0
   

A MAN 's HOME IS HIS CASTLE

 
 
Setanta
 
  1  
Reply Wed 14 May, 2008 06:00 pm
I don't know if it is just this thread, or if you don't normally pay attention, and i've just never noticed it before, Chai.

I wrote:

Quote:
Do you think that no intruders will show up in the daytime? Was not one of the scenarios you described in your personal experience a case of an intruder arriving in the daytime? What about a situation such as you described, when you came home to find an intruder in your home?


In the post in which you responded you begin by writing:

Chai wrote:
My personal scenerio?

No, it happened in the middle of the night. When I was alone, in bed, with no gun.


Now, that is clearly a statement contradicting what i had written. Now, i know that later in that post, you recount the experience of coming home to find an intruder. But that still leaves one to wonder why you would have initially seem to have contradicted what i said. That was why i replied by quoting your earlier post.

Perhaps it's just this topic and your response to it--but i in fact do attempt to respond to or comment on what people have actually written.
0 Replies
 
boomerang
 
  1  
Reply Wed 14 May, 2008 06:11 pm
hamburger wrote:
david wrote :

Quote:
Dogs are not reliable.
Like people, thay are thinking beings who
are unpredictable in how thay will act ... ...


give "unpredictable" people a gun and ... ...
Rolling Eyes


<snork>

Great point, hamburger!


David, I suppose my evidence is that I have always had well trained dogs and I have never had an intruder. I don't worry about intruders. Half the time my doors are unlocked. I'm not going to spend my life in fear, hiding behind a gun.
0 Replies
 
Setanta
 
  1  
Reply Wed 14 May, 2008 06:13 pm
I don't think you are taking into due consideration, Boom, that I'msickDavid relishes the siege mentality, and the prospect that he may eventually get the opportunity to actually shoot someone, under circumstances in which he is relatively certain he can get away with it.
0 Replies
 
OmSigDAVID
 
  1  
Reply Wed 14 May, 2008 06:51 pm
boomerang wrote:
hamburger wrote:
david wrote :

Quote:
Dogs are not reliable.
Like people, thay are thinking beings who
are unpredictable in how thay will act ... ...


give "unpredictable" people a gun and ... ...
Rolling Eyes


<snork>

Great point, hamburger!

It wuda been a BETTER point,
if I had suggested giving anyone a gun, as he implies.

I only suggested every citizen shud be LEFT ALONE
when he gets his own gun.
That point was setting up a "strawman" attack.






Quote:

David, I suppose my evidence is that I have always had well trained dogs
and I have never had an intruder.

Does that mean that u 'd have had intruders,
if thay had not been so well trained ?




Quote:
I don't worry about intruders.

That 's wise; I don t worry about ANYTHING,
but I try to be prepared for everything.
Worry is not helpful, but appropriate preparatory action is.



Quote:
Half the time my doors are unlocked.

That is not wise.




Quote:

I'm not going to spend my life in fear, hiding behind a gun.

Guns are not hiding places.
Possession of guns is not related to fear, except to end it.
When I was 8, I was somewhat apprehensive about my ability
to defend my premises, if that became necessary; ( it never did ).
As of the time that I first possessed myself of some defensive firepower,
that sense of unease ended,
and has never returned during many years & decades.
I have since lived in a state of tranquility.




David
0 Replies
 
OmSigDAVID
 
  1  
Reply Wed 14 May, 2008 07:08 pm
Setanta wrote:
I don't think you are taking into due consideration,
Boom, that I'msickDavid relishes the siege mentality,

Slanders, malicious mendacities and pink prevarications !





Quote:
and the prospect that he may eventually get the opportunity to actually shoot someone,
under circumstances in which he is relatively certain he can get away with it.

That is false.
What u describe wud be an inconvenience; annoying.
It might even result in damage to my chattel or realty
( e.g., a refrigerator or an oil tank or [ Heaven forfend ! ]
an HDTV getting clipped with a .44 hollowpointed slug )

I don t wanna be bothered with that; no good wud come of it.
Its not as if there is only one bad guy in the world
and after he is dispatched only good fellows remain.

Your pink think ing is fony.




David
0 Replies
 
OmSigDAVID
 
  1  
Reply Wed 14 May, 2008 07:33 pm
boomerang wrote:

Quote:

Homicide and suicide are the second and third leading causes of death
among teens ages 15 to 19, after accidental death.1

For the sake of argument, let us assume that these statistics r accurate.
Qua suicide, does it make a difference whether someone uses a knife,
or a gun, or jumps out the window ?
( Maybe the guy on the ground below might prefer that he use a knife or a gun. )
Any person and every person has the autonomous, natural right
to end his life, as a matter of private choice.
As to HOMICIDE, maybe the victims shud have been better
equipped to ward off malicious attacks, EXCEPT insofar as
that statistic includes criminals who were killed during their felonies.
To the extent that dead criminals were represented in that statistic,
let us REJOICE !



