Collin, onelongsong has mentioned before that he has been held at gunpoint.
Perhaps his views are tainted by this memory. Victims of violent crime are more likely to be more vigilant next time. And to be more prepared to defend themselves after an attack. Having said that, given that he is generally a peaceful person, I think you'd find that what he says, how he feels and what would actually happen are all very different things. And that goes for anybody.
No one can know what they would do in these situations.
i'm not alone. a famous attorney; catherine cryer i believe; was a strick anti-gun lobbiest. a close friend of hers had someone break into her house and rape her. her friend said she wished she had a gun in her house to protect herself. after a long conversation; catherine now carries a gun. and is a big pro-gun advocate for self defence. some victims have nightmares for years to come. some live in fear. some realize that the police are never at the scene of a crime until the crime is over. police are only for clean up.
when i was held at gunpoint; my gun was in my jeep. but i knew if i had it; i could draw it while dropping to 1 knee and kill the attacker before he knew what was happening.
agreed. you can't use an old book which is why I didn't bring it up. i'm only stating the way things are in my state. take your crime to somewhere that disarm citizens.
when i lived near chicago; a few towns banned all guns within the city limits. burglary and home invasions jumped. if i were a criminal; i'd gladly travel to a place where i knew the homeowner couldn't defend him/herself.
nowhere did i advocate banning guns. im talking about ways to stem the flow of guns into the hands of those who have no business using them. the common criminal can walk into a gun store and still buy a gun as long as his record is clean. you dont prevent guns from getting there until it's already too late. make the first step harder, to weed out those who only want a gun becos it's the easy way. those who wants to use them for good purpose will take those steps. those who just want a quick and easy way to mug someone aren't going to take the time to go to classes and pay money for them and so on and so forth. you impose the burden up front, not after the sale. this would not deprive anyone of guns who will use them responsibly (and would lessen the restrictions on those people) but would put more blocks into the path of those who want to use them recklessly.
nowhere did i advocate banning guns. im talking about ways to stem the flow of guns into the hands of those who have no business using them. the common criminal can walk into a gun store and still buy a gun as long as his record is clean. you dont prevent guns from getting there until it's already too late. make the first step harder, to weed out those who only want a gun becos it's the easy way. those who wants to use them for good purpose will take those steps. those who just want a quick and easy way to mug someone aren't going to take the time to go to classes and pay money for them and so on and so forth. you impose the burden up front, not after the sale. this would not deprive anyone of guns who will use them responsibly (and would lessen the restrictions on those people) but would put more blocks into the path of those who want to use them recklessly.
nowhere did i advocate banning guns. im talking about ways to stem the flow of guns into the hands of those who have no business using them. the common criminal can walk into a gun store and still buy a gun as long as his record is clean. you dont prevent guns from getting there until it's already too late. make the first step harder, to weed out those who only want a gun becos it's the easy way. those who wants to use them for good purpose will take those steps. those who just want a quick and easy way to mug someone aren't going to take the time to go to classes and pay money for them and so on and so forth. you impose the burden up front, not after the sale. this would not deprive anyone of guns who will use them responsibly (and would lessen the restrictions on those people) but would put more blocks into the path of those who want to use them recklessly.
if i were going to committ a crime; i would not buy a legal gun. i'd buy one off the street. then i'd modify the rifling so it couldn't be identified.
Sure there may be a difference but I think it's rather sick and sad that someone says he'd have no problem with killing someone over a candy bar or whatever.
If that doesn't upset people, there's something wrong with the people. It just proves how fucked up and twisted this world really is.
People say things all the time Collin. They are only words. You have to decide if what they are saying is valid or not. Certainly don't need to be getting so upset about them, when it's actions that count in this case.
And this world is not fucked up and twisted. People do what they can to get through each day. Given the way the world is, I think if you look, you'll find many fine examples as to why this world is not fucked up or twisted. Depends on how you look at it.
He wasn't my priest, he was my teacher. I truly believe he'd always do what he did.
I realise that you said he was your teacher, but you also said he was a priest. I was simply trying not to offend you by not referring to him correctly.
