““At first, I found the whole thing vaguely offensive. Marvin Katko came to burgle, to commit a crime, he didn’t care at all about Edward Briney, and now Briney has to pay him money after Katko got hurt during the commission of his crime by that shotgun booby-trap. But if you think a little closer on Katko v Briney, you can see a deeper reasoning of the Court’s, which is – Do not set booby traps on your property. It is not okay no matter what. The first-order consequence is that Briney, that poor fellow who had to deal with Marvin’s burgling attempt, now has to pay the burglar money. Yes, on some level this is offensive. But the second-order consequence is that knowledge of that decision spreads through Iowa and all of American society, and property owners are on notice not to set traps.””