Quote:

Firearms were the instrument of death in over 80 percent of teen homicides

Note that this will include gang wars over profitable drug turf,
wherein casualties on both sides r usually young,
but each of these fellows who kill one another,
make the world a safer place ( to some degree ) for the decent people.




Quote:
and about half of teen suicides in 2004.2
While almost one in four youth firearm injuries results in death,
nonfirearm injuries result in death in only one out of every 760 cases.3

Well, let 's hope that decent people defending themselves
will aim more carefully to bring up that statistic,
for the better safety of us all.





David
0 Replies
 
boomerang
 
  1  
Reply Wed 14 May, 2008 08:15 pm
Quote:
let us REJOICE !


That's it. I'm frikken over and out.
0 Replies
 
OmSigDAVID
 
  1  
Reply Wed 14 May, 2008 08:33 pm
boomerang wrote:
Quote:
let us REJOICE !


That's it. I'm frikken over and out.

OK.
No more frikken for Boomer.

I 'll stand by what I said.
Tho Mr. Setanta is rong in claiming that I wanna shoot anyone,
I do recognize that every time that disabling bad luck befalls
criminal predators ( for instance a victim killing his or her predator ),
that is a WONDERFUL, and joyous occasion
for the decent people, because the world is ( in some degree )
safer for us and for those who receive our good will.
( I even enjoyed it when a water buffalo kicked a lion in the jaw,
in defending himself, causing fatal injuries to the lion. )

Boomer is rooting for those who 'd vanquish her loved ones.
That means Boomer is disloyal to her loved ones.




David
0 Replies
 
dagmaraka
 
  1  
Reply Wed 14 May, 2008 10:21 pm
for a guy who wants to be "left alone", you are surely very judgmental, david. it is none of your business to issue statements on boomerang's loyalty to her family.
0 Replies
 
Mame
 
  1  
Reply Wed 14 May, 2008 10:22 pm
dag, you're just spitting into the wind here. He's just making waves.
0 Replies
 
OmSigDAVID
 
  1  
Reply Thu 15 May, 2008 01:41 am
dagmaraka wrote:
for a guy who wants to be "left alone",

I never said that I wanna be left alone.

I don 't have gun control problems.
My complaints are for my FELLOW CITIZENS.
For years, I have already had enuf guns to satisfy all of my security needs



Quote:
you are surely very judgmental, david.

Yes.
Sometimes.
( Your assertion, in itself, is a judgment; nothing rong with that. )



Quote:

it is none of your business to issue statements
on boomerang's loyalty to her family.

Of the trillions of things in the universe,
most of them are none of my business.
That does not interfere with my freedom of speech to comment upon them.
I hope u have noticed that I am NOT politically correct, in my comments;
at least, I try to avoid it.
I believe in standing up for what is right and denouncing what is politically correct and rong
( if I feel like it ).

I affirmed, and I now re-iterate, that
when a victim of violence kills his predator, that is and shud be an occasion
for the decent people to REJOICE in great delight.
If the malice of a violent criminal is turned around like a boomerang,
and falls upon HIM, by his victim killing him,
that is reason to celebrate like thay do when the home team wins.

If Boomer chooses to take exception to that,
I am perfectly free to point the finger at her position
and to offer my comments and observations about it.

Violent criminals are de facto at war against the decent people.
I adopt the constitutional definition of giving aid & comfort
( in this case moral support ) to the enemy as being treason, or disloyalty.

On re-consideration and further deliberation,
I ratify what I said.




David
0 Replies
 
OmSigDAVID
 
  1  
Reply Thu 15 May, 2008 02:01 am
Mame wrote:
dag, you're just spitting into the wind here.
He's just making waves.

Well, this forum offers everyone the opportunity
to express his opinions, Mame, not only the politically correct.
I represent the other side: the Originalist Americans.




David
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

How can we be sure? - Discussion by Raishu-tensho
Proof of nonexistence of free will - Discussion by litewave
morals and ethics, how are they different? - Question by existential potential
Destroy My Belief System, Please! - Discussion by Thomas
Star Wars in Philosophy. - Discussion by Logicus
Existence of Everything. - Discussion by Logicus
Is it better to be feared or loved? - Discussion by Black King
 
Copyright © 2021 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.05 seconds on 04/20/2021 at 04:32:44