Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => The O' Club => Topic started by: Toad on July 09, 2007, 10:26:16 PM
-
How very typical.
Texas State Lawmaker Opposing Deadly Force Bill Shoots Would-Be Thief (http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,288737,00.html)
He opposed the bill but he's quick on the draw when it's property of his own.
Also, where I live you have to have a resonable assumption that the intruder is going to do you great bodily harm or kill you and the need has to be immediate. (Not that I care a whit that he shot one of them. They didn't want to get shot, they could have decided not to steal is copper.)
IMO, it doesn't sound like this guy was in immediate danger of GBH or loss of life.
Still, it's typical of hypocritical politicians. Why do we put up with these guys?
-
Originally posted by Toad
Still, it's typical of hypocritical politicians. Why do we put up with these guys?
Shhhh.... American Idol is on.
We, as a population eligible to vote in elections and on issues (were we to register, learn about the issues, and actually go to the polls), get exactly the kinds of representatives and government we deserve.
-
True. But the problem is the dominance of the 2 parties that have dominated the last, what, 130+ years? With a democrat you pretty much know what you're getting. With a republican you pretty much roll the frikkin' dice. I vote conservatively but I really don't know what I'm getting nowadays. When I was a democrat I knew I was getting a womanising, cheating, drunkard, socialist commie bastard. Now that I am a conservative it seems they turn out to be pedophile, greedy ex-war hero, aisle-jumping, 'the bible above all else', bastard.
-
I believe my son's generation (he's 5) will revolt. It will happen, later than sooner, but it will happen.
-
Originally posted by Toad
...Also, where I live you have to have a resonable assumption that the intruder is going to do you great bodily harm or kill you and the need has to be immediate. (Not that I care a whit that he shot one of them. They didn't want to get shot, they could have decided not to steal is copper.)
IMO, it doesn't sound like this guy was in immediate danger of GBH or loss of life...
To me wheather the guy was in danger or not is beside the point. Those two criminals chose to walk the road they chose to walk and they got compensated for their time. Who cares if they mean me bodily harm or not?.....They're intruding/ tresspassing. They sure as hell aint there for milk and cookies.
Throwing a knife at a gunfight doesnt help matters much either. Its gonna sound bad me saying this, but I kinda wish the guy would have gotten a little more than being shot in the leg. I have no love for those who trespass against thy neighbor thinking they are going to get away with no repurcussions (sp?) or have no remorse doing so.
A criminal realy should have a very limited set of rights or maybe in some cases none at all after it has been determined the criminal was in the wrong. Everybody should have the right right to do process, but if they are convicted they lose the right to come after the person for shooting them when they were the ones screwing up. Do not pass go and do not collect $200. When the knife was thrown, even though it didnt hurt ot hit the guy, the situation was not one where they'd lay down on their bellies, with hands behind head, waiting for the cops to show up. I even doubt they would have stayed around anyway.
For awhile it has seemed that the politicians who want to be the ones who tell us what we need and dont need are the ones who live in some kind of personal utopia. Some of the perspectives they have on things......I just dont get it. Point and counter point is good and all, but it would be nice if they had some semblance of being down to earth. It goes for both sides actually.
I am happy the great state of Texas has allowed for the fine law abiding citizens to have the power to protect themselve and property. I work for a living. I'll be damned if somebody is going to come steal from me, thinking they are going to make the easy profit. I myself do not really want to have to shoot somebody, cause its something I'd have to live with for a good bit, but its nice to know I wont be penalized for protecting my property.
I'm curious now what the good politician is thinking in regards for being against the law.
-
diablo is correct in that with a democrat you know what you are getting.. a loss of your second amendment rights.. the guy is a democrat.
He is also correct that it is a roll of the dice with republicans but... it is a roll where only on or two numbers can bust you.. you still have a really good chance they will support the second amendment. Even if they don't.. they will vote with the party 9 out of ten times which.. in the case of the second... is a good thing.
I can't figure out how any gun owner or believer in the second would vote for a democrat.
lazs
-
I have no real concern for deadbeats/criminals. But do you kill someone over 5 pounds of copper? Wasn't there another option?
I think it adds to the hypocrisy. This guy wasn't really in danger of GBH/Death (as they put it in the CCH class). Yet he votes against a "no retreat" clause (something my state and many states have already adopted) for citizens that ARE actually in danger of GBH/Death and then shoots a guy over $100 worth of copper.
What a creep.
-
I know it's an unpopular opinion, but I think the no retreat clause is going to have it's problems.
Scenario:
Ned and Earl are best friends. Ned goes to Earl's house late on night to borrow a fishing pole out of Earl's boat but didn't calll because of the late hour. Earl hears a bump in the night, looks out the wndow and see's a prowler under the carport. Earl goes to the nightstand, retrieves his .50 DesertEagle that he bought for home defense and smokes his best friend Ned.
I've worked in Texas law enforcement for 8 years, in that time have never seen anyone have a problem defending their property even with deadly force. Maybe that's what this rep saw when he decided to oppose the law. The article stated that he was a former police officer.
-
yep.. why couldn't he have run away? What is so special about your property that you have the right to shoot someone?
Oh wait.. these are criminals who broke in... they might not be good people... perhaps they mean to do you harm? perhaps the simple fact that they are nutty enough to break into someones home is reason enough to view them as potential threats.
But.. as toad points out... have the courage of your convictions... if you don't think other peoples property or home is sacred then don't be shooting someone over a few pots and pans at your house.
do like the real moral anti gun politicians do and hire someone with a gun to protect you and your property...
do like the real moral politicians do and live in a home that will house 50 and charter jets full of servants to vacation in but buy a few trees in some depressed area to make up for your "footprint"
after all.. a politician should not be expected to suffer the hardships his laws may impose on others.
lazs
-
Texas is certainly different from Kansas.
A person is justified in using deadly force against another to protect land or tangible, movable property:
1. if he would be justified in using force against the other under Section 9.41; and
2. when and to the degree he reasonably believes the deadly force is immediately necessary:
A. to prevent the other's imminent commission of arson, burglary, robbery, aggravated robbery, theft during the nighttime, or criminal mischief during the nighttime; or
B. to prevent the other who is fleeing immediately after committing burglary, robbery, aggravated robbery, or theft during the nighttime from escaping with the property; and
3. he reasonably believes that:
A. the land or property cannot be protected or recovered by any other means; or
B. the use of force other than deadly force to protect or recover the land or property would expose the actor or another to a substantial risk of death or serious bodily injury.
Looks like this "do as I say, not as I do" lawmaker had the right to shoot to kill to protect his copper. He's still a hypocrite.
Kansas is different.
21-3213. Use of force in defense of property other than a dwelling. A person who is lawfully in possession of property other than a dwelling is justified in the threat or use of force against another for the purpose of preventing or terminating an unlawful interference with such property. Only such degree of force or threat thereof as a reasonable man would deem necessary to prevent or terminate the interference may intentionally be used.
I don't think the courts here would agree that shooting someone dead to save your fishing rod is what a reasonable man would deem necessary to prevent theft of the fishing rod.