Seems I've managed that anyway.
And great if you truly believe that. Belief in other people is an excellent thing to have. And I truly hope that he always lives up to your belief in him.
if i were going to committ a crime; i would not buy a legal gun. i'd buy one off the street. then i'd modify the rifling so it couldn't be identified.
how do you think those guns get onto the street to be sold illegally? most of them are legally bought handguns that get onto the streets becos we let any idiot buy a gun, then someone steals it or they get short on cash and pawn it to someone. these handguns flooding our streets are not being smuggled across the border with ak-47s. they are produced, bought, and sold here in the us under current gun laws and then handled carelessly. you said yourself assault rifles are rarely used in crimes. this is why im talking about a system that deters careless idiots from buying guns legally in the first place and offering incentives/penalties so that they are handled with care.
it would take time for such policies to have an impact becos there are already a lot of weapons out there, but in the long term, setting up a system that prevents careless people from acquiring a gun instead of waiting until after they get one and do something dumb with it to take it away from them is what needs to be done. it's time we get past worthless ad-hoc fixes like assault weapons bans and waiting periods that have proven ineffective.
I would like to suggest that someone with a clean record would not yet be classified as a common criminal.
like collin pointed out, currently, as long as you've not been caught yet we'll sell you a weapon. that is stupid. put the obstacles up front not after the fact.
i'm not alone. a famous attorney; catherine cryer i believe; was a strick anti-gun lobbiest. a close friend of hers had someone break into her house and rape her. her friend said she wished she had a gun in her house to protect herself. after a long conversation; catherine now carries a gun. and is a big pro-gun advocate for self defence. some victims have nightmares for years to come. some live in fear. some realize that the police are never at the scene of a crime until the crime is over. police are only for clean up.
when i was held at gunpoint; my gun was in my jeep. but i knew if i had it; i could draw it while dropping to 1 knee and kill the attacker before he knew what was happening.
Yes, I understand exactly what you are saying. And I must confess that there have been certain situations and individuals who have come into my life and perpertrated severe acts of violence against me, and I too have wished to have been able to retaliate with violence at the time. I've even planned to and made enquiries about retaliating against them after the fact. But I'm glad I didn't.
Because I know myself. And I know that I would feel bad if I succumbed to that part of myself. That if I responded to their bad behaviour with bad behaviour of my own that I would only be lessening me. And that's like giving them extra. But that's not to say that it's wrong for anyone else. I can only know myself. And judge what is the right thing to do for me.
I would never pressume to judge the best course of action for someone else.
People need to do what they think is the right thing at the time for them.
And I guess the whole thing is a moot point for me anyway, because I live in a relatively gun free society and I'm very glad of it. It's not a way of thinking that I'd like to take on.
Yes, I understand exactly what you are saying. And I must confess that there have been certain situations and individuals who have come into my life and perpertrated severe acts of violence against me, and I too have wished to have been able to retaliate with violence at the time. I've even planned to and made enquiries about retaliating against them after the fact. But I'm glad I didn't.
Because I know myself. And I know that I would feel bad if I succumbed to that part of myself. That if I responded to their bad behaviour with bad behaviour of my own that I would only be lessening me. And that's like giving them extra. But that's not to say that it's wrong for anyone else. I can only know myself. And judge what is the right thing to do for me.
I would never pressume to judge the best course of action for someone else.
People need to do what they think is the right thing at the time for them.
And I guess the whole thing is a moot point for me anyway, because I live in a relatively gun free society and I'm very glad of it. It's not a way of thinking that I'd like to take on.
killing your first person is hard. especially if you look into their eyes. but after that it isn't that bad. when you exterminate vermin; you do society a favour.
killing your first person is hard. especially if you look into their eyes. but after that it isn't that bad. when you exterminate vermin; you do society a favour.
who was first and how many times have you done it? have you stood trial for them all? are you batman?
killing your first person is hard. especially if you look into their eyes. but after that it isn't that bad. when you exterminate vermin; you do society a favour.
