What you are proposing is one of those "If a tree falls in the forest, and nobody is around to hear..." questions. Theft does constitute an initiation of force. Consider: the woman has violated the store owners' property right not only in taking without paying but in terms of even being in the store, she is trespassing. This is so because she has violated the terms of implied contract entered into when she entered the store: i.e. that she was there to potentially purchase something for sale, not expropriate the owner.
Let's continue the line of reasoning. Suppose the same woman is walking down a narrow alley and she is blocked in her progress by a large burly guy who demands that she get in his car or else. Suppose further that she pulls out a gun, but burly guy advances on her anyway. She shoots him. Has she initiated force? No. Burly guy did when he tried to kidnap her into his car. Change location, back to the store. Burly guy is an employee of the store and he sees her pick up the item, call it a loaf of bread, and head for the exit. Burly guy blocks her exit and demands that she relinquish the loaf of bread for which she did not pay, back on the shelf or he will not allow her to leave. She pulls out her gun and shoots him and leaves. Did she initiate force? YES. The key is in the initial rights violation. Force is only justifiable in defense against rights violation. In the alley scenario, burly guy violated the woman's right not to be assaulted and dragged into a car. In the store scenario, the woman had stolen the bread first, violating the store owner's rights; burly guy was defending the owner's property.
Credits & Style Info
Talk Politics. A place to discuss politics without egomaniacal mods
![[community profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/community.png){kind=small}
(no subject)
Date: 21/4/14 01:38 (UTC)Let's continue the line of reasoning. Suppose the same woman is walking down a narrow alley and she is blocked in her progress by a large burly guy who demands that she get in his car or else. Suppose further that she pulls out a gun, but burly guy advances on her anyway. She shoots him. Has she initiated force? No. Burly guy did when he tried to kidnap her into his car. Change location, back to the store. Burly guy is an employee of the store and he sees her pick up the item, call it a loaf of bread, and head for the exit. Burly guy blocks her exit and demands that she relinquish the loaf of bread for which she did not pay, back on the shelf or he will not allow her to leave. She pulls out her gun and shoots him and leaves. Did she initiate force? YES. The key is in the initial rights violation. Force is only justifiable in defense against rights violation. In the alley scenario, burly guy violated the woman's right not to be assaulted and dragged into a car. In the store scenario, the woman had stolen the bread first, violating the store owner's rights; burly guy was defending the owner's property.