-
Irony can be....so ironic.
68ROX
-
It's all about 'stuff' ..
My stuff is mine.
A theif wants my stuff.
If I shoot someone in my home who is tryin to take my stuff,
..he's gonna get the whole clip.
There won't be a trial.
You dont know if he's got a gun or not.
You dont know if he's on drugs/crazy/psychopathic
You do know he's not supposed to be near your stuff.
You do know he doesn't give a rats bellybutton about you or he wouldn't be there in the first place.
If you tell him to 'FREEZE' and he doesn't, he's done.
There have been several home invasions in Phoenix recently,
..quite a different scenario than the 'theif in the night'
.. these bastards force their way in at gunpoint
..and not only take your stuff, but abuse and shoot you.
They are in for a rude awakening if they want my stuff.
-GE
-
All I can say, if a man comes on me property, and he ain't supposed to be there, he's getting a full load of buckshot and blindness from the spotlight. A thief's a thief, they have no right to your property, and they have no right on your land. There shouldn't be a trial for you if you shoot someone you thought was a thief. It's their fault, they should've stayed off your property. Now, as for what rights a thief has, here are a few examples of that:
A man here in town tried to break into a home through a skylight while the owner was away. The owner came home, found him laying in the floor with a broken leg, and called the police. The thief sued the homeowner for his broken leg. He won the case.
A man tried climbing down the chimney to break into a house. (This sounds like the same guy.) He got stuck halfway down. The homeowner came home, found him up there by his yelling, and called the cops and the fire department. The homeowner tried suing him for the fact thay had to tear the chimney apart to get him out. He didn't win. The robber sued him for getting stuck in the chimney, and won.
Me papaw was working with a friend of his one night, (at an auto shop the guy owned), and heard a noise. They ran outside in time to see a guy jump over the fence and run away. Me papaw tells him not to follow him, he might have been waiting with a gun. He listens to me papaw, and they go in and call the cops. The cops get there, and they say, "Well, if he's gone, he's gone. He could be miles away by now." Well, me papaw's friend says, "Yeah, and I hope they come back, I'll beat him half to death next time." The cop gets angry aboot this and replies, "Hey now, you can't do that! I'll take you to jail if you do!" Well, me papaw's friend tells him he will be taking him to jail if he does come back. He was actually ready to fight the cop, but me papaw told him not to. I don't blame him meself, I actually would have.
This leaves me feeling real confident in our court and govment systems.
-
Originally posted by Masherbrum
I believe my son's generation (he's 5) will revolt. It will happen, later than sooner, but it will happen.
I wish they would.....
How funny would it be for guys my age.....to sit on thier front porch...rocking along with my lil ole plaid blankie coverung my lap...slight drool....THICK ole glasses......Cane next to my walker....watching the YOUNGINS fight in the streets. The next revolutionary war....new age style.
I could put my teeth in and holler at em.....
"Kick his butt sonny...hit him again...Harder....HARDER..... SHOOT HIM THEN.....There ya go..."
-
Originally posted by -Concho-
I know it's an unpopular opinion, but I think the no retreat clause is going to have it's problems.
Scenario:
Ned and Earl are best friends. Ned goes to Earl's house late on night to borrow a fishing pole out of Earl's boat but didn't calll because of the late hour. Earl hears a bump in the night, looks out the wndow and see's a prowler under the carport. Earl goes to the nightstand, retrieves his .50 DesertEagle that he bought for home defense and smokes his best friend Ned.
I've worked in Texas law enforcement for 8 years, in that time have never seen anyone have a problem defending their property even with deadly force. Maybe that's what this rep saw when he decided to oppose the law. The article stated that he was a former police officer.
More often Ned is 70-85 and hears a noise in the dark. Earl is 16-35 and has been working on his criminal record for some time. Ned catches Earl in the act of liberating his life long personal property because the elderly in many cases have collected quite a bit of it. Earl being younger and stronger incapasitates Ned along with removing his property.
Ned spends the next 3 months in the hospitel burning through his life savings and meger insurance on doctors bills. Concho could not be there to protect Ned and is not required to in any state of the U.S.. But Concho does not want us non LEO citizens to have unristricted "rights" to protect ourselves, family and property and tells us why it's not a good idea for the unwashed masses to have the right to stand our ground.
But the freashman congrass man from texas doesnt get a mention from Concho probably because of the ex-LEO background so he is one of the anointed in being able to blow away his fellow citizens when they try to steal the copper pipes from the new home he is building and throws a pocket knife at him. He shot the perp in the leg so that just shows us unanointed how much more worthy LEO's are to protect themselves than the rest of us unwased masses..................
Kinda like sewing up your own cut then mentioning it to your doctor months later and you get read the riot act because a 3 inch cut could have soo many unknown complications..........how did we ever survive before LEO's and doctors....sheeesh........... ............:rolleyes:
-
Wonder if the hypocrite will change his vote.
-
How many of you really think deadly force is justified over the theft of a fishing rod?
How many of you KNOW that your state would not prosecute you?
-
Right here. Your property is your property, whether it be a fishing rod or a car.
-
So you'd kill someone over theft of your fishing rod?
-
Yes, I would. For in the process of him taking me fishing rod, he may just want to take something else. He's already stolen one thing, what's to keep him from stealing something? Maybe, me money, me car, me life's work, me life? Thieves are thieves, they aren't going to change. Thieves will kill. Therefore, when dealing with them, it's kill or be killed.
-
Originally posted by Toad
So you'd kill someone over theft of your fishing rod?
If it came to that....yep :(
McFarland couldnt have said it better.
-
Deadly force is a means to preserve the things that can never be replaced, not to protect one's pride from the affront of a would-be thief lifting a fishing rod.
-
Pride? This is aboot your things, not your pride. What if that fishing rod were handed down from the generations? What if your papaw gave it to you? And even if you did go buy it at the local WalMart, or made it yourself, it's still YOURS. Not HIS. He is taking what belongs to you. Sure, it can be replaced. But what else will he take next once he realizes you're a soft target? Maybe you life savings? Maybe your car? Maybe your collection of antique model aircraft? Maybe your wife? Maybe your kids, for ransom? Maybe your life, if you just happen to walk in on him stealing the other things? Thieves will kill, they aren't above the law. When dealing with criminals, it's kill or be killed. I would rather defend me home than lose it.
-
Deadly force is final. There is no backspace key to return from there. There is no kings X to fix it. It is deadly, final, maximum prejudice.
I would think before firing. You have to. The only reason not to would be if you were under duress to save your life or that of a loved one.
Under the right circumstances I would not hesitate to fire at someone and would do so only with the intent to end their life, not to maim, wound, or frighten.
Word.
Mark
-
Originally posted by McFarland
A man here in town tried to break into a home through a skylight while the owner was away. The owner came home, found him laying in the floor with a broken leg, and called the police. The thief sued the homeowner for his broken leg. He won the case.