Is that so? What on earth are we going to do with you?
well, he sounds like either he fancies himself some sort of bad ass tough guy killer man, or he's become a borderline psychotic vigilante. the latter would make him batman. the former would make him a tool. but in either case, i rather doubt he's killed a couple people like he claims. if he has, he's an idiot to be bragging about it on a message board.
well, he sounds like either he fancies himself some sort of bad ass tough guy killer man, or he's become a borderline psychotic vigilante. the latter would make him batman. the former would make him a tool. but in either case, i rather doubt he's killed a couple people like he claims. if he has, he's an idiot to be bragging about it on a message board.
Nothing wrong with Batman ss! Bamm! Kapow!!
Think maybe my attempt at humour was lost on you today.
Think maybe my attempt at humour was lost on you today.
Never mind.
Maybe he's just trying to get a rise out of you?
i caught it after i replied. i dig batman too... watched batman begins last night in fact. anyway, he replied to you, not me. so dont know why he be trying to get the rise out of me...
who was first and how many times have you done it? have you stood trial for them all? are you batman?
you don't stand trial for self defence. there's only a trial if there's a question about self defence. when self defence is clear; there is nothing to charge you with.
let me ask you; if you're a victim of a violent crime; and you give up your car, wallet; or whatever; and let the person get away with it; are you not partially responsable for him victimizing the next person? let me put it this way; if i let the guy go when i could have stopped him; am i not somehow responsable if he kills an innocent the next day?
i'm not talking about the city close your eyes mentality. i mean; what happened to one's responsability to the community? and i don't mean vigilanty behavior. i watch out for every kid i see. i watch over everyones house and property. not intentionally; but if i happen to be on your block i'll notice something out of place and try to correct it. if your children are playing in the yard and a suspicious car is about; i'll hang around to make sure the kids are ok. and this has nothing to do with guns. i don't carry a gun in my town. i don't have to beause at least 50% of the residents are carrying so i'm protected. we protect eachother.
that being said; the result has been no violent crime in decades. no ones had the need to even expose a weapon.
i caught it after i replied. i dig batman too... watched batman begins last night in fact. anyway, he replied to you, not me. so dont know why he be trying to get the rise out of me...
Oh good!
Thought maybe I was talking Klingon or something!
Yeah, I love the old Batman. So camp!! So much fun!!
Lot less dark than the new stuff, although I love them too! Especially Christian Bale. Mmmmm.......oh that's right that's another thread! hehe!
I don't know ss, but people do do that around here! Or so I've noticed!
i'm not alone. a famous attorney; catherine cryer i believe; was a strick anti-gun lobbiest. a close friend of hers had someone break into her house and rape her. her friend said she wished she had a gun in her house to protect herself. after a long conversation; catherine now carries a gun. and is a big pro-gun advocate for self defence. some victims have nightmares for years to come. some live in fear. some realize that the police are never at the scene of a crime until the crime is over. police are only for clean up.
when i was held at gunpoint; my gun was in my jeep. but i knew if i had it; i could draw it while dropping to 1 knee and kill the attacker before he knew what was happening.
It's not really an eye for an eye if the criminal let you go without killing you. It sounds like you were a pretty big gun advocate before your unfortunate experience. It also sounds like you're itching to kill someone.
The only people we should try to get even with...
...are those who've helped us.
Right 'round the corner could be bigger than ourselves.
you don't stand trial for self defence. there's only a trial if there's a question about self defence. when self defence is clear; there is nothing to charge you with.
let me ask you; if you're a victim of a violent crime; and you give up your car, wallet; or whatever; and let the person get away with it; are you not partially responsable for him victimizing the next person? let me put it this way; if i let the guy go when i could have stopped him; am i not somehow responsable if he kills an innocent the next day?
i'm not talking about the city close your eyes mentality. i mean; what happened to one's responsability to the community? and i don't mean vigilanty behavior. i watch out for every kid i see. i watch over everyones house and property. not intentionally; but if i happen to be on your block i'll notice something out of place and try to correct it. if your children are playing in the yard and a suspicious car is about; i'll hang around to make sure the kids are ok. and this has nothing to do with guns. i don't carry a gun in my town. i don't have to beause at least 50% of the residents are carrying so i'm protected. we protect eachother.
that being said; the result has been no violent crime in decades. no ones had the need to even expose a weapon.
