# Worthless shithead New Orleans looters. **URL:** \ **Category:** The BBQ Pit\ **Created:** [August 31, 2005, 2:46am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/worthless-shithead-new-orleans-looters/319379 "2005-08-31T02:46:41Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 14
**Author:** ![Shagnasty](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/9dc877/32.png) [@Shagnasty](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Shagnasty)\ **Post date:** [September 1, 2005, 2:09pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/worthless-shithead-new-orleans-looters/319379/261 "2005-09-01T14:09:50Z")
> [@Duke of Rat](#): > > Not sure about Loisiana or Tennessee, but you would be well advised not to test your theory in Texas: I am from Louisiana and have posted in a couple of threads that it is legal to use deadly force to protect property in Louisiana. [From Tulane Law Review:](http://www.saf.org/LawReviews/Thelen1.html) "The result of the new statutory system is to allow defense of property to justify a homicide, but only if the property is inside a dwelling, business, or motor vehicle. If the incident occurs outside of those areas a permittee can use reasonable force to defend his or her property, but not necessarily deadly force. [143] A permittee would not be wise to use his or her concealed handgun to defend [p.349] property outside of the three protected areas because use of a firearm could violate the limit of “reasonable force.” [144] Use of a handgun could be deadly force, even if the permittee does not intend to kill the attacker. The present system could produce results that do not hinge on the value of the property. A man can kill to defend his decrepit car even though it is only worth a few hundred dollars, but a merchant walking to the bank with several thousand dollars cannot use deadly force to defend that money. [145] If the distinction which allows defense of property is not based on value, it becomes difficult to discern upon what it is based. Perhaps the legislature is focusing on the right of an individual to be secure while on private property. One unlawfully intruding upon that private property forfeits the right to be protected against homicide. Conversely, a person in his own home gains the right to kill to prevent unlawful entry." I believe **Dio** is partially from Louisiana too. He should know that. ---
**Author:** ![Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/e99b99/32.png) [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Diogenes_the_Cynic)\ **Post date:** [September 1, 2005, 2:10pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/worthless-shithead-new-orleans-looters/319379/262 "2005-09-01T14:10:38Z")
> [@Stephe96](#): > > Apparently, a National Guardsman on one of the helicopters was hit by a bullet. I say that President Bush should admit it was a mistake to go into New Orleans and withdraw _all_ troops immediately! Oh, and the Guardsman’s mother should camp out in Crawford and demand to know why her little baby was placed in harm’s way. 😃 You are just an endless source of asinine straw men, aren’t you? Is it physically painful to be that stupid. ---
**Author:** ![Stephe96](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/bbe5ce/32.png) [@Stephe96](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Stephe96)\ **Post date:** [September 1, 2005, 2:12pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/worthless-shithead-new-orleans-looters/319379/263 "2005-09-01T14:12:45Z")
> [@El\_Kabong](#): > > I asked this of you in another thread, and you ignored it, so I’ll ask again: how do you account for the fact that law enforcement officials themselves apparently do not yet feel that using deadly force on random looters would be an effective tactic? > > . Are you kidding? Use of deadly force, effective though it would be, is the _last_ thing anyone wants to OK right now. ---
**Author:** ![Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/e99b99/32.png) [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Diogenes_the_Cynic)\ **Post date:** [September 1, 2005, 2:13pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/worthless-shithead-new-orleans-looters/319379/264 "2005-09-01T14:13:10Z")
> [@Who\_me?](#): > > While I may not be as pro killing the looters as some people here. if I were in my (non existant) NO home and a roving gang of humans tried to break into my home (flooded as it may be), I would start shooting until either they, or I, were dead… or they ran off. This would be especially true if I had family in my home with me. > Since I don’t have any gods, do I still have to pray? We’re not talking about people breaking into homes. People in this thread are saying we should just randomly kill anyone slogging through the water with a bag of groceries on his back. ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [September 1, 2005, 2:14pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/worthless-shithead-new-orleans-looters/319379/265 "2005-09-01T14:14:24Z")
