Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #7601  
Old 04-07-2017, 06:02 PM
ElvisL1ves is online now
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: The land of the mouse
Posts: 50,549
NRA employee shoots himself at NRA headquarters during firearms training.
  #7602  
Old 04-07-2017, 07:03 PM
Scumpup is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Posts: 14,310
And?
  #7603  
Old 04-07-2017, 10:49 PM
Little_Pig is offline
BANNED
 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Location: Mountain View Ca.
Posts: 3,382
Too freaking funny, ElvisL1ves.

He was an instructor at a "gun safety training course. "The man’s injuries were non life-threatening, and he is being treated for a gunshot wound to his lower body at a local hospital."

Two bits sez he blew his balls off which, according to Darwin rules of for ilk, would indeed be "non- life-threatening".

Last edited by Little_Pig; 04-07-2017 at 10:54 PM.
  #7604  
Old 04-08-2017, 08:52 AM
ElvisL1ves is online now
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: The land of the mouse
Posts: 50,549
Quote:
Originally Posted by Scumpup View Post
And?
Check the thread title.
  #7605  
Old 04-08-2017, 08:58 AM
Scumpup is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Posts: 14,310
I'm sure it seems ironic and like proof of something to you, bless your heart. Enjoy.

Last edited by Scumpup; 04-08-2017 at 08:59 AM.
  #7606  
Old 04-08-2017, 10:16 AM
k9bfriender is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Posts: 11,564
Quote:
Originally Posted by Scumpup View Post
I'm sure it seems ironic and like proof of something to you, bless your heart. Enjoy.
It's gun news, it's stupid news, it's stupid gun news!
  #7607  
Old 04-09-2017, 01:16 PM
ElvisL1ves is online now
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: The land of the mouse
Posts: 50,549
The thread is not solely about you barrel-strokers' fetishes and delusions, despite their numerical dominance by post count. It's also about your Dunning-Kruger-case-level intelligence (both general and specific), competence in the skill you falsely claim to have, and, as Little Pig astutely suggests ( ), your reproductive adequacy.

You were gone for a while, Scumpup. What's the story - something toddler-related again?
  #7608  
Old 04-09-2017, 02:35 PM
Lumpy's Avatar
Lumpy is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Aug 1999
Location: Minneapolis, Minnesota US
Posts: 16,696
Quote:
Originally Posted by ElvisL1ves View Post
The thread is not solely about you barrel-strokers' fetishes and delusions, despite their numerical dominance by post count. It's also about your Dunning-Kruger-case-level intelligence (both general and specific), competence in the skill you falsely claim to have, and, as Little Pig astutely suggests ( ), your reproductive adequacy.

You were gone for a while, Scumpup. What's the story - something toddler-related again?
Careful E, the doctor might order your internet privileges revoked again.

Last edited by Lumpy; 04-09-2017 at 02:35 PM.
  #7609  
Old 04-09-2017, 05:39 PM
ElvisL1ves is online now
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: The land of the mouse
Posts: 50,549
You're thinking of Clothahump, who looks like Einstein compared to you.
  #7610  
Old 04-09-2017, 06:46 PM
Scumpup is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Posts: 14,310
Quote:
Originally Posted by ElvisL1ves View Post
The thread is not solely about you barrel-strokers' fetishes and delusions, despite their numerical dominance by post count. It's also about your Dunning-Kruger-case-level intelligence (both general and specific), competence in the skill you falsely claim to have, and, as Little Pig astutely suggests ( ), your reproductive adequacy.

You were gone for a while, Scumpup. What's the story - something toddler-related again?
Dude, you are the one_the only one_ who refuses to make the simple statement that you don't desire to molest or murder toddlers. I used to attribute that to you having a crippling fear of what you thought of as "losing" on the internet. I now realize I was wrong about that. You're just really, really stupid. I was gone for a while, but that was because most of the people who used to make this board interesting are gone. Now, it is mostly Big T and a few others scolding and you being stupid.

Last edited by Scumpup; 04-09-2017 at 06:47 PM.
  #7611  
Old 04-09-2017, 07:22 PM
Scumpup is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Posts: 14,310
Quote:
Originally Posted by ElvisL1ves View Post
You're thinking of Clothahump, who looks like Einstein compared to you.
I thought about you for a bit, which is something I seldom do, and so I'll have a go at explaining my new opinion of you to those who don'T get the toddler references and don'T want to search an endless thread. In several discussions, you advanced your ill-considered idea that every gun owner is one bad day from being a murderer, perhaps even a mass murderer. I asked you whether you were "one bad day" off of raping and murderer in a toddler. I offered that all you had to do was say that you would never do such a thing and the topic would be closed. To date, you have refused to make that statement. I used to think it was because you recognized that you saying you would never commit such a crime would give equal weight to a gun owner saying he would never commit murder. I figured you would perceive that as "losing on the internet" and a crippling fear of that kept you mum. Now, I realize that you are just so hopelessly dumb that you don't recognize how stupid your whole "one bad day" schtick is, but your dim little mind does suspect I must be setting some kind of trap for you. Anyway, you are really dumb and even the people on your side of the gun debate consider you a buffoon. Hope you have a good day. I worry for the children in your neighborhood.

