RE: Does self defense allow you to beat someone to death"?

RE: Does self defense allow you to beat someone to death"? (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion

Message

WinsomeDefiance -> RE: Does self defense allow you to beat someone to death"? (4/6/2016 2:46:15 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: PeonForHer quote: ORIGINAL: WinsomeDefiance I've always been taught that if you aim a gun at a living target, you shoot to kill. Which is why I don't have my rifles for home defense, and they are locked with the ammo locked away separately. I've no desire to ever kill a living human being. Kay has a different philosophy. I told her I thought someone was in the basement and she asked, "Should I load the rifle?" WD, take care. Once snared in this thread, you will never, ever leave. [:D] It is looking that way, at least until the weather warms up a bit.

PeonForHer -> RE: Does self defense allow you to beat someone to death"? (4/6/2016 2:51:34 PM)
FR I've been reading this thread carefully to try to work out which is the most satisfactory way of killing an American (should I suddenly be approached by one when on a safari or a wilderness walk, or similar), but so far am none the wiser. Am I best advised to shoot him/her with a gun, or beat him to death? I admit that I'm not entirely sure what this thread is actually about.

lovmuffin -> RE: Does self defense allow you to beat someone to death"? (4/6/2016 3:01:54 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: thompsonx ORIGINAL: lovmuffin No, it's your blustering snarky bold type posting style Posting in bold or perhaps posting in some other color besides black seems to offend you? Why? Does the color or depth of print intimidate you? Does it change the meaning of the words posted? Intimidating ?? LMAO Not at all, at least not to me. We all have our snarky moments but more often than not you are rude and insulting. Your bold type adds to that effect and makes you look like an ass. When you are rude and throw insults with your stupid bold type at other posters who are more inclined to be intimidated, especially new or less frequent posters, that makes you a bully. So yes, I find that offensive.

lovmuffin -> RE: Does self defense allow you to beat someone to death"? (4/6/2016 3:15:41 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: PeonForHer FR I've been reading this thread carefully to try to work out which is the most satisfactory way of killing an American (should I suddenly be approached by one when on a safari or a wilderness walk, or similar), but so far am none the wiser. Am I best advised to shoot him/her with a gun, or beat him to death? I admit that I'm not entirely sure what this thread is actually about. Well, if yer goin on safari somewhere around Downton Abby, I wouldn't worry about it [8D] Try a Fox hunt instead [:)]

WinsomeDefiance -> RE: Does self defense allow you to beat someone to death"? (4/6/2016 3:29:20 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: PeonForHer FR I've been reading this thread carefully to try to work out which is the most satisfactory way of killing an American (should I suddenly be approached by one when on a safari or a wilderness walk, or similar), but so far am none the wiser. Am I best advised to shoot him/her with a gun, or beat him to death? I admit that I'm not entirely sure what this thread is actually about. There's a big wide world you'd have to get in line behind, all of whom seem to want to kill Americans. Why bother? Our love of fast food will probably kill us off more efficiently than guns or beatings.

BamaD -> RE: Does self defense allow you to beat someone to death"? (4/6/2016 3:33:48 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: PeonForHer FR I've been reading this thread carefully to try to work out which is the most satisfactory way of killing an American (should I suddenly be approached by one when on a safari or a wilderness walk, or similar), but so far am none the wiser. Am I best advised to shoot him/her with a gun, or beat him to death? I admit that I'm not entirely sure what this thread is actually about. As I explained to you earlier this thread was started because someone had intimated that beating someone to death is somehow morally and legally superior to shooting them. You are best advised not to get into a confrontation which would force you to make that choice. PS Englishmen die the same way.

BamaD -> RE: Does self defense allow you to beat someone to death"? (4/6/2016 3:36:03 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: WinsomeDefiance quote: ORIGINAL: PeonForHer FR I've been reading this thread carefully to try to work out which is the most satisfactory way of killing an American (should I suddenly be approached by one when on a safari or a wilderness walk, or similar), but so far am none the wiser. Am I best advised to shoot him/her with a gun, or beat him to death? I admit that I'm not entirely sure what this thread is actually about. There's a big wide world you'd have to get in line behind, all of whom seem to want to kill Americans. Why bother? Our love of fast food will probably kill us off more efficiently than guns or beatings. True, there are many things in our society that fit that discription.