A man tried climbing down the chimney to break into a house. (This sounds like the same guy.) He got stuck halfway down. The homeowner came home, found him up there by his yelling, and called the cops and the fire department. The homeowner tried suing him for the fact thay had to tear the chimney apart to get him out. He didn't win. The robber sued him for getting stuck in the chimney, and won.
nice urban legends. BS
-
Originally posted by bustr
More often Ned is 70-85 and hears a noise in the dark. Earl is 16-35 and has been working on his criminal record for some time. Ned catches Earl in the act of liberating his life long personal property because the elderly in many cases have collected quite a bit of it. Earl being younger and stronger incapasitates Ned along with removing his property.
Ned spends the next 3 months in the hospitel burning through his life savings and meger insurance on doctors bills. Concho could not be there to protect Ned and is not required to in any state of the U.S.. But Concho does not want us non LEO citizens to have unristricted "rights" to protect ourselves, family and property and tells us why it's not a good idea for the unwashed masses to have the right to stand our ground.
But the freashman congrass man from texas doesnt get a mention from Concho probably because of the ex-LEO background so he is one of the anointed in being able to blow away his fellow citizens when they try to steal the copper pipes from the new home he is building and throws a pocket knife at him. He shot the perp in the leg so that just shows us unanointed how much more worthy LEO's are to protect themselves than the rest of us unwased masses..................
Kinda like sewing up your own cut then mentioning it to your doctor months later and you get read the riot act because a 3 inch cut could have soo many unknown complications..........how did we ever survive before LEO's and doctors....sheeesh........... ............:rolleyes:
that puts things in perspective for everyone.
-
Originally posted by Toad
So you'd kill someone over theft of your fishing rod?
A threat against personal property is the most egregious threat to our basic rights.
Rape, murder and torture are a distant 2nd, 3rd, and 4th.
-
No, those two law suits were real. They really happened, and the thiefs actually won. They aren't BS. And if it's me property, I'm going to protect it. It's taken me a long time to gather what little I have, and no thief is going to take it from me. Theft is theft, it is wrong. Thieves will kill. They could have chosen to do right, but they chose the wrong path. So they are going to pay for it. Any man that comes on me land, and I wasn't asked beforehand, is going to get shot. He just chose the wrong path. Granted, I'll yell at him asking his business, and if I don't get a reply, or he tries to run, he won't go far. And he makes any quick moves, he's had it. Me land is me land, it's mine, and not his. No man has the rights to something another man has.
-
Originally posted by bustr
More often Ned is 70-85 and hears a noise in the dark. Earl is 16-35 and has been working on his criminal record for some time. Ned catches Earl in the act of liberating his life long personal property because the elderly in many cases have collected quite a bit of it. Earl being younger and stronger incapasitates Ned along with removing his property.
Ned spends the next 3 months in the hospitel burning through his life savings and meger insurance on doctors bills. Concho could not be there to protect Ned and is not required to in any state of the U.S.. But Concho does not want us non LEO citizens to have unristricted "rights" to protect ourselves, family and property and tells us why it's not a good idea for the unwashed masses to have the right to stand our ground.
But the freashman congrass man from texas doesnt get a mention from Concho probably because of the ex-LEO background so he is one of the anointed in being able to blow away his fellow citizens when they try to steal the copper pipes from the new home he is building and throws a pocket knife at him. He shot the perp in the leg so that just shows us unanointed how much more worthy LEO's are to protect themselves than the rest of us unwased masses..................
Kinda like sewing up your own cut then mentioning it to your doctor months later and you get read the riot act because a 3 inch cut could have soo many unknown complications..........how did we ever survive before LEO's and doctors....sheeesh........... ............:rolleyes:
Don't put words in my mouth donuthead. All I'm saying is that people should be held to the same standard as the police and a have a REASON to use deadly force, not just because you can.
You can bet your bellybutton the first person that kills another just because they are on their property will be charged with murder.
-
McFarland,
Look up the word "my" and learn to use it.
People will take you a bit more seriously if you don’t write like your working on the script for Deliverance II.
-
Originally posted by eskimo2
McFarland,
Look up the word "my" and learn to use it.
People will take you a bit more seriously if you don’t write like your working on the script for Deliverance II.
:rofl :rofl :rofl
I wanted to say it, but you beat me to it!!!
-
I talk the way I write. I write the way I talk. So I talk with a Scottish accent, be glad I don't write withn a redneck accent. At least I actually use English. Unlike some users of this forum. But, if it makes you feel better, I'll use my.
-
Originally posted by Toad
So you'd kill someone over theft of your fishing rod?
Depends. Did he break into my house in the middle of the night and threaten me at gunpoint to take it or run out of my garage on a Saturday afternoon while I was mowing the grass?
-
Originally posted by AKIron
Depends. Did he break into my house in the middle of the night and threaten me at gunpoint to take it or run out of my garage on a Saturday afternoon while I was mowing the grass?
Circumstance is everything.
good post.
-
Well, as I said in my state, Kansas, the CCH law is written that specifically delineates when you can use deadly force. The law allows for you to defend yourself using deadly force if you have a “reasonable fear of imminent death or great bodily harm to such person’s self or another.” This includes someone in the act of breaking into your dwelling or vehicle.
I'm comfortable with that; I'm not going to kill someone unless I reasonably believe it is "kill or be killed".
In defense of other property, our laws say:
"A person who is lawfully in possession of property other than a dwelling is justified in the threat or use of force against another for the purpose of preventing or terminating an unlawful interference with such property. Only such degree of force or threat thereof as a reasonable man would deem necessary to prevent or terminate the interference may intentionally be used."
So if some doofus tries to walk off with my fishing rod, I can't just kill him outright. Nor would I really want to do so.
-
Even in Texas you can't shoot someone running off with your property. I don't recall the exact verbiage but Texas does grant more latitude to the gun possessing resident at night.
-
Originally posted by AKIron
Depends. Did he break into my house in the middle of the night and threaten me at gunpoint to take it or run out of my garage on a Saturday afternoon while I was mowing the grass?
Why does it matter? He is trespassing against you. Isnt that reason enough to put a permanent stop to it to keep the theif from going on to do the same or worse to someone else? Granted its nothing I dont think any one of us would like to do, but doing anything less is saying its ok for it to keep happening.
Its been shown in alot of cases that our correctional facilities dont work. A prosecuted criminal will pretty much always stay a crminal. Some catch a snap and straighten out and I think in those instances its safe to say you wont have to worry about drawing down on those individuals.
I'm sorry I dont have alot of faith in humanity as a whole. If somebody is tresspassing against you in anyway, please consider pulling the trigger. Stop the problem then and there. Stop prison overcrowding and please help save money that would be used to rehabilitate something that cant be rehabilitated. They lost their chance at rehabilitation when they crossed the line and trespassed against a fellow neighbor. They had all the power to prevent the moment they ceased to exist.
:noid
-
Everything he lurnt he lurnt from his papaw.
-
So wolf, you are going to shoot someone for trespassing on your property?
Your neighbors kids are walking across your yard and one has something that looks lik a fishing rod you own, so you're going to use deadly force on him?? I suppose no one else could possibly own a fishing rod like yours so you would know it was actually your $10.00 zebco rod he was walking away with.You honestly think that is grounds to kill them?
