Page 315 - EFI-RAV ZILBERSTIN_VOL 8.EFI-RAV ZILBERSTIN_VOL 8.1A

Pg: 315 - 10-Back 21-10-31

(27b). There was a well belonging to two people [who drew from it
on alternate days]. One of them came and drew water on a day that
was not his, whereupon the other one beat him. Rav Nachman said
that [in this case] all would agree that he was entitled to take the law
into his own hands and not leave him to draw water. Rav Nachman’s
own opinion is that even when he does not incur an immediate loss
a person is entitled to take the law into his own hands and prevent
someone else stealing from him, or if he sees an object belonging to
the other person, he can take it for himself [to settle a prior debt].
However, to snatch another person’s belonging or money as payment
for a debt – even under circumstances where this is permitted – may
only be done without beating him (see the detailed exposition of
these laws in Choshen Mishpat, 4). It is therefore not possible to per-
mit handing over the robber to the secular courts, to be sentenced to
imprisonment and other physical punishments.

“And as for those involved in forgeries where there is concern for
the public harm, the Rema states (ibid. 388:12) that if when they
warned him he ignored the warning they can hand him over and say
[to the authorities], ‘No one else is involved [in the forgeries], just
him.’ The Rema’s words, ‘harming the public,’ apparently refer to the
courts’ claim that others are also involved in forgeries…but [simply]
because this forger’s work has harmed the public [by putting fake
money into circulation] does not permit handing him over, saying
this [i.e. that he is the only forger].

“Now, in Darkei Moshe (Tur Choshen Mishpat ibid., 16) [the Rema
writes:] ‘The Maharam of Rizburg writes that if a person whose
occupation is a public hazard e.g. he deals in invalid coins etc., was
warned by the congregation [to desist] and ignored the warning, they
should hand him over to the authorities and [also] that an individual
who has been [unjustly] accused because of him [i.e. as a result of
using a coin produced by the forger] can say [to the authorities] that
he does not produce such coins but that ploni does.’ This apparently
implies that a person who harms the public can be handed over to
the authorities outright [i.e. without any wider threat existing, as the
Rema’s words in Shulchan Aruch imply] and only an individual who

Handling Unhealthy Criminals 2 299