Nnanji -> RE: Does self defense allow you to beat someone to death"? (4/6/2016 3:41:43 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: PeonForHer FR I've been reading this thread carefully to try to work out which is the most satisfactory way of killing an American (should I suddenly be approached by one when on a safari or a wilderness walk, or similar), but so far am none the wiser. Am I best advised to shoot him/her with a gun, or beat him to death? I admit that I'm not entirely sure what this thread is actually about. In what sense are you using the word "satisfactory"? In the sense adequate, in the sense of pleasurable, or in the sense of selection?

Nnanji -> RE: Does self defense allow you to beat someone to death"? (4/6/2016 3:46:42 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: thompsonx ORIGINAL: BamaD .22's are different usually light, small, and with little penetration. Is that why the cia and other assasins prefer them? Is that why garry powers carried one? In fact his is quite similar to mine minus the silencer. Jesus you are phoquing stupid. Really? You know they put Scooter Libby in jail for giving away CIA secrets. You should be careful how you disseminate your thoroughly researched knowledge.

BamaD -> RE: Does self defense allow you to beat someone to death"? (4/6/2016 3:52:33 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: thompsonx ORIGINAL: BamaD .22's are different usually light, small, and with little penetration. Is that why the cia and other assasins prefer them? Is that why garry powers carried one? In fact his is quite similar to mine minus the silencer. Jesus you are phoquing stupid. My name isn't Jesus and I had to quit when I divorced her.

kdsub -> RE: Does self defense allow you to beat someone to death"? (4/6/2016 3:54:05 PM)
I don't know... I've never heard of a Big Mac walking into a kindergarten and shooting children full of holes. Butch

Nnanji -> RE: Does self defense allow you to beat someone to death"? (4/6/2016 3:54:57 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: WinsomeDefiance quote: ORIGINAL: BamaD quote: ORIGINAL: WinsomeDefiance quote: ORIGINAL: BamaD I also have no desire to kill another human being, or to harm them for that matter. Be willing is not the same as wanting to. BTW a rifle is the last choice for home defense. Hard to use in a hallway or any relativly confined space and two much penetration. .22's are different usually light, small, and with little penetration. My rifle is a small .22 single shot, bolt action. Barely little more than a handgun with a long stock and barrel, lol. While I like to shoot at targets, I don't hold any expectations of defending my home with it. Given that my flight response is WAY stronger than my fight response, I just keep my insurance paid and let them reimburse me for anything stolen - meanwhile my flight happy ass is probably out the window and hiding at the neighbors. That is your choice. I like having the choice. Meanwhile, I live in a nice area with very little crime to minimize the chances of needing to make such decisions. Statistically, the average age of most home invaders is 14-16. I don't think I could live with myself if I shot a child. I do have intentions of having an instructor at the gun range train me on a handgun. More so, because I'm irrationally afraid of them, and like to face my fears. Plus, I just like doing different things. Like training with a staff and hitting the hell outa things, learning what plants are edible and what are poisonous. Yes, I forage. Not out of necessity but because I like knowing I CAN. Meh, I'm over sharing. I blame it on the crappy weather and cabin fever. With respect I'd like to point out that statistics such as you list above are often used unreasonably. Most, if not all, of those 14-16 year olds will be gang bangers who've been banging for years by that age. The anti-gun crowd always talk about kids being killed by people they know with guns. When in fact it's gang bangers killing people they know in another gang and they happen to be under the age of 25. In fact they have laws to try those bad young people, not children in any sense you'd know, in court as adults because they just aren't kids. I take your point and respect it. But little Timmy next door probably isn't going to invade your home while armed and accompanied by armed buddies.