-
Originally posted by Wolf14
Why does it matter? He is trespassing against you. Isnt that reason enough to put a permanent stop to it to keep the theif from going on to do the same or worse to someone else? Granted its nothing I dont think any one of us would like to do, but doing anything less is saying its ok for it to keep happening.
Its been shown in alot of cases that our correctional facilities dont work. A prosecuted criminal will pretty much always stay a crminal. Some catch a snap and straighten out and I think in those instances its safe to say you wont have to worry about drawing down on those individuals.
I'm sorry I dont have alot of faith in humanity as a whole. If somebody is tresspassing against you in anyway, please consider pulling the trigger. Stop the problem then and there. Stop prison overcrowding and please help save money that would be used to rehabilitate something that cant be rehabilitated. They lost their chance at rehabilitation when they crossed the line and trespassed against a fellow neighbor. They had all the power to prevent the moment they ceased to exist.
:noid
This outta really mess up the issue...what if the person assaults you. do you shoot him?
shamus
-
Originally posted by Maverick
So wolf, you are going to shoot someone for trespassing on your property?
Your neighbors kids are walking across your yard and one has something that looks lik a fishing rod you own, so you're going to use deadly force on him?? I suppose no one else could possibly own a fishing rod like yours so you would know it was actually your $10.00 zebco rod he was walking away with.You honestly think that is grounds to kill them?
There are times when a person needs to shoot first and ask questions later and times when its beneficial to ask questions first. The scenerio you describe is an instance to of course ask questions first.
The situation Shamus points out is the type of Situation where I would hope to shoot the guy comming to assault me before he assaults me. Any move toward me after asking him to cease all actions is a premeditated assault in my book. I really would try to let the fella know he is going to die if he makes any move that causes me to feel threatened. Course if he is already assaulting me, then he is to close and the talk part is over with. Granted it could be a situation where I could die by my own gun, but at least I can choose to defend myself as opposed to someone telling me I cant because the criminal has rights to.
-
wow.
-
Originally posted by McFarland
No, those two law suits were real. They really happened, and the thiefs actually won. They aren't BS.
give me one case number.. a name... a judge... anything. BS
-
Originally posted by Wolf14
Why does it matter? He is trespassing against you. Isnt that reason If somebody is tresspassing against you in anyway, please consider pulling the trigger. Stop the problem then and there. Stop prison overcrowding and please
Judge, jury, and executioner.
I will read about you some day:
Man shoots neighbor as neighbor retrieves his son's baseball from the shooter's front yard.
You are either a troll or very foolish and I'm pretty darned conservative.
-
Originally posted by SteveBailey
Judge, jury, and executioner.
I will read about you some day:
Man shoots neighbor as neighbor retrieves his son's baseball from the shooter's front yard.
You are either a troll or very foolish and I'm pretty darned conservative.
Sorry I was being somewhat sarcastic.
Part of the whole thing to me is being responsible enough to tulips the situation, but not hesitating when it goes bad. Some people are in fear of what will happen to them because the law dictates in alot of cases that the criminal has more rights than they do. That should never be the case. Commin through my door or on my property uninvited is sure as hell gonna have me pulling a gun on somebody. Doesnt say or mean I'm itching to pull the trigger. I am telling them in no uncertain terms that "I" am in control of the situation, a resolution can be reached, and "I" am to dictate what happens at all times. More than likely what will happen, providing they are smart and do what I say, is me calling the cops and the cops escort them off my property with tresspassing charges being filed. I dont play. They are not supposed to be in my yard or in my house. I have signs posted. hopefully after its all said and done with they have a refresher course on what those signs mean.
I also dont have to worry about my neighbors because they call me or knock on the door before entering my yard. They even have the courtesy to call me to let me know they were in my yard even when I'm not at home. I have had to get into their yard on occasion and I reciprocate the gesture. Its the polite respectful thing to do.
Now two weekends ago, I was walking out my door to go shoot. I see two young hispanic youths across the street thumbing through somebodies pocket book. They see me watching, drop the pocket book, and go on to try and break into somebody elses car. They werent real smart. I call the cops and while on the phone with the dispatcher they proceed to leave the area, but not beofre stopping and going through somebody elses car. Long story short, Cops caught them within 15 minutes of my call and I got to smile and wave at the two when I ID them. Another neighbor also ID the two and went as far as to suggest they are put in a cell to be someones butt toy. Now that would have been some poetic justice wouldnt you say?
I could have pulled my gun and stopped them. I didnt. If the situation required it, I wouldnt have hesitated regardless of age. I wont like having to do it, but along the lines of what McFarland said, I'm not going to give them the chance to hurt me or go on to hurt others. I'd rather be tried by twelve than carried by six.
-
I never did find the kid who stole my bike back in 82. I'm gonna reopen that cold case, find that kid, and kill him. It's my right!
-
concho... I am saying that anyone who breaks into my home and makes any move that could be construed as threatening is fair game to shoot.. I would be foolish to not.
I think that you have more constraints and that you should have. you are rarely defending your own property as a policeman and... you are uniformed and armed and confront people all the time. you are the person initiating contact in most cases.
These are subtle but real differences.
lazs
-
Originally posted by SteveBailey
You are either a troll or very foolish and I'm pretty darned conservative.
I think you have it pretty well nailed here Steve.
-
Stealing someone`s car...they might get away without being shot if they held real still.
Stealing cash.......they might get away without being shot if they held real still.
Stealing jewelry, TVs, stereos, etc. ..........they might get away without being shot if they held real still.
But stealing a man`s fishing rod????? Horrendous, devious and most of all dangerous.
Get the rope boys. I`ll meet ya down by the big old oak tree. ;)
-
I love living in Kennesaw, Ga. It is required by city ordnance to own a firearm. If you get broke into and you don't have a gun you can be fined. This may seem silly but crime in Kennesaw is very low. This is one of the few places in metro Atlanta where women, elders, young teens can run, walk and have fun at night with no fear of being robbed or assaulted.
Anti-gun types can say what they like. Kennesaw is proof that a pro-gun system works. Yes we still have crime in Kennesaw, but it violent crime doesn't happen to often.
The self defensive law was passes a few years ago here in Ga. In that time it has been used a few different times. It has saved lives and prevented more lives lost or ruined. Cops are not always around.
-
Originally posted by lazs2
concho... I am saying that anyone who breaks into my home and makes any move that could be construed as threatening is fair game to shoot.. I would be foolish to not.
I think that you have more constraints and that you should have. you are rarely defending your own property as a policeman and... you are uniformed and armed and confront people all the time. you are the person initiating contact in most cases.
These are subtle but real differences.
lazs
Sorry for the late reply, it's been a long day.
I just wanted to say those are very good points, we do initate most contacts that result in deadly situations. Proactive policing is a good policy to have in my opinion.
In the same manner that we have meat-headed cops with lack of training, expirence, or both infulence case law with their bad decisions this law will be influenced by people that lack good judgement. We've seen a few in this thread.
As long as a man uses good common sense their should be no need for such a statute.
