Now That's What I Call Erring On The Side Of Life

Baldimo wrote:
"It is funny how you guys want more protection for the crook then you do for the law biding citizen."

Stupid comment.

0 Replies

edgarblythe wrote:

Baldimo wrote:
"It is funny how you guys want more protection for the crook then you do for the law biding citizen."

Stupid comment.

Not really,when you actually look at it.
In many states,if an intruder comes into your home,business,or whatever,and gets hurt,they can sue you.
No matter that they were breaking the law.

When a crook does go to jail,he gets free food,medical care,education,and dental care.WHY? None of that is provided to the majority of the rest of the country.

If the arresting officer doesnt cross all the T's or dot all the I's,the crook can get out on a technicality,free to commit another crime.

There are many more examples where the criminal element gets more protection then the law abiding citizen.

My own opinion is that a criminal has NO rights,except the ones I tell him he can have.
If it was up to me,then ANY person committing a criminal act would be on their own.
If you see a mugger assault a little old lady,then you should have the right to stop him,using ANY available means,up to and including deadly force,without fear of civil or criminal prosecutioon.
In other words,if you kill a mugger,you cannot be prosecuted by the state or sued by his family.
You break the law,you take your chances.
Because,the best way to eliminate crime is to eliminate criminals,period.

0 Replies

He wasn't addressing that scenario; just the ones like me on this thread.

0 Replies

Well let's don't stop there. mystreryman. Let's kill anyone we see driving with an open container. Immediately. Clear and present danger. If a parent gts heavy handed with their misbehaving child, they gotta go. Clear and present danger. What? You say a parent should have a right to give their child corporal punishment? Well I don't. I perceive it as a clear threat to the child. That Mom or Dad forfeits their right to live. How about that neighbor who you see being abusive to his pets? Possible sociopath. Lights out.

Where does it stop? There has to be a line drawn somewhere and we can't start moving it around. If someone breaks into my house or property and is a threat to my wife or son, bang. But on the street?

I think Florida and Texas should secede from the Union. I really do. Arm every man woman and child and then go in a year later for the mop up.

0 Replies

blue
Somehow your avatar reminds me of the guy from Third Rock From the Sun.

0 Replies

blueveinedthrobber wrote:

Well let's don't stop there. mystreryman. Let's kill anyone we see driving with an open container. Immediately. Clear and present danger. If a parent gts heavy handed with their misbehaving child, they gotta go. Clear and present danger. What? You say a parent should have a right to give their child corporal punishment? Well I don't. I perceive it as a clear threat to the child. That Mom or Dad forfeits their right to live. How about that neighbor who you see being abusive to his pets? Possible sociopath. Lights out.

Where does it stop? There has to be a line drawn somewhere and we can't start moving it around. If someone breaks into my house or property and is a threat to my wife or son, bang. But on the street?

I think Florida and Texas should secede from the Union. I really do. Arm every man woman and child and then go in a year later for the mop up.

I realize that you are trying to be funny,but you are closer to the truth then you think.
If you have an open container,and your drinking causes an accident where someone gets killed,you forfeit your right to live,period.

If someone is mean and abusive to animals,its a good bet that they are mean and abusive to their family.I have no tolerance for anyone that is cruel to his or her pets.
Animals cant help being what they are,people have a choice.

Parents have the right to discipline their children anyway they see fit,short of actual abuse.
So,if a parent is disciplining their kid,its not my problem.My mom used to say that "thats why God put that extra padding on the butt"
Let em make clear that I am NOT advocating abusing a child,but a spanking is not abuse.

Personally,I would like to see the various states secede.If you don't like the values and morals a state chooses to live by,or the rules of that state,move to one you agree with.
Of course,these states would still be under the umbrella of the US,but they would be allowed to set up any legal and moral system they want,as long as it doesn't go outside the constitutional boundaries.

0 Replies

I predict Civil unrest in this country is right around the corner. I'd like to find a place to avoid it.

0 Replies

mysteryman wrote:

blueveinedthrobber wrote:
Well let's don't stop there. mystreryman. Let's kill anyone we see driving with an open container. Immediately. Clear and present danger. If a parent gts heavy handed with their misbehaving child, they gotta go. Clear and present danger. What? You say a parent should have a right to give their child corporal punishment? Well I don't. I perceive it as a clear threat to the child. That Mom or Dad forfeits their right to live. How about that neighbor who you see being abusive to his pets? Possible sociopath. Lights out.

Where does it stop? There has to be a line drawn somewhere and we can't start moving it around. If someone breaks into my house or property and is a threat to my wife or son, bang. But on the street?