thompsonx -> RE: Does self defense allow you to beat someone to death"? (4/6/2016 4:28:11 PM)
ORIGINAL: lovmuffin ORIGINAL: thompsonx ORIGINAL: BamaD Shooting to wound or to warn also, in court, lends credence to the idea that you didn't have fear for your life. Really????how so??? If ya didn't play 20 snarky questions all the time, maybe he would address your concern. When you say stupid things like the above I would like you to prove where you got that information. I know where you got it. It came from the same place you got all of your "shoot for center of mass" crap. When we go and look at who actually gets convicted of shooting to disable or firing a warning shot we find that seldom does someone get convicted. And when they are convicted it is for something like a stolen gun or felon in possession of a firearm. So when I ask someone to justify their idiotic rhetoric they cop an attitude like you are doing because you feel the truth will make you look foolish. If you would like to disabuse yourself of your ignorance, the answer to this question is easy to find. Just Google "shooting to wound is stupid". It's in there. Once again, you don't want to consider that the less than lethal option works for me and want to call me stupid for not agreeing with you. You are not content to agree to disagree you seem to feel that I must come around to your way of thinking. I have told you several times what I do works for me and you and all the other chairborn rangers can do as you please. I am not trying to convince you to change your mind. I am simply pointing out my opinion.

WinsomeDefiance -> RE: Does self defense allow you to beat someone to death"? (4/6/2016 4:36:11 PM)
Nnanji posted: quote: With respect I'd like to point out that statistics such as you list above are often used unreasonably. Most, if not all, of those 14-16 year olds will be gang bangers who've been banging for years by that age. The anti-gun crowd always talk about kids being killed by people they know with guns. When in fact it's gang bangers killing people they know in another gang and they happen to be under the age of 25. In fact they have laws to try those bad young people, not children in any sense you'd know, in court as adults because they just aren't kids. I take your point and respect it. But little Timmy next door probably isn't going to invade your home while armed and accompanied by armed buddies. I understand the distinction you are making, except I disagree with the courts trying children as adults. To me, regardless of a child's circumstances, a minor shouldn't be tried as an adult. A 14 - 16 year old is a child, in my eyes. That is my personal belief. If I shot a child, no matter if they were gang bangers or simply mischievous neighborhood kids; it would devastate me. However, I do get your point. I wasn't intending to make any pro or con political stances in my post, but I can see how my statement could be taken as a catalyst for what is a very sensitive topic for many.

thompsonx -> RE: Does self defense allow you to beat someone to death"? (4/6/2016 4:39:02 PM)
ORIGINAL: BamaD ORIGINAL: thompsonx The sites I found using information from lawyers stated that while shooting to wound is not illegal per se, Thank you for finally acknowledging that I was right that there is no law that prohibits shooting to disable. it does you no good legally. A warning shot, in those places it isn't considered reckless endagerment, and a wound is usually considered to just be a bad shot. A wounded attacker gets to tell his side of the story (and you can be sure he won't say yep he was just minding his own business and had to shoot me when I tried to mug him) a dead one doesn't. Once again thank you for admitting that one of the reasons you would shoot for com is to eliminate any witnesss. Shooting to wound or to warn also, in court, lends credence to the idea that you didn't have fear for your life. Really????how so??? A I didn't say that, no matter what you want to think. I was stating the facts as observed my numerous lawyers. But you have failed to show any evidence that what someone who claims to be a lawyer on a copsucker blog is true. You have not brought forth any court cases where what you claim to be true is in fact true. B If you are shooting at the foot you must not consider them that much of a threat. That would be your opinion and possibly the opinion of someone on a copsucker blog claiming to be a lawyer. You do not know what I consider a threat. You have not cited any court cases where a person was convicted of shooting someone in a less than lethal maner because they did not "really" consider the person a threat. This is what makes you look the fool and causes sane people to say things like Jesus you are phoquing stupid.

