Quote:what an idiot twist to a horrible story.
I have heard about this before on another board and though I dont know why it is not included i
n what was quoted in the first post, it was said before that the toddler was dead when police arrived.
So u CONDEMN the police
for shooting the stomper ?
Quote:
Possibly dead before other people arrived Im sure.
Toddlers bodies can not handle the brunt of adult's violence .
So u say that the witnesses shud not have shot the stomper
because
POSSIBLY the baby was already dead,
so the stomper shud be safe as he continues to stomp on the baby
because
POSSIBLY the baby is already dead; did I get that right ?
Quote:
Not to mention, it is also not stated here that the man was telling people
he had to get the demons out of the child .
Are U suggesting that the stomper shud have been
protected
by the "M'Naughten rule" from getting shot, because he was crazy ?
Quote:
He was not a small man either.
According to the photographs that were shown before
( I will take a minute and look this up too.. ) he was a pretty stocky man..
appearing to me as if he had possibly worked out on a regular basis.
Elderly people are not always as strong as we would hope they would be,
especially in a situation like this.
If the elderly people had shot him,
then the stomping on the baby wud have ended,
but thay do not appear to have been equipped for that,
instead being in full obedience to all gun control laws, while baby gets stomped,
like Reginald Denny.
Quote:
If this man... lets say he DID work out on a regular basis... was angry,
having a psychotic break and already lost in his 'behavior'.. just as
people are able to do in dangerous situations, he very well could have
brutally beaten anyone else who got near him to only return to beating that child.
That 's what HAPPENED,
in that he pushed them away.
Even if ONE of the witnesses had shot him
in the knee, that wud have been the end of the attack on
the baby. Instead of shooting him, the witnesses obeyed the anti-gun laws.
The stomper cud have been disabled by gunfire,
as indeed he was when the police shot him.
Quote:
If everyone took the opportunity to attempt to stop him,
he could have killed them or other wise made it to where no one could call for help.
That is the reason
that it wud have been very nice to have shot him,
instead of obeying anti-gun laws.
Quote:
It is entirely possible that the people who were there could tell the boy was already dead.
Right; thay were all coroners
(and u accuse
ME of being an idiot)
Quote:
In that case, there was nothing anyone could have possibly done
to change that. ( well.. MAYBE.. but I am not going to split hairs here)
After shooting him to end the attack,
then efforts to inquire as to whether anything were possible
to save the victim cud have been carried out.
Quote:
Having a gun at the situation?
Is a sick and twisted excuse for some murderous satisfaction.
The baby cud not speak for himself.
If he were able to speak for himself,
I believe that he 'd have yelled for help,
in hope that someone wud stop the stomper by killing him ASAP.
(
I suppose U think that 's idiotic also.)
If the same thing happened to
an older boy
(like Andrea Yates'
7 year old boy, before she drowned him)
I am confident that he 'd ardently wish for a witness to throw him a revolver.
Tell me THAT 's IDIOTIC.
Quote:
There is nothing in this story that suggests people HAD a gun,
that a gun was used by anyone other then the police,
That 's my POINT.
Instead of being armed and using defensive firepower
to rescue the baby (as the police did) thay were obeying the anti-gun laws.
If someone HAD violated California's victim disarmament laws
and used a gun to save the baby (as the police did)
YOU'D condemn that hero.
I don 't believe that the baby or his mother wud.
Maybe u'd want such a hero to be criminally prosecuted
for any violation of the victim disarmament laws.
Quote:and it does not even go into what was done
to that man to stop him from beating that child.
Now u denounce incompetent and incomplete journalism.
I suppose u think that 's relevant
to whether the citizens who witnessed ths
shud have been well armed ???
Quote:
You really need your head examined OhiCantspellDavid.
I will continue to support Teddy Roosevelt 's efforts
for a paradigm (paradime) shift to make English spelling fully fonetic.
Tho he was a very popular President,
he was ridiculed worse than I have been for trying to effect this improvement.
Quote:
Not only are your typing abilities immature and embarrassing,
In my YOUTH,
I spelled the way u do; that means the
RONG way.
I
feel guilty about having spelled your way for so many decades.
I wish to atone for my illogic.
