Shooting of the Day
Shooting of the Day
Out of context: Reply #1593
- Started
- Last post
- 2,776 Responses
- CALLES1
making america great again
https://www.washingtonpost.com/n…
Concealed gun permit holder fatally shoots suspected robber during Chicago stick-up
- finally!!!GeorgesII
- DEAD MAN: 55 year old father. Fake gun. Used to work at the store. Possible halloween prank.
SHOOTER: Not a jury. Not a judge.Morning_star - Suspected robbers deserve death?monospaced
- don't pull a fake gun if you don't want to get shotgilgamush
- * stares *Morning_star
- if you threaten someone with a gun in my presence i will engage you with appropriate force, which is shooting you until you stop movinggilgamush
- or should only criminals have guns and defending yourself be illegal. you guys are soft in the braingilgamush
- the penalty for all crimes shall be DEATH!sarahfailin
- you're stupidgilgamush
- Gilgamush am I right in thinking that, In your self appointed role as QBNs rational moral guardian, killing a human is 'Appropriate force' for a threat.Morning_star
- Yes, if you threaten my life by waving around a deadly weapon while commiting armed robbery, it morally and legally entitles me to use lethal forcegilgamush
- My right to my life trumps your right to a jury trial, anyone with half a brain can understand thatgilgamush
- You pacifists can curl into the foetal position in the corner and try to wish your way back to Kansas but I like living and don't leave it up to chance when somgilgamush
- Someone wants to threaten me with a gungilgamush
- What if I threatened your life by running a stop sign in my car? Does that entitle you to kill me?Morning_star
- Stupid question. Take a wild guessgilgamush
- Both you and Yuri have argued that there is no difference between a gun and a car. So how do you rationalise murder in one situation and not the other.Morning_star
- Nope, I have never argued that. It's a little thing called percieved intentgilgamush
- It isn't perception, perception requires understanding. You have no way of knowing the intent. The intent is assumed, which is an entirely different ...Morning_star
- ...decision based on prejudice.
(My mistake on the gun/car thing i thought i'd read your support for Yuris point)Morning_star - no worries, it happens. if someone pulls out a gun and declares that he is robbing you, the intent is clear. if you tell me that if i don't give you my wallet,gilgamush
- that you will go get in your minivan and run me over, then you have a self defense situation if i see you making a beeline for me in your dodge caravangilgamush
- you can evade a minivan, you can't evade a bullet. pulling a gun and demanding the money out of the register isn't a joke, especially not in chicago, all that sgilgamush
- shit about 'assumptions based on prejudice' is completely ridiculousgilgamush
- @gilga, your argument is insane. What if you shoot the armed robber, and another gun-vigilante sees you, but doesn't understand what happened.nb
- To them, it might look like a murder, if they had entered the scene at the wrong moment. In these heightened situations, people often make judgement errors.nb
- Would you then argue that this third person has the right to shoot you? They would perceive intent, killing you.nb
- Could they argue that their right to life trumps your right to jury trial?nb
- Um, I don't think you have any idea how the legal system works pal, the whole idea of self defense, at least in the north east, is that if you can run away, yougilgamush
- Are legally obligated to do so. So someone hearing shots and running in the store does not qualify.gilgamush
- I hear shots go off all the time, I don't go running in the direction of the shots though because this 'gun vigalante' bull shit you have made up doesn't applygilgamush
- To anyone in a self defence scenario like the original post. If you threaten people with guns, sooner or later someone is going to shoot you in the back, if thagilgamush
- That seems unjust to you than you have shit for brainsgilgamush