You don't kill the person. You work with the authorities to have them arrested and prosecuted in a civil manner.
The only people we should try to get even with...
...are those who've helped us.
Right 'round the corner could be bigger than ourselves.
you don't stand trial for self defence. there's only a trial if there's a question about self defence. when self defence is clear; there is nothing to charge you with.
let me ask you; if you're a victim of a violent crime; and you give up your car, wallet; or whatever; and let the person get away with it; are you not partially responsable for him victimizing the next person? let me put it this way; if i let the guy go when i could have stopped him; am i not somehow responsable if he kills an innocent the next day?
i'm not talking about the city close your eyes mentality. i mean; what happened to one's responsability to the community? and i don't mean vigilanty behavior. i watch out for every kid i see. i watch over everyones house and property. not intentionally; but if i happen to be on your block i'll notice something out of place and try to correct it. if your children are playing in the yard and a suspicious car is about; i'll hang around to make sure the kids are ok. and this has nothing to do with guns. i don't carry a gun in my town. i don't have to beause at least 50% of the residents are carrying so i'm protected. we protect eachother.
that being said; the result has been no violent crime in decades. no ones had the need to even expose a weapon.
no, you're not responsible. they're responsible for their actions.
you seem to think im one of the people telling you self-defense is unacceptable. im not. im just a little disturbed by how excited you seem about killing people. it's one thing to engage in necessary self-defense. it's another to sound like you can't wait for someone to pull something so you can pull the trigger and say that you feel no remorse about killing another human being. i think most people would have hoped they didnt have to... whereas you come off here sounding glad that you got the opprtunity. where do you live? im not visiting... you might see a stranger with long hair and gun me down in the streets.
now, answer me a question in return: how many people have you killed in self-defense? and how much did you get off on looking them in the eyes as you killed them?
I try to be consistent in my distrust of the gov't. I am anti-patriot act and anti-gun banning. I like the ACLU watching out for my liberties -- except the 2nd ammendment. I like the NRA for watching out for that one. I give money to both.
By the same token, I don't get people who are vigilant about our 1st and 4th ammendment rights, but don't give a shit about the 2nd ammendment, as if we should just pick and chose at this point. I'm a big fan of preserving all of my liberties.
This is a concept that I don't think I understand. It seems that in the american pschye the infallibility of the constitution is second only to that of the bible. Why are americans always crying 'Thou shalt not!' just because its written in the constitution? As if the constitution was written by Moses himself. The concept of liberty is not defined by the American constitution.
I see a constitution simply as a legal document intended to set out the guidlines for a country's laws. Obviously such a document needs to be updated and altered as time goes by.
It doesn't matter if you're male, female, or confused; black, white, brown, red, green, yellow; gay, lesbian; redneck cop, stoned; ugly; military style, doggy style; fat, rich or poor; vegetarian or cannibal; bum, hippie, virgin; famous or drunk-you're either an asshole or you're not!
This is a concept that I don't think I understand. It seems that in the american pschye the infallibility of the constitution is second only to that of the bible. Why are americans always crying 'Thou shalt not!' just because its written in the constitution? As if the constitution was written by Moses himself. The concept of liberty is not defined by the American constitution.
I see a constitution simply as a legal document intended to set out the guidlines for a country's laws. Obviously such a document needs to be updated and altered as time goes by.
And every time someone proposes to update it lately, it has involved less personal freedom and more government intervention. Also, since we're a nation of law, not a nation of will, I'll turn to the document that is the basis for the law when there is a question. If you want a nation where you sway with the whims of will, go for. I'm not asking you to change.
"I'll use the magic word - let's just shut the fuck up, please." EV, 04/13/08
This is a concept that I don't think I understand. It seems that in the american pschye the infallibility of the constitution is second only to that of the bible. Why are americans always crying 'Thou shalt not!' just because its written in the constitution? As if the constitution was written by Moses himself. The concept of liberty is not defined by the American constitution.
