It's nothing new that the philosophical left doesn't care for property.

That is, of course, until you get the hilarious stories out of communist occupied zones like CHAZ, where everybody was happy until people started taking each other's laptops and stuff.

Still, there was a time when people on the left had an understanding that property isn't "just stuff." For some people, it's life and death.

Given that carjacking has specifically increased over the last few years, I wanna point out the wisdom of a communist -- Vittorio De Sica.

De Sica released The Bicycle Thief in Italy in 1948. It was a simple, post-war story about a poor man named Antonio trying to provide for his wife and child. He was given a job offer to make a meager living; but, he needed a bike. He traded the family's linens as an investment in the bike that he needed for the job, just to have it stolen.

The rest of the film is about Antonio's desperate search for his bike. Antonio had nothing more to sell. He had no other recourse but to find the bike, or steal himself. We never discover who the original thief was, because it doesn't matter to Antonio. Whatever benefit that the thief gained from Antonio's bike came at the cost of the livelihood of an honest man and his family.

For several years, leftists have been painting theft as a simple action of poor people taking from rich people who can afford it.

Well, almost ten years ago, somebody stole my Nikon F3 and four lenses at a time that I couldn't afford to replace it.

Somehow, I doubt that he pawned it to buy bread.

Similarly, I doubt that the punks who are stealing Kias think that they're just stealing from a bunch of billionaires who has a fleet of cars. They're not stealing cars to get to the grocery store to buy bread rather than just stealing the bread directly.

These thieves are simply leaches on society, and that applies to everybody from the people raiding Wal-Mart for sneakers, and the douche who stole my camera.

The oddest thing is the hypocrisy of the left.

When Kyle Rittenhouse defended himself in Wisconsin, the left was calling for his blood, claiming that he shot Rosenbaum in order to defend property. All the while, one of the few ways that a person could get a concealed carry permit in New York pre-Bruen would be if you had a job defending valuable property. So, by New York law, you could shoot a person for trying to steal an expensive piece of jewelry (ahem...property); but, if somebody is trying to take your life, you're SOL.

Yes, I do think that, under certain circumstances, deadly force is justifiable in defense of property. Maybe I shouldn't be allowed to kill someone over a camera; but, legally, your dogs and cats are property. In 49 out of 50 states, if you shoot somebody who's going to kill your dog, you're going to prison for a very long time.

Property is valuable to everyone. The only difference in the discussion about property and theft is honesty.

My property means a lot to me. Since my property means a lot to me, I assume that your property means the same to you.

If you say that property is theft, or that no property is valuable enough to justify physical force in defense, I know you're lying.