I 'm doing it here, among other places.
Quote:
but your twist on this story in an attempt to reflect your 'personal' views
about gun laws is disgusting.
You advocate preserving the way it turned out,
with a dead baby, stomped to death because no witness was able to stop it
because apparently no witness had a gun,
so the stomper pushed them away.
I 'd change that and SAVE THE BABY by witnesses shooting the stomper
and
u ACCUSE ME OF BEING DISGUSTING,
after YOU support stomping a baby to death with NO successful interference.
Quote:
There are children, women and men hurt every day by many people.
Guns will not stop that.
Thad did THIS TIME,
when police shot the stomper.
U just want someone wearing a uniform and a badge
to do all the defensive shooting. I have contempt for government
and I recognize that citizens can do it and that this baby got stomped
to death
because people believe the way YOU DO.
Filosofically, u have joined yourself to the stomper,
against the victim, whom I support.
Quote:
Guns give people like you a way to live out their vigilante fantasies
I have no wish to become a vigilante, myself.
If these witnesses had done the same thing that the police did,
I 'd cheer that.
The last time that I had a vigilante fantasy
was in my childhood, when I wished that I were able to go back
to rescue my mother from a criminal who inflicted very severe
and permanent personal injuries upon my mother in 1912.
In later years, I changed my mind about that.
Quote:
and kill someone they perceive as being wrong.
meaning the baby stomper
Quote:
There are many horrible acts intercepted every day by people with out guns.
YEAH; these folks
TRIED.
U see how well THAT worked out.
Quote:
Only people who would not have the guts to stand up to someone else
would claim they need a gun to "take care of things" and to "defend " themselves.
So u are saying that people like my mother,
who had a leg cut off,
are GUTLESS cowards if thay do not stand up to someone
else without a gun to defend herself ???
I remember when I was
too weak to be able to WALK,
after abdominal surgery, much less able to fight.
According to you,
neither my mother nor I in my disabled condition had any right to defend ourselves ?
What happened to equal protection of the laws ?
Quote:
I personally think you should be ashamed of yourself taking the death
of a toddler like this and using it to spout about and try to blame the
bystanders for "obeying" gun laws. But, of course , you wont.
That is a very stupid, politically correct and anti-American thing to say.
I reaffirm, and ratify what I said. I will remain loyal to logic, morality and individualism
U oppose the baby 's survival.
U support the survival intact of the baby stomper.
LIVE WITH THAT. BY YOUR WORDS U HAVE DEFINED YOURSELF.
Quote:
You will take this and wear it like a plastic police badge as proof that your ideas are vital and necessary. For some reason you fail to see that force with force does not always equal justice. Yes, there are situations where that may differ... but again.. I am not splitting hairs.
You are the exact type of person who will complain about criminals with guns
and guns being in the hands of the wrong people [???] ..
The HELL, I am !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
That shows that u don 't know me.
U have NO IDEA about me.
I
have NEVER said that !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Quote:
yet you stand there and squack like a rooster in a hen house about how everyone should have one.
This toddler suffered a horrible death by the hands of a crazy man.
yet you over look that and feed on the idea/fantasy of killing him yourself.
That is NOT by position.
I absolutely
do NOT have any such fantasy,
but if one of the California witnessess had shot him,
I believe that wud have been very nice,
the same as if Sharon Tate 's guests had shot
the Manson intruders, when thay broke in.
I believe in SELFISHNESS, for me and for everyone.
U
underestimate my selfishness.
If I had been at the baby stomping in an armed condition,
I d have had second thoughts about paying the fees of California trial lawyers
to defend me from criminal and civil liability.
Possibly, I might have fired a round into the ground in front of him,
where he was standing.
Quote:I. cant. believe. you.
U have
distorted the position
that u cannot believe.
Quote:THAT 'would' over throw the Constitution
opening us up for 'infinite' tyranny at the hands of government,
at the discretion of government.
Quote:
You really need to take a look at the government you speak of
and realize this is already happening. Stop following the lemming line bud..
it ends at the cliff up there..
I agree with u.
This s strengthens and re-inforces my position
in this matter, about strengthening rights of the individual,
like ending all victim disarmament laws.
David
