Except that's not what you said- and no one here is disagreeing with you on self-defense- but you choose to lie. And of course you know this, but you'll backtrack as usual because that's what twisted people do.
It's unfortunate we didn't have a CHL holder on the other end in fear for his life and firing right back at her. That would have been awwwwwwwwesome.
"The life of a thief isn't one that matters in the least." Bobbytheafterthought. Think about that the next time some dumb 14 year-old kid tries to rip off a pack of gum from a local convenience store. Turd.
I said they deserve to die and that their lives don't matter. That's not advocating for the state to deprive them of life, liberty, or property without due process....it's saying that if they are caught by their intended victim, that person IMO would be right to kill them if they wished. If someone was breaking in to someone else's car, then I'd have no problem with that person shooting them and I don't know why anyone else would. Perhaps some people are just more friendly to crime than others. Perhaps you just didn't follow along. Don't worry, it happens a lot around here. I think if you go back and re-read, you might follow along better.
I feel like for certain posters, their idea of a utopia is the Middle East. Very religious (except not their preferred one) Harsh on crime (theft = hand amputation) Women inequality Harsh on adultery (for women) Lots of guns Anti-gay Pro-life Lots of oil
Oh, I followed along all right. And you stated it as clear as day. In your world, you catch a poor, starving person stealing a half-eaten hamburger from your car, and you have the right to shoot them dead. It's a sickness, Bobby. Somewhere in your life, you were bullied, abused, or otherwise made a victim, and you translated this into that individuals who are stolen from have the right to kill their perpetrators, and that a thief's LIFE does not matter. That is a mental deficiency that, if any psychologist were to read what you wrote, they would recommend sessions immediately.
LOL, to you all thieves are poor, starving people stealing a half eaten hamburger? Wow. That's pretty special. Anyway, you seem have a child's mentality, which is adorable, but perhaps some practical experience in life would do you well.
And I agree it was a reckless discharge of a firearm. If the thieves were armed and shooting, I think she's within her rights to fire back. If the thieves were armed and running away is more of a gray area where I'm leaning towards not legal, maybe 65-35.
You're right, it's a gray area because you can't claim self defense when you shoot someone in the back when they are running way, but there is some leeway to say that you were acting in the defense of your property if they stole something that they were running away with. Even then, it's a hard case to make.
Don't worry bobbythegrape, I'm positive that you'll get plenty of chances in life to act in self defense.
I really haven't had to for the most part. Most people look for easy targets.....which ties back into how you help prevent school shootings, you beef up security to make it less of a soft target.
No, that's an extreme example, but one that fits directly into your playbook, sir. The simple difference between you and me is that I value life and you don't. Oh, and I definitely have life experience in this regard. Shoplifted when I was 13. Bully in my neighborhood said it was either that or he was going to kick my ass- that was my 'initiation' in the neighborhood. So, I tried stealing a cassette tape and got caught. Of course. And I paid the price. Of course. But according to you, when I was running out of the store, I should have been shot at. And that my life basically wasn't worth anything.
That's a fair statement. There isn't a shortage of people, and there's nothing intrinsically valuable about people. You value the lives of criminals and those who would prey on others, I don't.
Why? What if one of the Oregon shooter's classmates stole something from him? According to you, he had the right to go shoot them. You stated just two posts ago that you feel there's nothing intrinsically valuable about people. Well, guess what? That is exactly what causes people like Charles Manson, Ted Bundy, John Wayne Gacy, etc. to do what they do. Regardless of their upbringing, etc., the one thing they have in common is that they felt that human lives were not of value. Otherwise, they wouldn't have done what they did. The Oregon shooter did not value human life. According to your own statements, you likewise feel the same. "Thieves' lives do not matter."
SMH, okay, since you are clearly slow, I'll spell it out for you. The Oregon shooter was preying on others....which is what I was speaking against when talking about why the lives of thieves don't matter. I never advocated preying on others. I don't really expect you to follow along given your history of failing to follow along in conversation, but I spelled it out for your anyway.
The only thing dumber than reading a sociopath's posts on a basketball message board is to quote the sociopath's posts and attempt a discussion with him. Amiright? Speaking of, bencarsonthegreat is really trying to up the ridiculous verbiage ante these days. Maybe he sees hyperbolic gun statements as the way to the GOP nomination.