Last edited by Scumpup; 04-09-2017 at 07:24 PM.
  #7612  
Old 05-02-2017, 11:10 AM
Projammer's Avatar
Projammer is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: SW Arkansas
Posts: 6,700
Dumbest gun control argument ever. (maybe)
Quote:
The main problem with the notion of self-defense is it imposes on justice, for everyone has the right for a fair trial. Therefore, using a firearm to defend oneself is not legal because if the attacker is killed, he or she is devoid of his or her rights.
Self defense is BAD because it denies due process rights to dead criminals?

I had to double check to make sure I wasn't reading an Onion article. Some gun control proponents are enjoyable to debate with. Others just make my head hurt.
  #7613  
Old 05-02-2017, 11:41 AM
Lumpy's Avatar
Lumpy is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Aug 1999
Location: Minneapolis, Minnesota US
Posts: 16,696
Not news as such, but this movie review does involve guns and stupidity:

"Free Fire" is a love letter to guns and criminal stupidity
  #7614  
Old 05-02-2017, 11:48 AM
k9bfriender is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Posts: 11,564
Quote:
Originally Posted by Projammer View Post
Dumbest gun control argument ever. (maybe)Self defense is BAD because it denies due process rights to dead criminals?

I had to double check to make sure I wasn't reading an Onion article. Some gun control proponents are enjoyable to debate with. Others just make my head hurt.
It is one thing if you are protecting life or limb of yourself or others.

It is quite another if you kill someone to protect property.
  #7615  
Old 05-02-2017, 12:03 PM
Projammer's Avatar
Projammer is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: SW Arkansas
Posts: 6,700
The author specifically states "using a firearm to defend oneself is not legal". I personally read that to mean protecting life or limb, but YMMV.
  #7616  
Old 05-02-2017, 02:22 PM
Tranquilis is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: Lurking nearby...
Posts: 6,447
Quote:
Originally Posted by Projammer View Post
Dumbest gun control argument ever. (maybe)Self defense is BAD because it denies due process rights to dead criminals?

I had to double check to make sure I wasn't reading an Onion article. Some gun control proponents are enjoyable to debate with. Others just make my head hurt.
Huffpo: Home of some of the greatest examples of maturbatory self-importance on the planet.
  #7617  
Old 05-02-2017, 06:51 PM
Lumpy's Avatar
Lumpy is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Aug 1999
Location: Minneapolis, Minnesota US
Posts: 16,696
Quote:
Originally Posted by k9bfriender View Post
It is one thing if you are protecting life or limb of yourself or others.

It is quite another if you kill someone to protect property.
Well strictly speaking you don't kill someone to protect property; you use lesser force first and then if they escalate to the point where you're in danger of death or great bodily harm, THEN you kill them. e.g. George Zimmerman.
  #7618  
Old 05-02-2017, 10:48 PM
eschereal's Avatar
eschereal is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: Frogstar World B
Posts: 16,579
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lumpy View Post
Well strictly speaking you don't kill someone to protect property; you use lesser force first and then if they escalate to the point where you're in danger of death or great bodily harm, THEN you kill them. e.g. George Zimmerman.
If you are the one who causes the escalation, as in the case you mention, the use of a gun to defend yourself from your own irresponsible behavior is entirely improper. Killing a person because you pissed them off is the exact opposite of acceptable.
  #7619  
Old 05-03-2017, 09:13 AM
Damuri Ajashi is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 20,483
Quote:
Originally Posted by k9bfriender View Post
It is one thing if you are protecting life or limb of yourself or others.

It is quite another if you kill someone to protect property.
Depends. We recently passed the anniversary of the LA riots. Was the use of deadly force to prevent and deter looters in the first category or the second?

Can I use deadly force to prevent looters from looting and burning my store? Or do I have to let them take everything I have worked for my whole life? The source of income with which I support my family. Or do I let them loot and burn down my store and apply for welfare, I mean its not like my family is going to starve if I let them take everything I own, the government will step in and make sure my family doesn't die of starvation, exposure or treatable disease, right?