-
Originally posted by Toad
How many of you really think deadly force is justified over the theft of a fishing rod?
How many of you KNOW that your state would not prosecute you?
Thus far I'd say 2 people have a clue about deadly force, the others will end up serving time for manslaughter or murder on top of being sued by the suspects family if they ever followed through with what they think they know.
Laws vary, but 1 word had better define the use of deadly force; "reasonable"... and even that varies a-lot, some DAs like to redefine it.
I had a call of a Joe Plumber dude who is awakened a 2am by noises in his unattached garage, his house alarm status was secure. He disables the alarm and goes out back to have a look seeing two suspects, 1 look out, 1 inside with a flashlight. Joe runs inside the house, grabs his .45 and runs back outside, the end result was he shot & wounded both of them after one of the little thugs simulated a weapon.
I had no problem with it, NHI IMO, and wrote it as self defense, but weeks later the DA calls me.. it's his opinion that Joes actions were not entirely reasonable and he's considering charges.
The DA opined that after going outside seeing the suspects and going inside to arm himself, Joe should have stayed inside the safety of his alarmed house, armed himself to defend his family and called the police... going back outside to confront 2 suspects was "unreasonable" since, as the DA decided, nobodies safety was in immediate danger.
Common sense prevailed, after the DA 'investigated' for a year, and no charges were filed.
Total BS like this is exactly what one can expect, some DAs are frik'n morons like that. Imagine a similar scenario some place in Texas with a "hang em high" DA, Joe plumber would get a well deserved medal for teaching two thug criminals a lesson.
-
Well, that is what is wrong with this world. Self defence is gone. Idiot lawmakers and lawyers think that the criminals have the same rights as the honest man. Which they don't. Someone tries stealing form me, I'll fill him with buckshot. The most basic right we have is to protect ourselves from dishonest men. In that situation above, by the time the police got there, the suspects would have been long gone, and the police would have said, "Nothing we can do here, they're gone." The man did what was right. If more people did that, you would see a sharp decline in crime levels.
-
Originally posted by McFarland
Self defence is gone.
Don't confuse self defense with defense of property.
-
concho... I am not saying that cops do a poor job or that they shouldn't use deadly force... I believe the opposite in fact.
I am just saying that you can't compare police force to civilian force. I not only think that cops can be trusted with deadly force... I also think that more than 99% of my fellow citizens can.
lazs
-
Self defence and defence of property are one and the same. Your property is yours, not his. You worked hard for what you have, and some freeloader does not have the rights to it.
-
Originally posted by McFarland
Self defence and defence of property are one and the same. Your property is yours, not his. You worked hard for what you have, and some freeloader does not have the rights to it.
So how much property value is a life worth? If someone is stealing your kids skateboard from your lawn are you going to shoot them?
-
Laz I follow you, it's just the 1% (like macfarland) that are going to infulence the out come.
I think every man has the right to defend himself to the highest degree when threatened, but listening to guys like macfarland beat his chest about how he would kill a person over class b theft of property scares the hell out of me.
My very own brother did 6 weeks in county over a theft charge. He paid his restitution and now he is a father, business owner, and good citizen. People can change their lives with the proper influence.
-
If they try to run, yes.
-
Originally posted by Maverick
So how much property value is a life worth? If someone is stealing your kids skateboard from your lawn are you going to shoot them?
Mav he is either very young, a troll, or possibly a leprechaun hell bent on saving his lucky charms.
-
Originally posted by McFarland
Yes, I would. For in the process of him taking me fishing rod, he may just want to take something else. He's already stolen one thing, what's to keep him from stealing something? Maybe, me money, me car, me life's work, me life? Thieves are thieves, they aren't going to change. Thieves will kill. Therefore, when dealing with them, it's kill or be killed.
Oh, so if someone is stealing something, they deserve to be killed?
What if you own a store & someone is taking something? Shoot em...
What if it is a 14 yr old kid taking a candy bar? Shoot em?
It is property just like a fishing pole.
What an Idiot. Just keep your hick *** in TN.
-
McFarland either you are a very very obvious troll or a truly foolish person who should never be allowed near moving machinery.
Stealing a skateboard is hardly any rational person's idea of a capitol offense, especially when there is no threat to anyone involved.
-
The thing is, first it's a skateboard, then maybe a bicycle. Then a car. Thieves, once they get away with something, will keep doing it. They just found the easy life. If it's just a skateboard, I may just shoot him in the leg or foot to keep him from running, and then only if he moves. But around here, the things they are going to be stealing will be worth far more. I've had them try to steal a radio out of me car, tried to steal me copper wiring for electrical work, tried to steal me engine, they've broken into me garage and stolen a lot of things while I'm gone, they've poisoned me dogs so they wouldn't be any trouble or noise from them, and they've tried stealing me car (I think I winged him that time.) They've done other things, like cut me radiator hoses, cut me oil lines on me car, put sand in me carburators, cut me battery wires, and slit me tires. And when I catch them, I will shoot them. It's called justice. Something you guys obviously don't know aboot.
-
My brother can be absent minded at times. He and I were driving cross country once. Fifteen minutes after a stop my brother exclaimed that he forgot to pay for the soda he was drinking. I knew that he’d turn around; less than a minute later he did. We drove back and he paid for it. Good thing they hadn’t noticed and shot him; it would be a shame to die with a wife and two small children after making an honest mistake.
-
Originally posted by McFarland
The thing is, first it's a skateboard, then maybe a bicycle. Then a car. Thieves, once they get away with something, will keep doing it. They just found the easy life. If it's just a skateboard, I may just shoot him in the leg or foot to keep him from running, and then only if he moves. But around here, the things they are going to be stealing will be worth far more. I've had them try to steal a radio out of me car, tried to steal me copper wiring for electrical work, tried to steal me engine, they've broken into me garage and stolen a lot of things while I'm gone, they've poisoned me dogs so they wouldn't be any trouble or noise from them, and they've tried stealing me car (I think I winged him that time.) They've done other things, like cut me radiator hoses, cut me oil lines on me car, put sand in me carburators, cut me battery wires, and slit me tires. And when I catch them, I will shoot them. It's called justice. Something you guys obviously don't know aboot.
Maybe they were just irritated with your grammar?
-
Aint nothing wrong with me grammar. Everyone here talks with worse grammar than I type with. And we are proud of our language.
-
%#$@ busin my crib iza pop a cap in hiz az! BAM! BAM! BAM! HE DED! i shows dat mofo bowt respect
ax my homies dem say don #$% wit me
-
McFarland,
What’s your impression of someone who would write like I did in the above post? Many people talk and write that way. They also are proud of the way they talk and think there’s nothing wrong with it. Do you think that anyone outside of their world would take them seriously or respect their opinion? To many of us, the way you write is just another flavor of the uneducated. Hood and sticks have much in common.
-
mcfarland... that is why we have a "reasonable man" jury system. I don't think a reasonable man would not convict you if you shot a person running away after stealing your sons skateboard.
I think you are just making noise because I don't think you would either. I have faith that you are not that nutty. also...
not everything your "paw" tells you is gospel my grandfather came here from scotland... his dad beat him till he got rid of the accent.
