ISRAEL - IRAN - SYRIA - HAMAS - HEZBOLLAH - WWWIII?

Foxfyre wrote:

old europe wrote:

Criminals, by definition, do not abide by the law either. Should the police therefore be exempt from following the law when prosecuting a criminal? How would you feel about that?

Speaking of straw men, how does police prosecuting criminals relate to terrorists fire bombing busloads of mostly kids? You honestly think the two things are comparable?

Now, however, if those criminals are methodically shooting into crowds of civilians or firebombing markets or trying to kill me or my kids and/or other loved ones, then yes, again, I really don't care what methods the police have to use to stop that.

I think the two things are absolutely comparable. It has happened often enough that the police had to prosecute crimes far worse than theft or robbery, and I don't think I'll have to remind you of the specific examples. If we let the magnitude of the crime or our emotions determine whether or not the police are bound by the law, then the very basis of our society becomes questionable.

I'm actually quite shocked that you don't care what methods the police could use.

If the police wouldn't be bound by the law, then nothing would prevent the formation of death squads who swarm out to kill the perpertrator, or his family, or his friends, or all the people in his village. It has happened before in so many countries, and it has often happened with the consent of a majority of the populations of those countries.

And even the fact that you're living in a democracy doesn't make any difference once you're willing to cross that line.

Shocked that I don't care what methods the police use to stop an imminent threat to me and mine or any other innocent lives that are in imminent threat of being destroyed by hate filled murderers? Really?

Surely you aren't one of those people who would watch your wife raped or your children maimed and killed because you abhor violence?

There are times when it is prudent to not take time to consult a rule book for directions before action is taken.

All I can say is I am really REALLY glad you aren't in charge of my rights and/or security.

And vice versa.

And death squadrons.

I wonder, why still some people like democracy, laws, parliaments, rights, freedom ...

All people, other than extreme leftists, like democracy, laws, parliaments, rights, freedom because they allow civilized people to govern themselves competently.

Foxfyre wrote:

All people, other than extreme leftists, like democracy, laws, parliaments, rights, freedom because they allow civilized people to govern themselves competently.

We had had nearly 33 years bad experience with the extreme right - something, we got saved from by the US, too, in case you forgot.

Foxfyre wrote:

Shocked that I don't care what methods the police use to stop an imminent threat to me and mine or any other innocent lives that are in imminent threat of being destroyed by hate filled murderers? Really?

Yes, really. I thought you would care about the law. It seems that I was wrong.

This is so patently absurd that I counter it with: I would think you would care about your wife and children. It seems that I was wrong.

Foxfyre wrote:

Surely you aren't one of those people who would watch your wife raped or your children maimed and killed because you abhor violence?

I think you have all the means necessary to your avail in order to act in defense of your family or of yourself, including the use of force, within the law.

Foxfyre wrote:

There are times when it is prudent to not take time to consult a rule book for directions before action is taken.

Yep, I agree. That would be in a situation where you don't have time to react but in immediate self-defense. That was not what we were arguing about.

That was not what we were arguing about? It was precisely what I was arguing about. You're the one who wanted to take it to someplace entirely different rather than admit there are times when expediency, not rules, must apply.

Foxfyre wrote:

All I can say is I am really REALLY glad you aren't in charge of my rights and/or security.

And vice versa.

Foxfyre wrote:

All people, other than extreme leftists, like democracy, laws, parliaments, rights, freedom because they allow civilized people to govern themselves competently.

We had had nearly 33 years bad experience with the extreme right - something, we got saved from by the US, too, in case you forgot.

You're the one who wanted to take it to someplace entirely different rather than admit there are times when expediency, not rules, must apply.

And if it is not antisemitism, then what is it?

Foxfyre wrote:

You're the one who wanted to take it to someplace entirely different rather than admit there are times when expediency, not rules, must apply.

I only can suppose that has to do with the different background of both oe and me: here, in Germany and Europe, times when expediency, not rules can are fortunately so narrowly specified by constitutions and laws that you can count them on one hand.

Its all a matter of perspective. And my perspective is that the targets of madmen deserve far more consideration than the madmen deserve.

Okay. Let me try to explain this again.

When you're in immediate danger, you obviously should have the right to defend yourself. You should have the right to use force. I think the law grants you that right. I have not problem with that. I've said that in previous posts, but you chose to ignore it.

Now, what we were talking about was a situation where you are not in immediate danger of being killed. Instead, we were talking about a situation where the police, in an effort to protect you, prosecutes a criminal.

It appeared to me that you were arguing that in that case, the police shouldn't be bound be the law, or at least that you don't care whether or not they're abiding by the law.

I think that would be wrong, and would be a danger to the very foundations of a democratic society.

Foxfyre wrote:

And if it is not antisemitism, then what is it?

Not being on the line of some of (current) Israelian policy for instance.

To make it once and for all times clear, Foxfyre: do you really think, Israelian diplomats and members of the Central Council of Jews in Germany would call me personal friends, if they thaught I was antisemitic?

What they think and what the attitude of you and others like you are toward their right to self defense are two different things.