I see a constitution simply as a legal document intended to set out the guidlines for a country's laws. Obviously such a document needs to be updated and altered as time goes by.
Because every government gets worse and worse over time until it's eventual failure and overthrow. It was as free and liberal as it was going to get back then. The more corrupt the government becomes the more they want to change the ground work to better suit thier retaining more and more power and control over the citizenry.
Strong state and local governments and weak protective national governments provide the citizen with the most amount of representation in society. (provided they care about thier own personal freedom and liberty) Our national government has done what it can to make sure people want thier personal freedoms taken away and dictated by our national government.
My Girlfriend said to me..."How many guitars do you need?" and I replied...."How many pairs of shoes do you need?" She got really quiet.
And every time someone proposes to update it lately, it has involved less personal freedom and more government intervention. Also, since we're a nation of law, not a nation of will, I'll turn to the document that is the basis for the law when there is a question. If you want a nation where you sway with the whims of will, go for. I'm not asking you to change.
absolutely right. if we let the constitution be rewritten every time someone got a burr under their saddle we wouldn't have any of the original document left. it would change from fad to fad. generation to generation. and our freedom would change from president to president.
if you don't like the constitution; there's a border to the north and another to the south. don't let the door hit you in the ass.
People say things all the time Collin. They are only words. You have to decide if what they are saying is valid or not.
I think he's pretty serious.
Certainly don't need to be getting so upset about them, when it's actions that count in this case.
I'm not really that upset. I'm stating my opinion. I think it's sick, scary and sad that we live in a world where people seem to think that their wallet or car are worth more than a human life. I believe in punishment. I don't believe in the death penalty for stealing a wallet and I certainly don't believe in citizens doing the actual killing.
I wonder how you'd feel about a guy saying he'd rape a woman (I'm not comparing the two, by the way). Would you say, no need to get upset, they're only words. Or would you think a mindset or a society that accepts these ideas and words is going downhill?
And this world is not fucked up and twisted.
It's not?
People do what they can to get through each day.
Funny. I know a guy, a good guy. His parents kicked him out because they didn't approve of his ideas. Anyway, he had some bad luck and fucked up. He suffered for his mistakes. And tried to change his life, unfortunately this not fucked up and twisted society doesn't accept guys like him so he had to take the lowest fucking job available. He could barely pay rent. He started stealing (even returned the wallets, just took the money) and bought food with it. Just doing what he could to get through, society pushed him in that position.
He started dealing drugs until he could buy and old, shabby place. And stopped dealing and stealing. With government aid he got a higher education and now he has a good nice job. He does tons of charity work because he feels he stole from society and needs to pay society back now. This guy is a friend. It's the kind of guy you want to have as a friend and when he tells his story, you don't believe it.
And then I hear guys like onelongsong saying he'd have no problem killing him over his wallet (even though onelongsong is very wealthy or comes from a very wealthy family). He wouldn't even wound him, he'd kill him, mercilessly because he believes in "an eye for an eye", the appropriate punishment for theft is death and he has the nerve to call it self defense.
And you tell me life is peachy.
Given the way the world is, I think if you look, you'll find many fine examples as to why this world is not fucked up or twisted. Depends on how you look at it.
It certainly depends on how you look at it. I just hoped that from every perspective killing someone over a wallet would seem absurb and wrong. I guess I was wrong.
I realise that you said he was your teacher, but you also said he was a priest. I was simply trying not to offend you by not referring to him correctly.
Seems I've managed that anyway.