The fact that yours did not proves that he doesn't have your welfare at heart.
lazs
-
Our language is dying, we are doing the best we can to preserve it. The younger generations are slowly forgetting it. And the old ones who know it well are dying out. Extinction of the Appalachian language would be a very great tragedy. Me papaw does have me welfare and good being at heart. And the good being and welfare of Appalachia. And yes, there are very big differences betwixt the "hood" and Appalachia. One is a disturbing neighborhood in a city where violence is everywhere. The other is a peaceful place where farmers and mechanics live, and the soil is rich and fertile. And I'm not uneducated. I'm very much the opposite. I know chemistry, biology, ecology, mechanics, physics, electronics, entomology, herpetology, and several other sciences. I know farming, animals, animal care, and many other things that farmers need to know, such as planting by the signs. I know how to build car engines, and how to soup them up for racing. We aren't the sticks. We are very smart people, just because we prefer to live like our ancestors and farm and hunt, doesn't mean we are uneducated. We know proper English, but we don't speak it. We prefer our simpler language, it's easier to talk and slower, and very easily understood. Just because you don't understand something is no reason to think it is bad.
-
Originally posted by -Concho-
Mav he is either very young, a troll, or possibly a leprechaun hell bent on saving his lucky charms.
:lol :rofl :lol :rofl :lol :rofl :lol :rofl
-
Originally posted by McFarland
The thing is, first it's a skateboard, then maybe a bicycle. Then a car. Thieves, once they get away with something, will keep doing it. They just found the easy life. If it's just a skateboard, I may just shoot him in the leg or foot to keep him from running, and then only if he moves. But around here, the things they are going to be stealing will be worth far more. I've had them try to steal a radio out of me car, tried to steal me copper wiring for electrical work, tried to steal me engine, they've broken into me garage and stolen a lot of things while I'm gone, they've poisoned me dogs so they wouldn't be any trouble or noise from them, and they've tried stealing me car (I think I winged him that time.) They've done other things, like cut me radiator hoses, cut me oil lines on me car, put sand in me carburators, cut me battery wires, and slit me tires. And when I catch them, I will shoot them. It's called justice. Something you guys obviously don't know aboot.
You know, sometimes when you post it's as if you've had a moment of clarity, well thought out and written. Then , more often, your posts resemble this one, ignorant and full of BS.
I can tell you this of justice as a father of two young boys, if you ever shot one of them dead for threatening your life or the lives of your loved ones, I'd bury him and ask your forgiveness. If you'd shot and killed one of them for a petty theft offense, I'd hunt you down and take you out Jack Ruby style. Plain and simple and I'm certain theres more than one father in here that would agree.
-
The language used in East Tenn/Appiliacia are amoung the oldest forms of the english language known, and directly related to old english, predating many other dialectes in the USA.
And I wonder, if a 'fishing pole' is all an individual owns...and yes, known people who would have felt blessed to own such... should you defend your property?
There are many sides to this, should one shoot a child for shoplifting? Seems a stretch to consider such... but it happens. And officers/police have been shot for tresspass and killed w/shooter walks...see Texas property laws prior to about 1988(ain't takin time look it up, help yourself)..there may yet be decisions going either way...
The situation is ALWAYS unique.
The best defence is securing your property.
While police get there after what happens, inevitibly it is up to the individual to watch out for there own.
Concho is blessed to not be visiting a grave. His relative was on the road there...
And...most criminals strike a location multiple times, until stopped, one way or another. The fact that the criminal MAYBE rehabilitaed should allow them to steal UNTIL they threaten life? Might be too late.
And Mav, respect ya, but gotta disagree. If your threatened, you'll let em go if they just take a fishing pole?
-
And as a postscript, was there not a well known California Lawmaker who shot a teenager for SWIMMING IN HIS POOL W/O PERMISSION? I beleive that liberial lawmaker, who claimed 'NO ONE SHOULD OWN A GUN' WALKED...
When laws in a country only protect the rich, the contected, the powerful, that country is on the road to ....what?
-
Originally posted by Groth
The language used in East Tenn/Appiliacia are amoung the oldest forms of the english language known, and directly related to old english, predating many other dialectes in the USA.
that's Appilachia, dialects, and oh yeah, olde english...
-
McFarland really confuses me. First he acts weird about some topics, and then he comes out and hits the nail on the head for others.
Of course he is right, any imaginary line drawn about whether or not it is worth it to violently defend your property will be pushed further and further back until you're not allowed to defend yourself. Hell, we're practically there.
It's either right to defend ALL OF YOUR PROPERTY, or NONE OF IT. With the second option, you've jumped head first into the idea that there is no such thing as personal property. Welcome to communism.
-
Mr McGroin..(hope I'm not presumptious to a Miss or Mrs)thanks for spelling update.... good job:)
Anything WORTHWHILE to add to disscussion?
-
Originally posted by Holden McGroin
that's Appilachia
Actually, it's Appalachia.
-
Originally posted by McFarland
Actually, it's Appalachia.
Word it didn't catch it, so I accepted Bill's word for it. Then I hit the return key and show nuff, the red squiggley line went unnerneath it. Some beech.
-
some beech
So now it's a tree? Wow, things change really fast here. :lol
-
The law should protect the law abider. I think most sane people are not going to shoot someone over theft unless they feel threatened or what is being stolen is very important to them. I think the law should allow for the use of deadly force in defense of your property if nothing more than as a deterrent. Let the thief beware.
-
Originally posted by McFarland
I've had them try to steal a radio out of me car, tried to steal me copper wiring for electrical work, tried to steal me engine, they've broken into me garage and stolen a lot of things while I'm gone, they've poisoned me dogs so they wouldn't be any trouble or noise from them, and they've tried stealing me car (I think I winged him that time.) They've done other things, like cut me radiator hoses, cut me oil lines on me car, put sand in me carburators, cut me battery wires, and slit me tires.
Originally posted by McFarland
And yes, there are very big differences betwixt the "hood" and Appalachia. One is a disturbing neighborhood in a city where violence is everywhere. The other is a peaceful place where farmers and mechanics live, and the soil is rich and fertile.
Sounds like one in the same to me.
-
The thefts and problems are from the migrating construction workers. They know they can't be tracked very easily, so they think they will get away with stealing. I've watched them steal from other people, and then laughed as they got the heck beat out of them. Serves them right.
-
Opps, typed faster than I read:)
-
Sorry.
-
Originally posted by -Concho-
Mav he is either very young, a troll, or possibly a leprechaun hell bent on saving his lucky charms.
OMG, how did I miss that the first time...? That's the funniest thing I've read all day. I think it's true as well; McFarland is a eprechaun!
(http://www.pappasblog.com/wp-content/uploads/2006/05/lucky%20charms21.jpg)
-
Originally posted by -Concho-
Sounds like one in the same to me.
The cops are bad too.
-
Originally posted by Groth
Mr McGroin..(hope I'm not presumptious to a Miss or Mrs)thanks for spelling update.... good job:)
Anything WORTHWHILE to add to disscussion?