What if they only want to take my car?
  #7620  
Old 05-03-2017, 09:20 AM
k9bfriender is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Posts: 11,564
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lumpy View Post
Well strictly speaking you don't kill someone to protect property; you use lesser force first and then if they escalate to the point where you're in danger of death or great bodily harm, THEN you kill them. e.g. George Zimmerman.
Strictly speaking, you don't even need to be protecting property, you can just be looking for someone to harass. And if the person that you choose to harass fights back, shoot 'em.
  #7621  
Old 05-03-2017, 09:27 AM
k9bfriender is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Posts: 11,564
Quote:
Originally Posted by Damuri Ajashi View Post
Depends. We recently passed the anniversary of the LA riots. Was the use of deadly force to prevent and deter looters in the first category or the second?

Can I use deadly force to prevent looters from looting and burning my store? Or do I have to let them take everything I have worked for my whole life? The source of income with which I support my family. Or do I let them loot and burn down my store and apply for welfare, I mean its not like my family is going to starve if I let them take everything I own, the government will step in and make sure my family doesn't die of starvation, exposure or treatable disease, right?
Can you? Sure, you can. May you, it depends on the law. Is it ethical to kill people in order to protect property that is insured, I do not believe so.

And, slight off-question, if you had a store that was burnt down, and for whatever reason, you are unable to requild it, would you apply for welfare and let your family starve, or would you just go get a job?

Quote:

What if they only want to take my car?
Same thing, as even grand theft auto is not a capital crime, killing them to prevent them from stealing your car would be murdering someone to protect your property. If you are in the car at the time, and they are car-jacking you, then sure, there is a concern for your own safety, and if you really need to kill someone to ensure your safety, then that's your right.

But killing people in defense of property, especially property that should be insured, is IMHO a pretty shitty thing to do.
  #7622  
Old 05-03-2017, 02:43 PM
Projammer's Avatar
Projammer is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: SW Arkansas
Posts: 6,700
There are other scenarios concerning armed response in defense of property. Suppose I'm walking down the street with 12 dollars and a Nokia flip-phone in my pocket when I'm confronted by an armed mugger demanding everything I've got. Is shooting him in response to his demands justified? Based solely on 12 bucks and a decade old phone, no. But what assurance do I have that he's not going to wound or kill me for not having more? It has happened before and no doubt will happen again. Sure, at that point it's escalated to fearing for my life defense, but I have no way of knowing that until it's all but done. Am I supposed to wait until I have a knife or bullet in me to take action?

Last edited by Projammer; 05-03-2017 at 02:44 PM.
  #7623  
Old 05-03-2017, 02:55 PM
Little_Pig is offline
BANNED
 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Location: Mountain View Ca.
Posts: 3,382
Baseball fan grazed by stray bullet during Cardinals game at Busch Stadium.

Wonderful...
  #7624  
Old 05-03-2017, 03:39 PM
k9bfriender is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Posts: 11,564
Quote:
Originally Posted by Projammer View Post
There are other scenarios concerning armed response in defense of property. Suppose I'm walking down the street with 12 dollars and a Nokia flip-phone in my pocket when I'm confronted by an armed mugger demanding everything I've got. Is shooting him in response to his demands justified? Based solely on 12 bucks and a decade old phone, no. But what assurance do I have that he's not going to wound or kill me for not having more? It has happened before and no doubt will happen again. Sure, at that point it's escalated to fearing for my life defense, but I have no way of knowing that until it's all but done. Am I supposed to wait until I have a knife or bullet in me to take action?
You do what you think you need to do to keep yourself safe.

If you feel that turning over your phone and money to the mugger will keep you safer than confronting the mugger, then go ahead and do that.

If you think that confronting the mugger will keep you safer than turning over your possessions, then do that.

It is your safety that should be the concern, not the possessions.

Now, personally, I do not see why a mugger would cuase me harm if I give him what he wants, so I would just hand over my stuff to him, and ask him to have a nice day.

If you really feel that you can get your gun drawn and shoot him before he is able to take action, then go for it, but I'm gonna be honest, if he's already got a bead on you, and is willing to do you harm, your gun is not going to even clear the holster before you get shot.

The only way you get out of the confrontation winning is if the mugger was not willing to actually kill you in order to take your stuff. Of course, long term, this has the consequence that muggers who are not willing to kill you get eliminated, leaving only the muggers who are willing to kill you, and rather than take a chance that you may have a gun, they are just going to shoot you dead, then take your stuff, and your gun. Not sure what defense you can put up when you are already bleeding out on the ground.
  #7625  
Old 05-03-2017, 03:41 PM
k9bfriender is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Posts: 11,564
Quote:
Originally Posted by Little_Pig View Post
Baseball fan grazed by stray bullet during Cardinals game at Busch Stadium.