> [@Duke of Rat](#): > > Not sure about Loisiana or Tennessee, but you would be well advised not to test your theory in Texas: **Dio** will likely say that Texas is a backwards state for having such a law. What is unclear to me is where **Dio** ’s book is – the one from which he is confidently asserting what is and isn’t a right. I have ideas on what is and isn’t a right, too. But I suspect **Dio** isn’t going to accept my judgements. why he expects me to accept his judgements isn’t too clear, either. We have a system for resolving these sorts of disputes. We elect leaders, and the leaders make laws. If we don’t like what they’ve done, we can elect new leaders who will change the laws. I think abortion is a scourge, an absolutely evil practice. But I recognize that not everyone agrees with me, and that the law of the land favors legal abortion. I don’t scream about how “no one has the right to kill an unborn baby,” because they in fact do. I work to get the law changed, but in the meantime, I acknowledge it as the mutally-agreed-upon arbiter of our rights. Now comes **Dio** into the picture. He agrees with the law concerning abortion. So that’s a valid exercise of law-making power. He doesn’t like another aspect of the law: the right to use deadly force to protect property. So that law, he says, is not only backwards, but is invalid. Now, the backwards comment is a fair one. When he moves to saying that it’s invalid, that you have no right to use deadly force even though the law grants it… THAT’S when I think **Dio** is horrifically inconsistent or uninformed. ---
**Author:** ![Stephe96](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/bbe5ce/32.png) [@Stephe96](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Stephe96)\ **Post date:** [September 1, 2005, 2:15pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/worthless-shithead-new-orleans-looters/319379/266 "2005-09-01T14:15:07Z")
> [@Diogenes the Cynic](#): > > You are just an endless source of asinine straw men, aren’t you? Is it physically painful to be that stupid. You know, you still haven’t explained to me just how Fox News was “especially racist” while they were running the same pool footage of the looters as everyone else and, as you said in your post, refrained from saying anything about race. You gonna explain that one? ---
**Author:** ![Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/e99b99/32.png) [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Diogenes_the_Cynic)\ **Post date:** [September 1, 2005, 2:15pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/worthless-shithead-new-orleans-looters/319379/267 "2005-09-01T14:15:49Z")
> [@Shagnasty](#): > > I am from Louisiana and have posted in a couple of threads that it is legal to use deadly force to protect property in Louisiana. > > [From Tulane Law Review:](http://www.saf.org/LawReviews/Thelen1.html) > > "The result of the new statutory system is to allow defense of property to justify a homicide, but only if the property is inside a dwelling, business, or motor vehicle. If the incident occurs outside of those areas a permittee can use reasonable force to defend his or her property, but not necessarily deadly force. [143] A permittee would not be wise to use his or her concealed handgun to defend [p.349] property outside of the three protected areas because use of a firearm could violate the limit of “reasonable force.” [144] Use of a handgun could be deadly force, even if the permittee does not intend to kill the attacker. > > The present system could produce results that do not hinge on the value of the property. A man can kill to defend his decrepit car even though it is only worth a few hundred dollars, but a merchant walking to the bank with several thousand dollars cannot use deadly force to defend that money. [145] If the distinction which allows defense of property is not based on value, it becomes difficult to discern upon what it is based. Perhaps the legislature is focusing on the right of an individual to be secure while on private property. One unlawfully intruding upon that private property forfeits the right to be protected against homicide. Conversely, a person in his own home gains the right to kill to prevent unlawful entry." > > I believe **Dio** is partially from Louisiana too. He should know that. I’m originally from Shreveport. The scenario that we’re talking about does not involve people protecting their own homes or buisnesses, but about whether people should be summarily gunned down merely for _possessing_ stolen property. ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [September 1, 2005, 2:18pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/worthless-shithead-new-orleans-looters/319379/268 "2005-09-01T14:18:23Z")
> [@Diogenes the Cynic](#): > > Everybody can just fuck off with their legal cites. For one thing. I’m talking about moral rights, not legal rights. For another, The laws being cited are about owners protecting property as it’s being taken, not about police helicopters randomly strafing hurricane survivors in the streets because they’re holding a bottle of water. > > You want to know what book? Check your fucking Bible. Well, as it happens, I have checked the Bible, and there seems to be considerable support in some parts for killing, and considerable opposition to it in others. Are you suggesting we base secular public policy on the Bible? ---
