Q&A: Harming Someone Who Abuses the Law
Harming Someone Who Abuses the Law
Question
In the article about a burglar who tunnels into a house, you wrote that the main basis for permission to kill him is that the burglar relies on the protection of the law and abuses it: he relies on the fact that I will not violate “Do not murder,” and exploits that in order to steal. The Torah then removes that protection in such a case.
According to that same logic, what would the ruling be regarding someone who blocks roads and operates in the same way: relying on the fact that people will not keep driving in order to harm them and block them? Does that rationale apply here as well, such that theoretically it would be permitted to run him over?
(Of course, this is all theoretical and not for practical application.)
Answer
If there is concern about a significant undermining of public order, then maybe yes. Of course, we are talking about a situation where there is no other way to solve the problem. That is true of the burglar as well.
Discussion on Answer
It seems to me we already dealt with this topic. I raised several distinctions, such as entering my private property versus acting in the public domain. The public domain is governed by the law and the authorities, not by you. You have permission to use it according to the rules.
So no, there is nothing binary here.
The question is what counts as “significant.” From my perspective, when someone blocks my way home that is in itself annoying, but what bothers me much more is that the blocker is exploiting the fact that I won’t run him over in order to harm me.
What counts as another way? The police don’t move them, so the question is about the private individual in that situation.
In the end it’s binary: either I don’t run him over and the way of the wicked prospers by exploiting my observance of the law, or I do run him over and he could die.