Wonderful...
That's why we need to have guns in stadiums.

A good guy with a gun would have shot that stray bullet right out of the air.

(Of course, then we need another good guy with a gun to shoot down that bullet.)
  #7626  
Old 05-03-2017, 03:51 PM
Little_Pig is offline
BANNED
 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Location: Mountain View Ca.
Posts: 3,382
Quote:
Originally Posted by k9bfriender View Post
That's why we need to have guns in stadiums.

A good guy with a gun would have shot that stray bullet right out of the air.

(Of course, then we need another good guy with a gun to shoot down that bullet.)
An so on, and so on, and... I envisage 50,000+ fans with guns, all shooting wildly into the air.

Last edited by Little_Pig; 05-03-2017 at 03:53 PM.
  #7627  
Old 05-03-2017, 03:56 PM
Channing Idaho Banks's Avatar
Channing Idaho Banks is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2015
Location: beautiful Idaho
Posts: 2,672
Quote:
Originally Posted by k9bfriender View Post
... Now, personally, I do not see why a mugger would cuase me harm if I give him what he wants, so I would just hand over my stuff to him, and ask him to have a nice day.
OK, what if he demands to take your dog, too? Do you turn into k9defender?
  #7628  
Old 05-03-2017, 04:07 PM
k9bfriender is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Posts: 11,564
Quote:
Originally Posted by Channing Idaho Banks View Post
OK, what if he demands to take your dog, too? Do you turn into k9defender?
eh, logically, my dog is property, so same rules.

Emotionally... I may consider the defense of my dog as being close to the importance of defense of myself.
  #7629  
Old 05-03-2017, 04:35 PM
Jack Batty's Avatar
Jack Batty is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: The Astral Plane.
Posts: 15,618
Quote:
Originally Posted by Little_Pig View Post
An so on, and so on, and... I envisage 50,000+ fans with guns, all shooting wildly into the air.
It's bullets all the way down.
  #7630  
Old 05-03-2017, 10:44 PM
Projammer's Avatar
Projammer is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: SW Arkansas
Posts: 6,700
Quote:
Originally Posted by Little_Pig View Post
Baseball fan grazed by stray bullet during Cardinals game at Busch Stadium.

Wonderful...
Quote:
Originally Posted by k9bfriender View Post
That's why we need to have guns in stadiums.

A good guy with a gun would have shot that stray bullet right out of the air.

(Of course, then we need another good guy with a gun to shoot down that bullet.)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Little_Pig View Post
An so on, and so on, and... I envisage 50,000+ fans with guns, all shooting wildly into the air.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jack Batty View Post
It's bullets all the way down.
MLB report: Woman grazed by bullet at Busch Stadium in St. Louis
Quote:
Police believe the bullet came from outside the stadium.
But don't let actual facts interfere with your mutual masturbation.

Oh wait. That detail was in the original link.
Quote:
A bullet slug was found “in the immediate area around the victim’s seat,” according to police. They said it appeared the bullet came from outside the stadium.
Carry on.
  #7631  
Old 05-03-2017, 10:55 PM
Damuri Ajashi is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 20,483
Quote:
Originally Posted by k9bfriender View Post
Can you? Sure, you can. May you, it depends on the law. Is it ethical to kill people in order to protect property that is insured, I do not believe so.
So, you would be OK with someone coming along and taking everything you have worked for your entire life and impoverish your family because you don't want to drive him off with a gun and possibly kill him to protect your property?

Quote:
And, slight off-question, if you had a store that was burnt down, and for whatever reason, you are unable to requild it, would you apply for welfare and let your family starve, or would you just go get a job?
Are you under the impression that all these Korean immigrants opened stores because that's what they wanted to do? Go to America and open a liquor store or or consumer electronics store in a shitty crime ridden neighborhood? They did this because their English language skills made them unemployable by anyone other than themselves or other Koreans. Without guns virtually all the Korean stores in Koreatown would have been burned down, noone to give them jobs.

They wouldn't have the option of just going out there and getting a job in the summer of 1992. There was a recession going on at the time (its part of the reason Clinton got elected "Its the economy stupid")

Quote:
Same thing, as even grand theft auto is not a capital crime, killing them to prevent them from stealing your car would be murdering someone to protect your property. If you are in the car at the time, and they are car-jacking you, then sure, there is a concern for your own safety, and if you really need to kill someone to ensure your safety, then that's your right.

