[quote=“ivan_astikov, post:599, topic:482060”]
S/he’s doing her/his job, and fully aware of the risks.
QUOTE]
Somehow this doesn’t apply to the perp? How do you arrive at this double standard.
Break into houses or steal cars? It’s only material possessions, can’t shoot me! Nyah, nyah, nyah, nyah!
Trying to arrest a suspect? You are fair game. You know the risks.
Your criminal bias is showing.
People who are fucked up on junk or what have you may not even hear you. They may not understand what you’re saying.
I was joking.
Damn. The needle on my Worry Meter just swung back to the right. They’re that messed up? Is that the same degree of messed up that leads them to think I’m a demon they need to kill as their next task? Am I once again to resolve the ambiguity of “messed up enough that he can’t understand me, but probably not so messed up that he would ever try to hurt me” in HIS favor?
Probably won’t feel the blows of the pistol butt raining down on their softened skulls either, so basically, everybody wins.
If he was going to hurt you, do you really think he’d stop for the VCR first?
You just got through convincing me that he is beyond ordinary reason. Ordinary reasonable people can hear or understand a command that puts their life on the line. You dramatically illustrated to me why he might not be able to. Therefore, I make no assumptions that his other actions will be reasonable.
I TOTALLY knew that… really… :smack:
I think some posting here may have that same problem 
Well, its been said YOU DON’T KNOW what this guy might do. The VCR might have been an afterthought. Instead of thinking “is the VCR worth me shooting the guy” the criminal sgould be thinking “Is the VCR worth possibly being injured or killed”. I’d assume a person stealing a VCR which are relatively cheap is depserate enough to try anything. So if an order to “Stop or I’ll Shoot” doesn’t jar their common sense, well…you know, the fucker shouldn’t have been bresaking into houses.
As for if he’s high…heh…thats not a point in their favor. If anything it makles them more dangerous and unpredictable and you know, if Mr. Homeowner didn’t sell him the drugs, it ain’t Mr. Homeowner’s problem if he’s a druggie.
Do you not realize what you’ve just said? Goddamn, the stupid in this thread is just MASSIVE!
Can you think of any reason why a guarantee might not be considered valuable when offered by a career criminal who thinks the victims of crime are to blame for crime? Who finds it inconvenient and reprehensible that an amateur / householder would try to prevent a criminal perpetrating a crime against him, rather than leave it to the professionals?
Only wondering.
I suspect you are mistaken about the impact your posts and opinions have on readers.
And yet you can’t provide an example! Stupid doesn’t even begin to cover it.
You really are a fucking moron aren’t you? You are claiming to not be able to read the intruders intentions. AND THAT’S THE WHOLE FUCKING POINT!
Jackass.
Cute. I also hope I’m never in a position to steal someone’s car. But that’s not the question. I’m asking why it’s morally wrong, I’m wanting a good argument here.
Yes, but why is it morally wrong to do so? That’s the question I’m asking. I already admit that I’m unlikely to ever do it, and if I ever was placed in a situation where I happened to have a gun, ammo, and someone stealing my car, I probably would not be able to shoot them due to a strong unwillingness to actually inflict permanent harm on anyone. That one deer I shot was enough. (I am of the opinion that if I eat meat, I am on the same moral level as the butcher and slaughterhouse. I felt it was important to kill, clean, butcher, and eat an animal to come to real terms with that fact. I did it. I don’t want to ever do it again.)
Ivan, read my words. Livelihood. My livelihood is dependent on my car. We havn’t gotten to the computer yet.
Hell. Fair play, Ivan? Why do I want to engage in fair play with someone who’s already broken the rules of society? I’m not Ahnuld. I’m not Hulk Hogan. I’m not even the Fabulous Moolah. I want every unfair advantage I can get. If it comes to a fair fight, I will lose and the person will hurt me and take my stuff that I have spent a fair amount of my life working for. Ten minutes of effort for him, versus five years for me.
That’s not stopping a burglar. That’s just sending him somewhere else. I don’t call that being a good neighbor at all.
I, ah, know. I was calling you on it gently. There is an AR-15 mod, and I was pointing out that a shotshell load is probably better for soap in your eyes. I think there’s like three-four .38 slugs in a .410 00 load, but I forget exactly.
Hey, my car isn’t used! That’s why I put the five year number in. 60 month loan.
Note that I didn’t say it was legal to shoot someone stealing my car. I’m asking about the morality of it. Why is it immoral to do so?
Good point, Shodan.
Note: Holy heck, Firefox just nuked itself when I tried to post, then when I restarted? All this came back. Way to go, Firefox 3.1!
For me, it’s both an unwillingness to do permanent harm to a person as well as the obvious imbalance between the crime and the punishment. I’m anti-death penalty for *any *crime, and as I said earlier, the whole gun culture in this country, in my opinion, is symptomatic of a decline in our humanity. I don’t want to be part of that. It doesn’t matter that the burglar is completely in the wrong. I feel that shooting him is more wrong.
While I understand the frustration people feel when their stuff is stolen (having been burgled twice and robbed by a knife-wielding dude myself), the assumption that thieves are likely to harm their victims is wrong. Do they sometimes? Certainly. But the vast majority do not. I won’t assume anything about the guy either way. If I’m attacked, I’ll fight back. If I’m not, I’m willing to hide, lock myself in a room, call the police, high-tail it out the window, or whatever I can do to avoid adding fuel to an already bad situation.
Has humanity been declining steadily, exponentially, or what over the last 220 years in which gun ownership has been lawful, prevalent, and fairly successful?
How high was it when the Second Amendment was drafted? Was it higher, or lower, than when the country was settled by a bunch of guys with guns? Or when those guys with guns seized their independence from the Brits?
Just looking to quantify the decline.
Great for YOU.
Dont hold your Ivory tower standards to OTHER people who fear for their safety, do not have Ninja mind reading abilities, and are just trying to get along in life.
And when you sell everything you own to feed all the starving in Africa children in Africa get back to us…mmmkay?
Well, let’s see, there are the numerous times that you’ve written something along the lines of “A burglar who has no intention of harming you,” for one, and then the strong insinuation that you keep making that gun owners are eager to have someone try to steal something so they can go all Eastwood on them KILL KILL KILL. I respectfully decline to comb the entire thread to provide direct quotes, but I think that’s a fair summary.
Who said I was trying to hold others to my standard? Someone asked an opinion and I gave one.
You know…you remind me of that guy in high school whose mother told him he was funny and clever and he actually believed it.:rolleyes: Don’t quit your day job, ok? I can see you spend about as much time on your lame material as you do on your compassion lessons. I’m glad you’re in the minority.