I wasn't offended. I'm sorry if I came over a bit rude.
edit: edited for all the spelling mistakes I made.
absolutely right. if we let the constitution be rewritten every time someone got a burr under their saddle we wouldn't have any of the original document left. it would change from fad to fad. generation to generation. and our freedom would change from president to president.
if you don't like the constitution; there's a border to the north and another to the south. don't let the door hit you in the ass.
no, you're not responsible. they're responsible for their actions.
you seem to think im one of the people telling you self-defense is unacceptable. im not. im just a little disturbed by how excited you seem about killing people. it's one thing to engage in necessary self-defense. it's another to sound like you can't wait for someone to pull something so you can pull the trigger and say that you feel no remorse about killing another human being. i think most people would have hoped they didnt have to... whereas you come off here sounding glad that you got the opprtunity. where do you live? im not visiting... you might see a stranger with long hair and gun me down in the streets.
now, answer me a question in return: how many people have you killed in self-defense? and how much did you get off on looking them in the eyes as you killed them?
i don't look for trouble. i rarely leave the ranch. but there's people like me everywhere. a couple years back florida passed a self defence law. kentucky is currently passing legislation to allow the shooting of carjackers. you seem more concerned about the criminals than you do the victims.
i'll answer your question by saying not as many as people say.
try walking through a VA hospital asking the same question. let me know how far you get.
Comments
i'm not alone. a famous attorney; catherine cryer i believe; was a strick anti-gun lobbiest. a close friend of hers had someone break into her house and rape her. her friend said she wished she had a gun in her house to protect herself. after a long conversation; catherine now carries a gun. and is a big pro-gun advocate for self defence. some victims have nightmares for years to come. some live in fear. some realize that the police are never at the scene of a crime until the crime is over. police are only for clean up.
when i was held at gunpoint; my gun was in my jeep. but i knew if i had it; i could draw it while dropping to 1 knee and kill the attacker before he knew what was happening.
nowhere did i advocate banning guns. im talking about ways to stem the flow of guns into the hands of those who have no business using them. the common criminal can walk into a gun store and still buy a gun as long as his record is clean. you dont prevent guns from getting there until it's already too late. make the first step harder, to weed out those who only want a gun becos it's the easy way. those who wants to use them for good purpose will take those steps. those who just want a quick and easy way to mug someone aren't going to take the time to go to classes and pay money for them and so on and so forth. you impose the burden up front, not after the sale. this would not deprive anyone of guns who will use them responsibly (and would lessen the restrictions on those people) but would put more blocks into the path of those who want to use them recklessly.
I completely agree with this.
naděje umírá poslední
I would like to suggest that someone with a clean record would not yet be classified as a common criminal.
"What I lack in decorum, I make up for with an absence of tact."
Camden 5-28-06
Washington, D.C. 6-22-08
I'm a criminal and I don't have a record:D
Well actually, I'm not a criminal until I get caught
naděje umírá poslední
Yeah, that's a good way to put it.
"What I lack in decorum, I make up for with an absence of tact."
Camden 5-28-06
Washington, D.C. 6-22-08
if i were going to committ a crime; i would not buy a legal gun. i'd buy one off the street. then i'd modify the rifling so it couldn't be identified.
People say things all the time Collin. They are only words. You have to decide if what they are saying is valid or not. Certainly don't need to be getting so upset about them, when it's actions that count in this case.
And this world is not fucked up and twisted. People do what they can to get through each day. Given the way the world is, I think if you look, you'll find many fine examples as to why this world is not fucked up or twisted. Depends on how you look at it.
I realise that you said he was your teacher, but you also said he was a priest. I was simply trying not to offend you by not referring to him correctly.
Seems I've managed that anyway.
And great if you truly believe that. Belief in other people is an excellent thing to have.
*~You're IT Bert!~*
Hold on to the thread
The currents will shift
how do you think those guns get onto the street to be sold illegally? most of them are legally bought handguns that get onto the streets becos we let any idiot buy a gun, then someone steals it or they get short on cash and pawn it to someone. these handguns flooding our streets are not being smuggled across the border with ak-47s. they are produced, bought, and sold here in the us under current gun laws and then handled carelessly. you said yourself assault rifles are rarely used in crimes. this is why im talking about a system that deters careless idiots from buying guns legally in the first place and offering incentives/penalties so that they are handled with care.
it would take time for such policies to have an impact becos there are already a lot of weapons out there, but in the long term, setting up a system that prevents careless people from acquiring a gun instead of waiting until after they get one and do something dumb with it to take it away from them is what needs to be done. it's time we get past worthless ad-hoc fixes like assault weapons bans and waiting periods that have proven ineffective.
like collin pointed out, currently, as long as you've not been caught yet we'll sell you a weapon. that is stupid. put the obstacles up front not after the fact.