But killing people in defense of property, especially property that should be insured, is IMHO a pretty shitty thing to do.
These stores were in neighborhoods that were uninsurable. So when the store burns down, there is no money to rebuild it.

I knew a kid who had to drop out of college and didn't graduate until about 4 years after me by going to college part time and at night while working during the day because he had to work to help support the family. Because their store in an uninsurable neighborhood got looted then burned.
  #7632  
Old 05-03-2017, 11:59 PM
eschereal's Avatar
eschereal is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: Frogstar World B
Posts: 16,579
Quote:
Originally Posted by Projammer View Post
MLB report: Woman grazed by bullet at Busch Stadium in St. Louis
Quote:
Police believe the bullet came from outside the stadium.
But don't let actual facts interfere with your mutual masturbation.
The bullet came from elsewhere. Good. That makes it all ok.
  #7633  
Old 05-04-2017, 12:04 AM
eschereal's Avatar
eschereal is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: Frogstar World B
Posts: 16,579
Quote:
Originally Posted by k9bfriender View Post
If you really feel that you can get your gun drawn and shoot him before he is able to take action, then go for it, but I'm gonna be honest, if he's already got a bead on you, and is willing to do you harm, your gun is not going to even clear the holster before you get shot.
No problem: you just let the mugger take your stuff, then shoot him in the back as he is running away, and then take your stuff back.



(which relies on the mugger not noticing that you have a gun and relieving you of that)
  #7634  
Old 05-04-2017, 08:44 AM
k9bfriender is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Posts: 11,564
Quote:
Originally Posted by Projammer View Post
MLB report: Woman grazed by bullet at Busch Stadium in St. Louis

But don't let actual facts interfere with your mutual masturbation.

Oh wait. That detail was in the original link.


Carry on.
If you pay attention to the posts, you would see that I originally made a joke about shooting the bullet out of the air, not shooting the shooter.

You see, that is because I read the article, and was aware that the irresponsible gun owner was outside of the stadium. But I also read in the article where the bullet entered the stadium.

This is the time that my hypothetical "good guy with a gun" would shoot the bullet out of the air, and then there would need to be another to shoot down that bullet, and so on.

But don't let the actual posts interfere with your accusations.

Carry on.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Damuri Ajashi View Post
So, you would be OK with someone coming along and taking everything you have worked for your entire life and impoverish your family because you don't want to drive him off with a gun and possibly kill him to protect your property?
Would I be okay with that, of course not, don't be stupid.

Would I be willing to kill for that is another question entirely.
Quote:

Are you under the impression that all these Korean immigrants opened stores because that's what they wanted to do? Go to America and open a liquor store or or consumer electronics store in a shitty crime ridden neighborhood? They did this because their English language skills made them unemployable by anyone other than themselves or other Koreans. Without guns virtually all the Korean stores in Koreatown would have been burned down, noone to give them jobs.
There are a number of people out there that are lacking for work. Sucks to be them, I've been there.

It sucks, I'll agree, but it doesn't suck so much that I would be willing to kill someone to keep my job.
Quote:
They wouldn't have the option of just going out there and getting a job in the summer of 1992. There was a recession going on at the time (its part of the reason Clinton got elected "Its the economy stupid")
And if their stores had gone out of business due to the economy, would they then be justified in killing someone in order to keep them open then?
Quote:

These stores were in neighborhoods that were uninsurable. So when the store burns down, there is no money to rebuild it.

I knew a kid who had to drop out of college and didn't graduate until about 4 years after me by going to college part time and at night while working during the day because he had to work to help support the family. Because their store in an uninsurable neighborhood got looted then burned.
That happens in lots of places. I didn't finish college because I could only go part time, as I was working full time to help pay my family's bills. The fact that your friend was in the same position as many other people in this country does not mean that his parents should have killed people to prevent it. What would they have done if there was a flood, or an earthquake, or a fire? The fact that the riots were one "natural disaster" that they could have killed people to prevent happening to their individual establishment, does not, IMHO, give them the ethical high ground to kill people to protect their property.
  #7635  
Old 05-05-2017, 09:43 AM
Damuri Ajashi is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 20,483
Quote:
Originally Posted by k9bfriender View Post
Would I be okay with that, of course not, don't be stupid.

Would I be willing to kill for that is another question entirely.

There are a number of people out there that are lacking for work. Sucks to be them, I've been there.

It sucks, I'll agree, but it doesn't suck so much that I would be willing to kill someone to keep my job.
And you feel like you can judge those who kill to preserve the welfare of their family and retirement?

Quote:
And if their stores had gone out of business due to the economy, would they then be justified in killing someone in order to keep them open then?
Kill who? It sort of matters whether the person you are killing is taking your shit and burning down your means of providing for your family or if it is just some random innocent person.