**Author:** ![Duke\_of\_Rat](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/ad7895/32.png) [@Duke\_of\_Rat](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Duke_of_Rat)\ **Post date:** [September 1, 2005, 2:18pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/worthless-shithead-new-orleans-looters/319379/269 "2005-09-01T14:18:25Z")
> [@Diogenes the Cynic](#): > > We’re not talking about people breaking into homes. People in this thread are saying we should just randomly kill anyone slogging through the water with a bag of groceries on his back. No, you made that jump. The original argument was to kill people shooting at helicopters. You added the bag of groceries (or was it diapers?). ---
**Author:** ![Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/e99b99/32.png) [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Diogenes_the_Cynic)\ **Post date:** [September 1, 2005, 2:19pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/worthless-shithead-new-orleans-looters/319379/270 "2005-09-01T14:19:21Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > Now, the backwards comment is a fair one. When he moves to saying that it’s invalid, that you have no right to use deadly force even though the law grants it… THAT’S when I think **Dio** is horrifically inconsistent or uninformed. It’s specious to say that the law grants it. We are not talking about using deadly force to stop a robbery, we’re talking about the summary execution of anyone in the streets with stolen merchanise. Surely you can see the difference. ---
**Author:** ![Duke\_of\_Rat](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/ad7895/32.png) [@Duke\_of\_Rat](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Duke_of_Rat)\ **Post date:** [September 1, 2005, 2:20pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/worthless-shithead-new-orleans-looters/319379/271 "2005-09-01T14:20:00Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > **Dio** will likely say that Texas is a backwards state for having such a law. > > What is unclear to me is where **Dio** ’s book is – the one from which he is confidently asserting what is and isn’t a right. > > I have ideas on what is and isn’t a right, too. But I suspect **Dio** isn’t going to accept my judgements. why he expects me to accept his judgements isn’t too clear, either. > > We have a system for resolving these sorts of disputes. We elect leaders, and the leaders make laws. If we don’t like what they’ve done, we can elect new leaders who will change the laws. > > I think abortion is a scourge, an absolutely evil practice. But I recognize that not everyone agrees with me, and that the law of the land favors legal abortion. I don’t scream about how “no one has the right to kill an unborn baby,” because they in fact do. I work to get the law changed, but in the meantime, I acknowledge it as the mutally-agreed-upon arbiter of our rights. > > Now comes **Dio** into the picture. He agrees with the law concerning abortion. So that’s a valid exercise of law-making power. He doesn’t like another aspect of the law: the right to use deadly force to protect property. So that law, he says, is not only backwards, but is invalid. > > Now, the backwards comment is a fair one. When he moves to saying that it’s invalid, that you have no right to use deadly force even though the law grants it… THAT’S when I think **Dio** is horrifically inconsistent or uninformed. I’m searching for a word that describes such people… ---
**Author:** ![Shagnasty](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/9dc877/32.png) [@Shagnasty](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Shagnasty)\ **Post date:** [September 1, 2005, 2:22pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/worthless-shithead-new-orleans-looters/319379/272 "2005-09-01T14:22:25Z")
> [@El\_Kabong](#): > > I asked this of you in another thread, and you ignored it, so I’ll ask again: how do you account for the fact that law enforcement officials themselves apparently do not yet feel that using deadly force on random looters would be an effective tactic? Its not that they don’t feel it would be an effective tactic. It is that they feel it would be an extremely dangerous tactic given the number of troops and law enforcement on the ground right now. They are outnumbered and anarchy reins, They would need to kill anyone that they got in a violent confrontation with because there is no place to take prisoners. They need many times the National Guard troops on the ground right now. I assume someone is working on calling up additional National Guard troops but I haven’t heard much about that in a day or so. If the additional troops were on the ground, then I would advocate a strong show of deadly force. ---
**Author:** ![El\_Kabong](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/el_kabong/32/496_2.png) [@El\_Kabong](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/El_Kabong)\ **Post date:** [September 1, 2005, 2:23pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/worthless-shithead-new-orleans-looters/319379/273 "2005-09-01T14:23:27Z")
> [@](#): > > Are you kidding? Use of deadly force, effective though it would be, is the last thing anyone wants to OK right now. Exactly. Now why, in your mind, is that the case? ---