Let's see...
Originally posted by Groth
Please deleate this post
Originally posted by Groth
Opps, typed faster than I read:)
Certainly nothing to post up to your standards... sorry... ;)
wait I might have something...
Miles, a former law enforcement officer, shot the man in the left leg, police said. The wounded suspect was being treated at a Houston hospital. Police were trying to identify the other suspect.
So somebody who opposes deadly force shoots a man in the leg instead of the chest or taking a head shot...
So where is the hypocrisy again?
-
Originally posted by eskimo2
The cops are bad too.
from the sound of it there aren't any there at all.
-
Originally posted by Holden McGroin
So somebody who opposes deadly force shoots a man in the leg instead of the chest or taking a head shot...
So where is the hypocrisy again?
If he shoots like most cops, he missed his target but still managed to hit him in the leg.
-
mcfarland.. glad to give you a chance to rant but I never said you were uneducated or a theif.
What I did say was that you are full of it and that you would not shoot a kid running away from your yard after stealing some minor item. some petty theft where the thief was no threat to you or anyone..
If you shot at him stealing your car it might even be a little different.. he is stealing a potentialy deadly weapon...
you would have to explain it to a jury in any case.. if you have a good case you will win.
As was said.. if you killed my kid while he was breaking into your home and threatening you.. I would bury him and tell you I was sorry... If you killed him because he wandered onto your land and picked up some interesting junk he thought was abandoned...
I would hunt you down and kill you and take MY chances with a jury.
lazs
-
I'm sure that since mcfarland likes the idea of applying deadly force to a misdemeanor he would agree that shooting a domestic abuse violator would be the prudent thing to do. After all, striking their spouse / "significant other" can only lead to a life of desperate crime and gang land style killings. We must not allow that to happen so anyone who does cause physical injury in a case like that must be shot.
-
I am going to start shooting tailgater's, after all, they are "assaulting" me.
shamus
-
People who take too long at the ATM are stealing my time while I wait behind them. Bang! I really hate that.
I even shot myself for it once.
-
Criminals must learn that they chose the wrong path. If someone is stealing from me, I'll shoot him. It's me right to defend me property. I have no tresspassing signs up. That should tell them something right there. Disregard those, and you are a threat. Are you saying if someone went onto the White House lawn, and started walking around, he wouldn't be shot on sight? Because that's how it's supposed to be. If someone is on me property, I don't know if they are here to kill me, steal from me, or what. So I'm going to defend meself. And if they are stealing, they won't hesitate to kill me. So it's kill or be killed.
-
how many UPS drivers have you shot lately? Hope no one ever sends you flowers.
Thanks for the warning tho.. if I ever break down in your part of the country I will know not to go up to a house for help.
please... never leave your area.. I don't want your kind anywhere near me. You are a dangerous fruitcake or a troll. I am not sure which.
lazs
-
Originally posted by McFarland
Criminals must learn that they chose the wrong path. If someone is stealing from me, I'll shoot him. It's me right to defend me property. I have no tresspassing signs up. That should tell them something right there. Disregard those, and you are a threat. Are you saying if someone went onto the White House lawn, and started walking around, he wouldn't be shot on sight? Because that's how it's supposed to be. If someone is on me property, I don't know if they are here to kill me, steal from me, or what. So I'm going to defend meself. And if they are stealing, they won't hesitate to kill me. So it's kill or be killed.
Translation:
Children must be learn’in that tey chose the wrong path. If someone t’is stealing me Lucky Charms, I'll pop the lad in the bollocks with me Lucky Gun. It's me right to defend me property of Hearts, Stars, and Horseshoes, Clovers, Blue Moons, Pots of Gold, Rainbows, and me Red Balloons! I have no Lucky Trespassing signs up. That should tell em sometin right ter. They're Always After me Lucky Charms! Pay tem no mind, and you are a threat. Are you saying if someone went onto the Lucky White House lawn, and started walking around, he wouldn't be shot on sight? Right. Because tat's how it's posed ta be. If someone is on me Lucky Property, I don't know if they are here to kill me, steal me Lucky Charms from me, or what. So I'm going to defend meself. And if they are stealing, tey won't hesitate to kill me. So it's kill or have em steal me Lucky Charms.
-
Originally posted by McFarland
Are you saying if someone went onto the White House lawn, and started walking around, he wouldn't be shot on sight?
No, I'm not saying that. The US Secret Service is saying someone walking around on the White House lawn would not be shot on sight.
[WASHINGTON (CNN) Sunday, April 9, 2006-- A New Mexico man arrested for jumping the White House fence Sunday has been arrested for the same thing three times before, a Secret Service spokesman said.
In you misguided mind, he should have been shot each of the three times before.
But because the Secret Service has intelligent people working for them, with clear, intelligent guidelines, the loony was merely arrested.
Eric Zahren, a spokesman for the Secret Service, said "incidents like Sunday's are a "fairly regular" occurrence".
Fairly regular, yet the Secret Service hasn't racked up a McFarland-tall pile of bodies.
You know why? Because 99.9% of these clowns do not present an immediate threat of great bodily injury or death to anyone.
Something for you to ponder when you are playing your banjo.
-
Originally posted by lazs2
how many UPS drivers have you shot lately? Hope no one ever sends you flowers.
Thanks for the warning tho.. if I ever break down in your part of the country I will know not to go up to a house for help.
please... never leave your area.. I don't want your kind anywhere near me. You are a dangerous fruitcake or a troll. I am not sure which.
lazs
Nay, I didn't say you couldn't walk up the driveway, I said you couldn't be on me property. That means in the pastures, or walking around me house. You can come up and knock on me door. And I'll help you, but the pistol will be staying on me hip. I don't shoot people going down the road, nor walking up me driveway, as long as they stay in me driveway and don't go into the pastures or around me house.
-
Originally posted by Toad
How many of you really think deadly force is justified over the theft of a fishing rod?
How many of you KNOW that your state would not prosecute you?
Toad,
Please post your phone number so I can call you over if someone is stealing my stuff. I would appreciate you going out there and asking the perp to wait while you inventory his loot to see what he has and then break out the adding machine to get the dollar amount. Just think you may be saving an important useful life of a thief from some scum homeowner, like myself, with a gun.
PS Bring your own flashlight because your friend in my garage or yard may have already aquired mine.
-
Why would you want me to do that? Is there some dollar amount of property that is worth killing a man to protect? How many dollars does it take to make you pull the trigger? $5? $15? 25 cents?
From my cursory reading of Texas law, it may be permissible for you to shoot someone stealing your fishing rod.
Go right ahead; I don't have to live with it on my conscience, you do.
I suppose if you Texans catch some hungry man stealing your freshly baked apple pie off the window sill, you'll have no compunction about pumping a few .40 Short & Weaks into him from your pistol. Good for you!
I'm pretty sure I'd just let him have the apple pie.
-
He' referring to you going out into harm's way to see if he is a thief or just there cause he is, which there is no reason for.
-
If it was a starving man stealing an apple pie off a window sill, I'd probably help him out and let him keep the pie, and a good meal. I've been there. But I didn't steal anything. I just starved till the crops finally came in a week late.