Quote:
That happens in lots of places. I didn't finish college because I could only go part time, as I was working full time to help pay my family's bills. The fact that your friend was in the same position as many other people in this country does not mean that his parents should have killed people to prevent it. What would they have done if there was a flood, or an earthquake, or a fire? The fact that the riots were one "natural disaster" that they could have killed people to prevent happening to their individual establishment, does not, IMHO, give them the ethical high ground to kill people to protect their property.
Of course it does. It may not fit YOUR definition of MORALITY but looters are not a natural disaster. But it does seem ethical to use deadly force to stop criminals engaging in criminal activity. If I could shoot a flood to prevent it from destroying lives and property, I would.

Last edited by Damuri Ajashi; 05-05-2017 at 09:44 AM.
  #7636  
Old 05-05-2017, 12:30 PM
k9bfriender is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Posts: 11,564
Quote:
Originally Posted by Damuri Ajashi View Post
And you feel like you can judge those who kill to preserve the welfare of their family and retirement?
No, but then where did I say that?

I would not kill someone over property, and I feel it is the wrong thing to do.

If you feel differently, and if the law agrees, then do what you have to do.

Quote:

Kill who? It sort of matters whether the person you are killing is taking your shit and burning down your means of providing for your family or if it is just some random innocent person.
Well, obviously, killing some random innocent person is pretty uncool, and is not going to protect your property, but it very well could be the result if you start shooting at people who you think look threatening to your property, whether because you misjudged their intent, or missed them and hit the bystander behind them.

But, to the person who is vandalising or burning your store, I would not kill them either. Property is not worth killing for.
Quote:

Of course it does. It may not fit YOUR definition of MORALITY but looters are not a natural disaster. But it does seem ethical to use deadly force to stop criminals engaging in criminal activity. If I could shoot a flood to prevent it from destroying lives and property, I would.
Looters are a civil emergency, like any other. You have earthquakes, floods, fire, there are many reasons you could be wiped out, if you didn't bother to get insurance, which was not impossible, though about 30% of the businesses in the area chose not to pay for it.

If you could kill a person to prevent a flood from destroying your property, would you?

Now, you threw in "lives" into that last statement, which is different than property. I too would kill someone who was threatening the life of someone else, if that was the only way to prevent it.

And, at this point, what has happened to the shop keepers who were willing to kill to prevent their stores from being looted and going out of business? Well, most of them went out of business because the riots left a long lasting impression on the economy of the area. So, killing people to protect property did not actually protect their businesses.
  #7637  
Old 05-06-2017, 10:31 AM
Defensive Indifference is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: St. Louis, MO
Posts: 7,268
My six year old son likes to play with the six year old boy next door. My wife and I have drinks with the parents pretty often. When my wife was over there last night sharing a bottle of wine with the mom, she learned that the house is evidently awash in loaded, unsecured guns. It was late, and the mom heard a noise on the child monitor. She went to check it out and came back with a gun. In case there was an intruder, you see. Because when you live in one of the safest and wealthiest suburbs in the region, and you hear a rustle on the child monitor, your first thought is, "Intruder Alert!" and not, "My six year old son probably wants a drink of water." So she comes back into the kitchen -- to resume drinking -- with the gun tucked into her waistband. No holster or anything, just stuffed into the top of her yoga pants, gangsta style. Good thinkin! She reassured my wife that when kids are over there playing she gives them instructions not to go into the rooms where the guns are.
  #7638  
Old 05-06-2017, 12:02 PM
ElvisL1ves is online now
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: The land of the mouse
Posts: 50,549
Quote:
Originally Posted by Damuri Ajashi View Post
And you feel like you can judge those who kill to preserve the welfare of their family and retirement?
Yes, your stuff matters more than anyone's life. Got it.

Ever hear of homeowner's or renter's insurance? It covers that stuff. Cheaper than ammo, too, and doesn't involve shutting off any sort of sense of morality.

Now do tell us more about how the best defense against black people with guns is white people with guns.
  #7639  
Old 05-06-2017, 02:52 PM
2square4u is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: 63°N, CET (GMT+1)
Posts: 1,290
Quote:
Originally Posted by eschereal View Post
No problem: you just let the mugger take your stuff, then shoot him in the back as he is running away, and then take your stuff back.



(which relies on the mugger not noticing that you have a gun and relieving you of that)
Sociopath.

In civilized countries, that'll earn you a charge - and most probably a conviction - for murder.