**Author:** ![Kalhoun](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/3bc359/32.png) [@Kalhoun](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Kalhoun)\ **Post date:** [September 1, 2005, 2:25pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/worthless-shithead-new-orleans-looters/319379/274 "2005-09-01T14:25:21Z")
> [@Hippy Hollow](#): > > One picture on CNN had a woman covering her face as she exited a store with diapers. I don’t think the majority of people who are in this situation are proud or pleased if they’ve had to steal. And of course I am curious as to how accurate the images of widespread looting are… Brian Williams was talking about people who have been rinsing and recycling disposable diapers for three days. If that doesn’t signify the degree of utter desperation these people are feeling, I don’t know what does. There’s some kind of psychological regression going on here. Many of them have never been beyond the city limits. This is their whole world. The only world they’ve ever known. A disaster of apocalyptic proportions does scary things to the human psyche. I feel despair watching their lives unravel minute by minute. I’m not even going to try to imagine what the hell is going on in \*their \* heads. ---
**Author:** ![Stephe96](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/bbe5ce/32.png) [@Stephe96](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Stephe96)\ **Post date:** [September 1, 2005, 2:25pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/worthless-shithead-new-orleans-looters/319379/275 "2005-09-01T14:25:52Z")
> [@El\_Kabong](#): > > Exactly. Now why, in your mind, is that the case? Two words: Rodney King ---
**Author:** ![Steve\_MB](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/steve_mb/32/5339_2.png) [@Steve\_MB](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Steve_MB)\ **Post date:** [September 1, 2005, 2:26pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/worthless-shithead-new-orleans-looters/319379/276 "2005-09-01T14:26:43Z")
> [@Duke of Rat](#): > > One way to help those who are not shooting would be to stop the ones who are shooting from shooting. > > Any suggestions? Offer them a Twinkie and a Pepsi? It’s good to know that I’m not the only one who remembers the classics of advertising. ---
**Author:** ![Shagnasty](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/9dc877/32.png) [@Shagnasty](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Shagnasty)\ **Post date:** [September 1, 2005, 2:27pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/worthless-shithead-new-orleans-looters/319379/277 "2005-09-01T14:27:57Z")
> [@Diogenes the Cynic](#): > > I’m originally from Shreveport. Oh wow. I am from Logansport, LA in Desoto Parish but near Shreveport. I even went to Southwood High School for a while. Isn’t it funny that too people can be from the same area and yet be so _different._ ---
**Author:** ![Bosda\_Di\_Chi\_of\_Tricor](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/bosda_di_chi_of_tricor/32/16845_2.png) [@Bosda\_Di\_Chi\_of\_Tricor](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bosda_Di_Chi_of_Tricor)\ **Post date:** [September 1, 2005, 2:29pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/worthless-shithead-new-orleans-looters/319379/278 "2005-09-01T14:29:39Z")
Bush is talking about Zero Tolerance for looters in NO. [http://www.mercurynews.com/mld/mercurynews/news/12533177.htm](http://www.mercurynews.com/mld/mercurynews/news/12533177.htm) I have this horrible mental image of gunships firing on anybody with a rifle, or carrying a pack. :eek: ☹ ---
**Author:** ![Stephe96](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/bbe5ce/32.png) [@Stephe96](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Stephe96)\ **Post date:** [September 1, 2005, 2:31pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/worthless-shithead-new-orleans-looters/319379/279 "2005-09-01T14:31:08Z")
> [@Bosda Di'Chi of Tricor](#): > > Bush is talking about Zero Tolerance for looters in NO. > > [http://www.mercurynews.com/mld/mercurynews/news/12533177.htm](http://www.mercurynews.com/mld/mercurynews/news/12533177.htm) > I have this horrible mental image of gunships firing on anybody with a rifle, or carrying a pack. :eek: ☹ Who will get before the TV cameras first after looter #1 is shot? Al Sharpton or Jesse Jackson? ---
**Author:** ![Steve\_MB](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/steve_mb/32/5339_2.png) [@Steve\_MB](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Steve_MB)\ **Post date:** [September 1, 2005, 2:32pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/worthless-shithead-new-orleans-looters/319379/280 "2005-09-01T14:32:53Z")
> [@Diogenes the Cynic](#): > > The scenario that we’re talking about does not involve people protecting their own homes or buisnesses, but about whether people should be summarily gunned down merely for _possessing_ stolen property. Your straw man irritates my sinuses. Even the firmest law-and-order types are clearly referring to a scenario in which looters **caught in the act** of stealing **items with no plausible relationship to survival scrounging** and who **fail to disperse on command** are subject to lethal force. That, not the right to kill anyone who happens to offend them like a medieval shogun, is the authorization given to the police and National Guard under a declared state of martial law. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/worthless-shithead-new-orleans-looters/319379.md?page=13) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/worthless-shithead-new-orleans-looters/319379.md?page=15)