
I mean, it might just be a rumor but I hear that instead of being born with arms, Europeans are born with baguette extremities. They nibble on their baguette arms throughout the day, and they grow back while they’re sleeping.
Nah that’s just the french, they’re a little weird. Us germans got normal pretzel arms
Do the Swiss have cheese arms?
Yes and quite predictably Italians have pasta fingers.
Do Belgians have waffle ears?
Not a doctor and not familiar with Belgians sorry.
Lutefisk I heard…
Chocolate
I thought they were steins filled with Paulaner.
deleted by creator
We are not ruled by our monarchy. Their role is purely ceremonial. But yes they are of German descent.
It’s ceremonial only by convention. Most of the monarchy’s power still legally exists, which to me is ridiculous
Guess what would happen if they tried to use that power
Nothing! Because they already use that power, just not in public. They blatantly exercise their powers to extort judges/politicians/media to their benefit.
They’d be deposed, obviously. Thing is, the very act of deposing them would be an extralegal action, as all laws in the UK are established under the crowns authority. Legally speaking it would be the equivalent of a non-violent coup. Hence ceremonial by convention(de facto), rather than by law(de jure).
There would definitely be a huge backlash. But also a very vocal minority who would probably support them. The end result would be some long overdue changes to our constitutional setup, but given the current state of UK politics, this would be delivered at the end of a highly polarising and disruptive period (I’m thinking Brexit vote level of rancour).
Would be better if we just nipped this in the bud now. Remove the monarchy’s constitutional power, and make them fund themselves with their huge existing wealth. They can keep the titles and ceremonies for all I care, just pay for it themselves
Define “Most”.
Every new law passed is signed off by the monarch, a new PM still has to ask royal permission to form a government etc. In practice, these are purely formalities and are treated as such, but still legally there
The monarchies of Europe were one big family anyway up to WW1.
we know we have made memes about it
I mean, the Saudi monarchy has significant pull in every world government.
Not that uncommon tbh, in Norway our monarchs are of Danish descent.
We (NL) have distantly German monarchs. Currently half our Royal Pair is from 🇦🇷 Argentina, which is neat.
some of us hate it but unfortunately we’re in the minority
Explain that
They belong(ed) to the german royal house “Sachsen-Coburg und Gotha” and changed their name to “Windsor” after WW1 to not be affiliated with germany anymore. I don’t know if that’s enough to call them foreign though.
A “house name” represents only one of a person’s many ancestors.
If I’m not mistaken, the royals are German or something.
What annoys me more is that they’re British (/j). But nah they’re hardly foreign it’s just like their grandad or great grandad, you could make an equal claim that trump is German I think (off the top of my head).
I met up for lunch with a buddy and his partner who was visiting from Europe. I mentioned that I drink a lot of water and asked for a refill, they asked if water was free.
Typically they ask you for still or sparkling while dining and they charge in Europe. In London, I typically just say, “tap”. They had to legally serve it.
Yeah, tap water is something you can ask for basically everywhere and its free, bonus if it’s in a place with amazing tap water
Now that’s an intriguing idea: who has amazing tap water?
Scotland.
well I don’t know but fun fact: Tallinn and the district of nõmme in Tallinn have separate tap water systems
It depends on the country, in Greece it’s usually free, maybe in touristy places or if you order bottled water you will be charged, but otherwise most places will give you cold tap water for free.
I think it’s legally required to give tap water for free mostly everywhere, but if you don’t specify it they might sneak in an outrageously expensive bottle of mineral water, it’s basically a way to scam tourists.
In Italy they don’t, Italians are weird like that. It’s also a country where nearly everyone doesn’t trust their tap water and buy water in plastic bottles…
deleted by creator
We usually don’t give out tap water but something pricey like San Pellegrino water.
I know that a short visit doesnt give great insight into a place, but the following 2 things were very striking to me when visiting:
1 - the smoking… i found it disturbing just how many people were smoking 2 - the graffiti. I was surprised by just how much graffiti there was. Do people not take pride in their property enough to wash it off? I know Graffiti is common everywhere, but it seemed to be on a whole other level in europe… like it wasnt just on the back alleys, but on the front facades of buildings too. The front door of one of my airbnbs was covered in graffiti.
There was 1 thing though that was totally the opposite though & made total sense… the dual function windows (where you turn the handle 1 way to open them like a door & another way to lean them in to provide ventilation. These were everywhere & i found them to be the most functional thing ever! I wish they would catch on in the usa… with that said, the first time i discovered this functionality, it was accidental. I panicked as i thought i broke the window lol.
The graffiti thing kills me. Washing it off is a waste, it will be vandalised again quickly. Think this way, repaint properly a wall takes time and money, to draw a cartoonishly large cock takes seconds and costs pennies. So many places chose to allow selected artists do some good stuff as it’s a better deterrent.
Psst there is a third way to just provide ventilation, where you put the handle in a 45 degree angle upwards.
You monster
You know that meme with Jesus about how they hated him for speaking the truth?
Imagine that please.
The smoking absolutely kills me, as someone with asthma who has gotten very used to the fact that most things in the US are non-smoking now. It felt like there was a cloud of smoke basically everywhere I went in France and, to a lesser extent, England.
No disabled access almost everywhere, even in newer buildings.
This is one thing I think America has done right, the ADA is so nice for people with disabilities. I want everyone to be able to experience everything so having the ADA being strong is perfectly okay with me. And I think both sides agree, everyone will get old someday!
Bear in mind, this is relatively recent in the US too. It’s culturally connected with both the civil rights movement of the 1950s-1960s, and to the respect that Americans (sometimes) express for war veterans.