In civilized countries, using deadly force for self defense requires that there is no other reasonable alternative. A person running away from you can't be an acute threat to your life. And if the entry wound is in his back, you're going to have a slight problem claiming that you were justifiably fearing for your life.
  #7640  
Old 05-06-2017, 02:55 PM
mhendo is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Posts: 25,457
Quote:
Originally Posted by 2square4u View Post
Sociopath.

In civilized countries, that'll earn you a charge - and most probably a conviction - for murder.
Lighten up Francis. If you read eschereal's posts in this thread, i think you'll come to understand that the post you responded to was not exactly a serious suggestion.
  #7641  
Old 05-06-2017, 05:05 PM
Scumpup is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Posts: 14,310
Quote:
Originally Posted by ElvisL1ves View Post
Yes, your stuff matters more than anyone's life. Got it.

Ever hear of homeowner's or renter's insurance? It covers that stuff. Cheaper than ammo, too, and doesn't involve shutting off any sort of sense of morality.

Now do tell us more about how the best defense against black people with guns is white people with guns.
You get stupider with each post to this thread.
  #7642  
Old 05-06-2017, 07:08 PM
eschereal's Avatar
eschereal is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: Frogstar World B
Posts: 16,579
Quote:
Originally Posted by 2square4u View Post
Sociopath.
No, the word you are looking for is "psychopath".

Quote:
In civilized countries, that'll earn you a charge - and most probably a conviction - for murder.
Some people claim that Florida is part of a civilized country. Read up on what goes on in Florida. You might end up forced to redefine either Florida or Civilization.
  #7643  
Old 05-06-2017, 07:18 PM
ElvisL1ves is online now
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: The land of the mouse
Posts: 50,549
Quote:
Originally Posted by Scumpup View Post
You get stupider with each post to this thread.
Does your mommy know you got her password?
  #7644  
Old 05-06-2017, 07:37 PM
Lumpy's Avatar
Lumpy is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Aug 1999
Location: Minneapolis, Minnesota US
Posts: 16,696
People who violate the social contract by trying to steal from me, thus demonstrating that they don't care about my humanity- apparently I'm just prey- will get exactly as much mercy as I can afford to show them. But no, they're not just running off with my stuff.
  #7645  
Old 05-07-2017, 03:44 AM
SaneBill is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Dec 2016
Posts: 631
Islamic State magazine steers followers to U.S. gun shows for ‘easy’ access to weapons

“They say the Americans are dumb — they have open gun policies” the recruit told the New York Times from a German prison. “They say we can radicalize them easily, and if they have no prior record, they can buy guns, so we don’t need to have a contact man who has to provide guns for them.”
  #7646  
Old 05-07-2017, 12:32 PM
ElvisL1ves is online now
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: The land of the mouse
Posts: 50,549
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lumpy View Post
People who violate the social contract
Interesting that you would bring that up. Part of the social contract, codified in our legal system as well, is that you don't get to be a vigilante, making up your own rules about when killing someone is justified. The process defined under the social contract for getting justice against a thief involves judges and juries, not cowboys. And nowhere in it is theft a capital offense.

If you ever get the chance to violate the social contract, and the law, in any of the scenarios you fantasize about, you can expect to receive more justice from it than you're willing to give. Maybe that's a flaw, or maybe it's a strength, but it's still how the sane manage to live together out here in reality.

So cut the excuse-making for your bloodthirst. It convinces only your fellow sociopaths.
  #7647  
Old 05-07-2017, 01:21 PM
2square4u is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: 63°N, CET (GMT+1)
Posts: 1,290
Quote:
Originally Posted by eschereal View Post
the word you are looking for is "psychopath".
Duly noted.

Quote:
Originally Posted by eschereal View Post
Some people claim that Florida is part of a civilized country. Read up on what goes on in Florida. You might end up forced to redefine either Florida or Civilization.
I think I'll just go with Hanlon's razor and refuse to accept that Florida is part of a civilized country. Whether that's due to Florida or it's due to the country it's a part of will not be discussed here by me.
  #7648  
Old 05-07-2017, 01:35 PM
k9bfriender is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Posts: 11,564
Quote:
Originally Posted by ElvisL1ves View Post
Interesting that you would bring that up. Part of the social contract, codified in our legal system as well, is that you don't get to be a vigilante, making up your own rules about when killing someone is justified. The process defined under the social contract for getting justice against a thief involves judges and juries, not cowboys. And nowhere in it is theft a capital offense.

If you ever get the chance to violate the social contract, and the law, in any of the scenarios you fantasize about, you can expect to receive more justice from it than you're willing to give. Maybe that's a flaw, or maybe it's a strength, but it's still how the sane manage to live together out here in reality.