thompsonx -> RE: Does self defense allow you to beat someone to death"? (4/6/2016 4:45:01 PM)
ORIGINAL: lovmuffin ORIGINAL: thompsonx No, it's your blustering snarky bold type posting style constantly insulting others and saying stuff like "Jesus you are phoquing stupid." When you post unbelievably stupid statements like "it is illegal to shoot to disable in the state of florida" what else can anyone say besides ... Jesus you are phoquing stupid. I did say that it wasn't lawful to shoot to wound in Florida. One source of information for that was a conversation with a police officer. As it's been awhile I'm trying to remember if that part of the conversation was about a point of law or a horrendously bad idea as it could severely diminish your claim of self defense. After you and I both tried to find it I stated at that point I wasn't so sure and I needed to confirm it. I'm not at all concerned with your blustering demand that I come up with proof. You used that untruth to make the point that my position was not only stupid but illegal. It was a seminal focus of your arguement. Yet now you dismiss it as a less than insignificant item. You justify this by telling me that you are not my "google boy" instead of owning your mistake like an adult. My life doesn't revolve around proofing every little trivial thing you demand answers for. It was not trivial when you posted it as proof that I was not only stupid but a law breaker. Though if you Google "shooting to wound is stupid" you'll find that it's a horrendously bad idea as it could severely diminish your claim of self defense among other reasons it's a bad idea that apply to tactics. Except for the fact that it is not true. You have yet to produce one court case where a less than lethal shot got the shooter convicted for anything.

thompsonx -> RE: Does self defense allow you to beat someone to death"? (4/6/2016 4:52:20 PM)
ORIGINAL: lovmuffin ORIGINAL: thompsonx No, it's your blustering snarky bold type posting style Posting in bold or perhaps posting in some other color besides black seems to offend you? Why? Does the color or depth of print intimidate you? Does it change the meaning of the words posted? Intimidating ?? LMAO Not at all, at least not to me. If it did not bother/intimidate you why bring it up? We all have our snarky moments but more often than not you are rude and insulting. Yup...You offer me an insult I will pass it back with tripple digit interest. Your bold type adds to that effect and makes you look like an ass. No it bothers/intimidates you. When you are rude and throw insults with your stupid bold type at other posters who are more inclined to be intimidated, especially new or less frequent posters, that makes you a bully. So yes, I find that offensive. Fido,bama,subrob,sanity,ifmaz,greta,ken and of course all of sanity's sox et al are not new or less frequent posters so give that shit a rest.

thompsonx -> RE: Does self defense allow you to beat someone to death"? (4/6/2016 4:56:34 PM)
ORIGINAL: Nnanji ORIGINAL: thompsonx ORIGINAL: BamaD .22's are different usually light, small, and with little penetration. Is that why the cia and other assasins prefer them? Is that why garry powers carried one? In fact his is quite similar to mine minus the silencer. Jesus you are phoquing stupid. Really? You know they put Scooter Libby in jail for giving away CIA secrets. You are mistaken. Bush the dumber pardoned the little punk. You should be careful how you disseminate your thoroughly researched knowledge. That data is on wiki. They even have a photo of the silenced high power .22 that powers was carrying when he was shot down. It is in a meuseam in moscow.

thompsonx -> RE: Does self defense allow you to beat someone to death"? (4/6/2016 5:04:27 PM)
ORIGINAL: Nnanji With respect I'd like to point out that statistics such as you list above are often used unreasonably. Most, if not all, of those 14-16 year olds will be gang bangers who've been banging for years by that age. If this were true you should be able to document your opinion with court cases. The anti-gun crowd always talk about kids being killed by people they know with guns. When in fact it's gang bangers killing people they know in another gang and they happen to be under the age of 25. In fact they have laws to try those bad young people, not children in any sense you'd know, in court as adults because they just aren't kids. There are some specific cases where that sort of foolishness is done. A simple google search would allow you to discover at what age medical doctors agree that the human brain is fully formed and capable of making rational decissions. There is a reason why there is an age restriction for being a congressman,senator or president in this country. It would follow from that why the age restriction for joining the military is so low. What adult with a fully formed brain would join the military?

thompsonx -> RE: Does self defense allow you to beat someone to death"? (4/6/2016 5:07:03 PM)
ORIGINAL: WinsomeDefiance I understand the distinction you are making, except I disagree with the courts trying children as adults. To me, regardless of a child's circumstances, a minor shouldn't be tried as an adult. A 14 - 16 year old is a child, in my eyes. That is my personal belief. It is also the unanimous opinion of medical doctors so it would appear that you are in good company.

Page: << < prev 23 24 [25] 26 27 next > >>

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.0625