This really depends on the place, but yeah some places have pretty awful mobility, like there’s a path next to my house with stairs and no ramp on it
Inwinder where in Europe it’s like this. Where I’ve been most places are accessible
It largely depends on the European nation. Even as a non-native, I don’t tend to lump them all in one judgment, just as Europeans shouldn’t lump all Americans in one judgment. Every American state is different. Reply to this comment with a European country and I’ll share the thing about it that I understand the least.
The Netherlands
deleted by creator
You don’t understand drugs? I think it’s understandable to be against drugs, but I thought you’d be able to understand them.
deleted by creator
Mah, drugs makes sense to me. We have a more open policy. You can get your xtc freely tested by the gov so you dont take weird shit, shroom growing kits are legal and so are weak shrooms, truffles. Which can be bought in a certain store.
And except for weed that is really were it stops though.
Might be where it stops legally but availability/quality of all drugs in NL is clearly above the neighbours.
Idk im pretty against war on drugs etc. And believe that people just need mental support for them not to get addicted.
Oh me too, decriminalise everything! Just saying NL definitely has better/more accessible drugs, also the illegal stuff.
Yeah, whoever thought up the gedoog-policy was on something strong…
Belgium
As a Dutch person, a bit off topic, but some truth in television that I found funny:
The Belgians’ relationship with fries.
Last summer I was at a former military camp in the German hills, managed by Belgium when it was still operational, and we had a Belgian tour guide who’d served in the camp when it was active. He joked that the Belgian conscripts serving in that camp still got fries thrice a week, or they’d have a riot.
The lack of a feeling of equal opportunity the secessionists all have for each other. If one group has the right to leave, I’d think all do.
That’s what I’m saying, the UK and Bosnia for example are very different places
Czechlands.
The thing I understood the least about the Czechlands is why Czechoslovakia didn’t have one identity (for a lack of a better way to put it). Like it always seemed like a compound of two places, as opposed to a singular distinct body.
How do they put up with the lack of mass shootings ?
Growing up without the adrenaline rush when crossing school’s gates is indeed a tragedy. Heckin boring
Yeah wheres the excitement
It’s like the abortion lottery with the most corrupted poor States working hard to enslave women’s bodies to their institutionalized meat lottery of school shootings and miserable impoverished existence all to feed the insatiable appetite of the parasitic billionaires. How can those Europeans really live without getting to experience the Grand Republican Hunger Games.
Why some of them seem downright gleeful about every American shortcoming or perceived shortcoming.
As if we don’t do the same between the states.
You’re allowed to pick on your siblings.
I consider Americans like distant cousins. Not as closely related as neighbouring countries but still part of the family.
-
Because its funny
-
Gives a sense of superiority
-
It’s because you believe yourselves to be the supreme master race.
No we don’t lol
Nah, just the loud idiots who get all the attention. Most of us realize how unspecial we are in the grand scheme of things.
Self defense laws are pretty weird in Europe. I am spoiled on our second amendment laws, so let my bias be noted.
However, some guy can break into your house and if you defend yourself with a bat or knife, the laws there from what I hear (this isn’t fact, I could be mistaken) can get you in trouble with the law. I remember reading that somewhere.
Sure it’s like that in the US too but there are many protections for those who clearly have acted in self defense.
I think the difference is welf defense in Europe is defending your person, not your property. If someone breaks in, you don’t have the right to hurt them. You call the police. If they were trying to attack you or you alerting them to your presence makes them come for you, then of course you can defend yourself.
Self defence is just that. Defence of the self.
One thing that your 2a right also means is that your criminals are likely to be armed. Ours are less likely to be and certainly much less likely for petty crime. The police in Ireland, for instanc, don’t carry guns.
If someone breaks into my house. I’m not approaching them with hugs. I’m calling the police and grabbing a golf club or poker or similar.
This guy is extremely conservative and a former cop. (He doesn’t fly his politics, but you can tell.) He has testified in dozens of deadly force trials as an expert witness. Here’s what he has to say about defending property. Very eye opening.
“In the anti-gun Spokane newspaper, internet comments indicated that many people had the clueless idea that Gerlach had shot the man – in the back – to stop the thief from stealing his car. One idiot wrote in defense of doing such, “That ‘inert property’ as you call it represents a significant part of a man’s life. Stealing it is the same as stealing a part of his life. Part of my life is far more important than all of a thief’s life.”
Analyze that statement. The world revolves around this speaker so much that a bit of his life spent earning an expensive object is worth “all of (another man’s) life.” Never forget that, in this country, human life is seen by the courts as having a higher value than what those courts call “mere property,” even if you’re shooting the most incorrigible lifelong thief to keep him from stealing the Hope Diamond. A principle of our law is also that the evil man has the same rights as a good man. Here we have yet another case of a person dangerously confusing “how he thinks things ought to be” with “how things actually are.”
As a rule of thumb, American law does not justify the use of deadly force to protect what the courts have called “mere property.” In the rare jurisdiction that does appear to allow this, ask yourself how the following words would resonate with a jury when uttered by plaintiff’s counsel in closing argument: “Ladies and gentlemen, the defendant has admitted that he killed the deceased over property. How much difference is there in your hearts between the man who kills another to steal that man’s property, and one who kills another to maintain possession of his own? Either way, he ended a human life for mere property!” ― Massad Ayoob, Deadly Force - Understanding Your Right To Self Defense
Self defense is of course allowed, but only so far as to prevent harm. It also needs to be adequate to prevent the harm the attacker tried to inflict. So shooting someone who entered isn’t okay, you could’ve just held the gun at them. Which isn’t relevant cause you don’t have a gun and neither do they, most likely.
Man catchers should become more common.
Same bias as yourself. I find it stunning that the British police are so proud of the pocketknives they confiscate.
deleted by creator