I think Florida and Texas should secede from the Union. I really do. Arm every man woman and child and then go in a year later for the mop up.

I realize that you are trying to be funny,but you are closer to the truth then you think.
If you have an open container,and your drinking causes an accident where someone gets killed,you forfeit your right to live,period.

If someone is mean and abusive to animals,its a good bet that they are mean and abusive to their family.I have no tolerance for anyone that is cruel to his or her pets.
Animals cant help being what they are,people have a choice.

Parents have the right to discipline their children anyway they see fit,short of actual abuse.
So,if a parent is disciplining their kid,its not my problem.My mom used to say that "thats why God put that extra padding on the butt"
Let em make clear that I am NOT advocating abusing a child,but a spanking is not abuse.
Personally,I would like to see the various states secede.If you don't like the values and morals a state chooses to live by,or the rules of that state,move to one you agree with.
Of course,these states would still be under the umbrella of the US,but they would be allowed to set up any legal and moral system they want,as long as it doesn't go outside the constitutional boundaries.

But we're not talking about what you think. We're talking about my right, should I perceive that a spanking in the mall is a clear and present danger to the welfare of the child, to shoot the parent. Perceive is the operative word here. So if you agree with the proposed legislation you must agree with my right to shoot the parent should I perceive they're harming the child.

Perception is very subjective. If you want to live somewhere where perception givs you the right to shoot someone we are heading down a slippery slope IMO.

0 Replies

Nice try,but the proposed legislation states that if you PERCIEVE a threat to you!!

Me spanking my child is not by any stretch a perceived threat to you,and there is no way you can say it is.

0 Replies

No?

You spank yer child -> he grows up to be violent -> robs my child some day.

Clear causality Smile

. And the real question is: do you want every idiot out there with a gun making the judgement? How many innocents are going to end up dead because the guy 'thought' he was threatened?'

How many murders is this going to cover up? The killer can just say 'I percieved a threat and acted according to the law.'

Cycloptichorn

0 Replies

When I first hear about this I thought "this is nuts". But then what if it has a deterrent effect? Deterrence is based - okay I'm over-simplifying it - the chance of apprehension plus the severity of the punishment. Way back when Cesare Beccaria talked about this, he said it was good to increase the chances of apprehension and also the severity of punishment. Now it seems to me that if the victim fights back there's an example of increased chance of punishment and also of severity all in one. You know, it just might deter some crimes from happening. And perhaps on that basis it isn't so bad.

0 Replies

mysteryman wrote:

Its quite simple,if you break into a house,the home owner should be allowed to use whatever force he wants against you.
If you get hurt,shot,killed,or maimed,its your own fault.
Neither you nor your survivors should be allowed to sue the homeowner for anything.
If you are committing a criminal act,then whatever happens to you is your choice.
You CHOSE to break the law,you CHOOSE to accept the consequences,whatever they are.

I disagree. I think every attempt must be made to avoid injuring or killing anyone, including criminals. Burglary is not a capital offense UNTIL it gets to court. It certainly isn't afterwards.

0 Replies

SCoates wrote:

mysteryman wrote:
Its quite simple,if you break into a house,the home owner should be allowed to use whatever force he wants against you.
If you get hurt,shot,killed,or maimed,its your own fault.
Neither you nor your survivors should be allowed to sue the homeowner for anything.
If you are committing a criminal act,then whatever happens to you is your choice.
You CHOSE to break the law,you CHOOSE to accept the consequences,whatever they are.

I disagree. I think every attempt must be made to avoid injuring or killing anyone, including criminals. Burglary is not a capital offense UNTIL it gets to court. It certainly isn't afterwards.

Are you going to deny that people are killed during robberies? It happens more often then you think but once again you are more concerned with the welfare of the crook then you are of the law-biding citizen. I vote to protect my family and those that are victims of crimes. I could careless why you are committing a crime, you enter my house without my permission to take something of mine, and you might end up with a lead injection.

0 Replies

I think that you should have that right, and that you should be very conservative with it.

0 Replies

perhaps if all Americans were simply shot at birth.......................

0 Replies

I believe they are nowadays. But they don't get some shots until their a little older. (I think certain vaccines are a little too much for babies).

0 Replies

SCoates wrote:

I believe they are nowadays. But they don't get some shots until their a little older. (I think certain vaccines are a little too much for babies).

I know they caused my son to go deaf at the age of 9 months.

0 Replies

Now That's What I Call Erring On The Side Of Life

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know