Yes, I understand exactly what you are saying. And I must confess that there have been certain situations and individuals who have come into my life and perpertrated severe acts of violence against me, and I too have wished to have been able to retaliate with violence at the time. I've even planned to and made enquiries about retaliating against them after the fact. But I'm glad I didn't.
Because I know myself. And I know that I would feel bad if I succumbed to that part of myself. That if I responded to their bad behaviour with bad behaviour of my own that I would only be lessening me. And that's like giving them extra. But that's not to say that it's wrong for anyone else. I can only know myself. And judge what is the right thing to do for me.
I would never pressume to judge the best course of action for someone else.
People need to do what they think is the right thing at the time for them.
And I guess the whole thing is a moot point for me anyway, because I live in a relatively gun free society and I'm very glad of it. It's not a way of thinking that I'd like to take on.
*~You're IT Bert!~*
Hold on to the thread
The currents will shift
killing your first person is hard. especially if you look into their eyes. but after that it isn't that bad. when you exterminate vermin; you do society a favour.
who was first and how many times have you done it? have you stood trial for them all? are you batman?
Is that so? What on earth are we going to do with you?
*~You're IT Bert!~*
Hold on to the thread
The currents will shift
What are you implying?
*~You're IT Bert!~*
Hold on to the thread
The currents will shift
well, he sounds like either he fancies himself some sort of bad ass tough guy killer man, or he's become a borderline psychotic vigilante. the latter would make him batman. the former would make him a tool. but in either case, i rather doubt he's killed a couple people like he claims. if he has, he's an idiot to be bragging about it on a message board.
Nothing wrong with Batman ss! Bamm! Kapow!!
Think maybe my attempt at humour was lost on you today.
Never mind.
Maybe he's just trying to get a rise out of you?
*~You're IT Bert!~*
Hold on to the thread
The currents will shift
i caught it after i replied. i dig batman too... watched batman begins last night in fact.
you don't stand trial for self defence. there's only a trial if there's a question about self defence. when self defence is clear; there is nothing to charge you with.
let me ask you; if you're a victim of a violent crime; and you give up your car, wallet; or whatever; and let the person get away with it; are you not partially responsable for him victimizing the next person? let me put it this way; if i let the guy go when i could have stopped him; am i not somehow responsable if he kills an innocent the next day?
i'm not talking about the city close your eyes mentality. i mean; what happened to one's responsability to the community? and i don't mean vigilanty behavior. i watch out for every kid i see. i watch over everyones house and property. not intentionally; but if i happen to be on your block i'll notice something out of place and try to correct it. if your children are playing in the yard and a suspicious car is about; i'll hang around to make sure the kids are ok. and this has nothing to do with guns. i don't carry a gun in my town. i don't have to beause at least 50% of the residents are carrying so i'm protected. we protect eachother.
that being said; the result has been no violent crime in decades. no ones had the need to even expose a weapon.
Oh good!
Thought maybe I was talking Klingon or something!
Yeah, I love the old Batman. So camp!! So much fun!!
Lot less dark than the new stuff, although I love them too! Especially Christian Bale. Mmmmm.......oh that's right that's another thread! hehe!
I don't know ss, but people do do that around here! Or so I've noticed!
*~You're IT Bert!~*
Hold on to the thread
The currents will shift
It's not really an eye for an eye if the criminal let you go without killing you. It sounds like you were a pretty big gun advocate before your unfortunate experience. It also sounds like you're itching to kill someone.
...are those who've helped us.
Right 'round the corner could be bigger than ourselves.
You don't kill the person. You work with the authorities to have them arrested and prosecuted in a civil manner.
...are those who've helped us.