So cut the excuse-making for your bloodthirst. It convinces only your fellow sociopaths.
To be fair, he is starting to convince me to shoot jay-walkers.
  #7649  
Old 05-08-2017, 03:43 PM
Damuri Ajashi is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 20,483
Quote:
Originally Posted by k9bfriender View Post
No, but then where did I say that?

I would not kill someone over property, and I feel it is the wrong thing to do.

If you feel differently, and if the law agrees, then do what you have to do.
Oh, OK. So you were just giving your opinion but recognize that its just an opinion and other people have equally valid opinions that make it perfectly acceptable for them to kill people who are trying to destroy their livelihood?

Quote:
Well, obviously, killing some random innocent person is pretty uncool, and is not going to protect your property, but it very well could be the result if you start shooting at people who you think look threatening to your property, whether because you misjudged their intent, or missed them and hit the bystander behind them.
I was referring to the "lottery" a story about killing an innocent person for the greater good.

You take the chance of missing your assailant and killing an innocent EVERY TIME you shoot a gun in self defense. And shooting looting arsonists is not shooting people who LOOK threatening to your property it is shooting looting arsonists.

Quote:
But, to the person who is vandalising or burning your store, I would not kill them either. Property is not worth killing for.
In your opinion, right?

I mean reasonable minds can disagree over the value of the life of the criminal that is looting and burning down your livelihood, the means by which you feed and clothe your family, compared to your ability to provide for your family, right?

Quote:
Looters are a civil emergency, like any other.
No, they're criminals.

Quote:
You have earthquakes, floods, fire, there are many reasons you could be wiped out,
[

And if I could stop an earthquake or flood by shooting it, I would. Wouldn't you?

Quote:
if you didn't bother to get insurance, which was not impossible, though about 30% of the businesses in the area chose not to pay for it.
Did you miss the part where I say that many of these businesses were uninsurable?

And what do you mean by not impossible to get insurance?

Quote:
If you could kill a person to prevent a flood from destroying your property, would you?
If that person was trying to cause the flood that would destroy my livelihood, then yes. If they are an innocent bystander that God has told me would prevent a flood of fully insured property with their death, then no.

Quote:
Now, you threw in "lives" into that last statement, which is different than property. I too would kill someone who was threatening the life of someone else, if that was the only way to prevent it.
Forget the part about lives then, (I would submit that these looters were looting stores in the presence of store owners and using threat of force to prevent the store owners from blocking the doorway to their stores), I would kill looters to prevent the destruction of a family's livelihood.

Quote:
And, at this point, what has happened to the shop keepers who were willing to kill to prevent their stores from being looted and going out of business? Well, most of them went out of business because the riots left a long lasting impression on the economy of the area. So, killing people to protect property did not actually protect their businesses.
Well many of the places that got burned down stayed burned down because (once again) many of these places were uninsurable. 45% of the damage caused during the LA riots were to Korean owned property. Koreatown rebuilt and it is doing better than ever by all accounts.

The credible threat to kill looters made it unnecessary to actually kill any looters. So the Koreans should have armed themselves at the beginning of rioting instead of waiting until half the area had been burnt down. It might have cut the riots short and saved lives in the process.
  #7650  
Old 05-08-2017, 03:50 PM
Damuri Ajashi is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 20,483
Quote:
Originally Posted by ElvisL1ves View Post
Yes, your stuff matters more than anyone's life. Got it.
If that other person is a criminal trying to destroy the means by which i feed my family? Then yes, of course.

Quote:
Ever hear of homeowner's or renter's insurance? It covers that stuff. Cheaper than ammo, too, and doesn't involve shutting off any sort of sense of morality.
You ever hear of uninsurable? You know how some people with pre-existing conditions didn't used to be able to get health care before Obamacare? Well property casualty insurers do the same thing in high risk neighborhoods.

It seems like some of the left wing nutjobs on this board have an intimate grasp of what uninsurable means for someone with diabetes but not for businesses in a high risk neighborhood.

Quote:
Now do tell us more about how the best defense against black people with guns is white people with guns.
WTF are you talking about? Your arguments always devolve into "you're a racist" with absolutely no evidence of racism.

You are the reason why Trump won. people like you spent so much time ascribing everything to racism that people became blind to ACTUAL racism when it popped up during the election. You vaccinated people against charges of racism.
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 04:48 PM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.

Send questions for Cecil Adams to: cecil@straightdope.com

Send comments about this website to: webmaster@straightdope.com

Terms of Use / Privacy Policy

Advertise on the Straight Dope!
(Your direct line to thousands of the smartest, hippest people on the planet, plus a few total dipsticks.)

Copyright © 2019 STM Reader, LLC.

 
Copyright © 2017