Right 'round the corner could be bigger than ourselves.
no, you're not responsible. they're responsible for their actions.
you seem to think im one of the people telling you self-defense is unacceptable. im not. im just a little disturbed by how excited you seem about killing people. it's one thing to engage in necessary self-defense. it's another to sound like you can't wait for someone to pull something so you can pull the trigger and say that you feel no remorse about killing another human being. i think most people would have hoped they didnt have to... whereas you come off here sounding glad that you got the opprtunity. where do you live? im not visiting... you might see a stranger with long hair and gun me down in the streets.
now, answer me a question in return: how many people have you killed in self-defense? and how much did you get off on looking them in the eyes as you killed them?
This is a concept that I don't think I understand. It seems that in the american pschye the infallibility of the constitution is second only to that of the bible. Why are americans always crying 'Thou shalt not!' just because its written in the constitution? As if the constitution was written by Moses himself. The concept of liberty is not defined by the American constitution.
I see a constitution simply as a legal document intended to set out the guidlines for a country's laws. Obviously such a document needs to be updated and altered as time goes by.
-C Addison
And every time someone proposes to update it lately, it has involved less personal freedom and more government intervention. Also, since we're a nation of law, not a nation of will, I'll turn to the document that is the basis for the law when there is a question. If you want a nation where you sway with the whims of will, go for. I'm not asking you to change.
Because every government gets worse and worse over time until it's eventual failure and overthrow. It was as free and liberal as it was going to get back then. The more corrupt the government becomes the more they want to change the ground work to better suit thier retaining more and more power and control over the citizenry.
Strong state and local governments and weak protective national governments provide the citizen with the most amount of representation in society. (provided they care about thier own personal freedom and liberty) Our national government has done what it can to make sure people want thier personal freedoms taken away and dictated by our national government.
absolutely right. if we let the constitution be rewritten every time someone got a burr under their saddle we wouldn't have any of the original document left. it would change from fad to fad. generation to generation. and our freedom would change from president to president.
if you don't like the constitution; there's a border to the north and another to the south. don't let the door hit you in the ass.
I think he's pretty serious.
I'm not really that upset. I'm stating my opinion. I think it's sick, scary and sad that we live in a world where people seem to think that their wallet or car are worth more than a human life. I believe in punishment. I don't believe in the death penalty for stealing a wallet and I certainly don't believe in citizens doing the actual killing.
I wonder how you'd feel about a guy saying he'd rape a woman (I'm not comparing the two, by the way). Would you say, no need to get upset, they're only words. Or would you think a mindset or a society that accepts these ideas and words is going downhill?
It's not?
Funny. I know a guy, a good guy. His parents kicked him out because they didn't approve of his ideas. Anyway, he had some bad luck and fucked up. He suffered for his mistakes. And tried to change his life, unfortunately this not fucked up and twisted society doesn't accept guys like him so he had to take the lowest fucking job available. He could barely pay rent. He started stealing (even returned the wallets, just took the money) and bought food with it. Just doing what he could to get through, society pushed him in that position.
He started dealing drugs until he could buy and old, shabby place. And stopped dealing and stealing. With government aid he got a higher education and now he has a good nice job. He does tons of charity work because he feels he stole from society and needs to pay society back now. This guy is a friend. It's the kind of guy you want to have as a friend and when he tells his story, you don't believe it.
And then I hear guys like onelongsong saying he'd have no problem killing him over his wallet (even though onelongsong is very wealthy or comes from a very wealthy family). He wouldn't even wound him, he'd kill him, mercilessly because he believes in "an eye for an eye", the appropriate punishment for theft is death and he has the nerve to call it self defense.
And you tell me life is peachy.
It certainly depends on how you look at it. I just hoped that from every perspective killing someone over a wallet would seem absurb and wrong. I guess I was wrong.
I wasn't offended. I'm sorry if I came over a bit rude.
edit: edited for all the spelling mistakes I made.
naděje umírá poslední
suppose you're going to ignore my query?
i don't look for trouble. i rarely leave the ranch. but there's people like me everywhere. a couple years back florida passed a self defence law. kentucky is currently passing legislation to allow the shooting of carjackers. you seem more concerned about the criminals than you do the victims.
i'll answer your question by saying not as many as people say.
try walking through a VA hospital asking the same question. let me know how far you get.