-
Originally posted by McFarland
If it was a starving man stealing an apple pie off a window seal, I'd probably help him out and let him keep the pie, and a good meal. I've been there. But I didn't steal anything. I just starved till the crops finally came in a week late.
sill. A seal is the caulk around the window itself. You're welcome.
-
Thankee.
-
Originally posted by eskimo2
Translation:
Children must be learn’in that tey chose the wrong path. If someone t’is stealing me Lucky Charms, I'll pop the lad in the bollocks with me Lucky Gun. It's me right to defend me property of Hearts, Stars, and Horseshoes, Clovers, Blue Moons, Pots of Gold, Rainbows, and me Red Balloons! I have no Lucky Trespassing signs up. That should tell em sometin right ter. They're Always After me Lucky Charms! Pay tem no mind, and you are a threat. Are you saying if someone went onto the Lucky White House lawn, and started walking around, he wouldn't be shot on sight? Right. Because tat's how it's posed ta be. If someone is on me Lucky Property, I don't know if they are here to kill me, steal me Lucky Charms from me, or what. So I'm going to defend meself. And if they are stealing, tey won't hesitate to kill me. So it's kill or have em steal me Lucky Charms.
:rofl :rofl :rofl :rofl :rofl :rofl
That, my friend, is the funniest thing I've read in a long time. Good stuff!!!:D
-
Originally posted by McFarland
All I can say, if a man comes on me property, and he ain't supposed to be there, he's getting a full load of buckshot and blindness from the spotlight. A thief's a thief, they have no right to your property, and they have no right on your land. There shouldn't be a trial for you if you shoot someone you thought was a thief.
Originally posted by McFarland
If it was a starving man stealing an apple pie off a window sill, I'd probably help him out and let him keep the pie, and a good meal. I've been there. But I didn't steal anything. I just starved till the crops finally came in a week late.
See? Maybe it's not all in vain. You seem to have learned at least a little bit already!
Congrats!
-
Originally posted by -Concho-
Don't put words in my mouth donuthead. All I'm saying is that people should be held to the same standard as the police and a have a REASON to use deadly force, not just because you can.
You can bet your bellybutton the first person that kills another just because they are on their property will be charged with murder.
No Concho, you give us a rediculous scenario that happens infrequently. About as often as hunting dogs step on shotguns shooting their owners. Rather than the translation I did which happens with regularity to the elderly and other ages of property owners in the U.S.
You give no indication that you have any respect for the judgment of your fellow citizens. Even in your above citation you still place the police before the citizen.
I repeat: how did we ever get by before doctors and policemen?
-
Originally posted by bustr
No Concho, you give us a rediculous scenario that happens infrequently. About as often as hunting dogs step on shotguns shooting their owners. Rather than the translation I did which happens with regularity to the elderly and other ages of property owners in the U.S.
You give no indication that you have any respect for the judgment of your fellow citizens. Even in your above citation you still place the police before the citizen.
I repeat: how did we ever get by before doctors and policemen?
Ther are plenty of islands in the pacific without either.
-
Originally posted by -Concho-
Ther are plenty of islands in the pacific without either.
Didn't know you were moving, please send us pictures.
The rest of us U.S. Citizens will contiue to get by with the excellent judgment we have always exercised. Considering that the U.S. population is over 250M and non suicide firearm related deaths number +-16,000 per year with a preponderance by criminals to criminals, police to criminals and police accidental to Citizens. I would suspect the police have a higher incident of accidental shootings than Ned and his freind types.
I'm more scared of +-120,000 accidental deaths by doctors and accidental shootings by over worked night shift police men here in Oakland. But then isn't New York city the police accidental shooting capitol of the U.S.? Serveral hundred rounds at a time for pulling a wallet out...............
-
Originally posted by bustr
Didn't know you were moving, please send us pictures.
The rest of us U.S. Citizens will contiue to get by with the excellent judgment we have always exercised. Considering that the U.S. population is over 250M and non suicide firearm related deaths number +-16,000 per year with a preponderance by criminals to criminals, police to criminals and police accidental to Citizens. I would suspect the police have a higher incident of accidental shootings than Ned and his freind types.
I'm more scared of +-120,000 accidental deaths by doctors and accidental shootings by over worked night shift police men here in Oakland. But then isn't New York city the police accidental shooting capitol of the U.S.? Serveral hundred rounds at a time for pulling a wallet out...............
just out of curiosity what do you do for a living?
no animosity intended.
-
Originally posted by -Concho-
Mav he is either very young, a troll, or possibly a leprechaun hell bent on saving his lucky charms.
Nope Mcfarland is either Mrblack come back as an Irishmen, or a short yellow bus rider.
He is the type of gun owner that makes gun owners look like ignorant redneck trash to normal people.
If it is beat1e its his greatest troll ever.
-
Who or what is "beat1e"? And as for shooting people on me property, the only ways on to me property are: climb up a tall wooded ridge, which means leaving the road some 5 miles away, and cross over the 6 foot electric fence at the top; cross the 6 foot electric fence running the length of the road; come down the driveway; cross a 10 ft. deep gully, and then cross the 6 foot electric fence; swim a river and cross a 6 foot electric fence; or, highly unlikely, paratroop in. So, if someone is on me property, and they didn't knock on the door, they didn't get here easily, and they can't be just walking through, so they are up to no good. Which means they are either stealing, or killing me animals, or here to harm me. Or any combination of the above. So, I am justified to shoot, as it won't be any kids unless it's some teenage punk trying to get rich quick.
-
Originally posted by GtoRA2
Nope Mcfarland is either Mrblack come back as an Irishmen, or a short yellow bus rider.
If it is beat1e its his greatest troll ever.
Originally posted by McFarland
Online, I fly as OldTime.
Anyone ever see the OldTime guy online?
-
Originally posted by McFarland
Who or what is "beat1e"? And as for shooting people on me property, the only ways on to me property are: climb up a tall wooded ridge, which means leaving the road some 5 miles away, and cross over the 6 foot electric fence at the top; cross the 6 foot electric fence running the length of the road; come down the driveway; cross a 10 ft. deep gully, and then cross the 6 foot electric fence; swim a river and cross a 6 foot electric fence; or, highly unlikely, paratroop in.
Going to the quickie mart for a bottle of milk must be a biatch...
-
Originally posted by McFarland
Who or what is "beat1e"?
That's exactly what beat1e would say if he were trolling as an imposter!
-
Originally posted by Holden McGroin
Going to the quickie mart for a bottle of milk must be a biatch...
No, I just go out the DRIVEWAY.
-
Originally posted by eskimo2
That's exactly what beat1e would say if he were trolling as an imposter!
I'm new, look at me registration date. I have seen the name on other threads, mentioning it, but what is it?
-
Originally posted by McFarland
No, I just go out the DRIVEWAY.
So trespassers would choose to go thru all that instead of using the driveway?
Criminals in your neck of the woods must be incredibly stupid or maybe just trespass for the fitness aspects.
-
If they come up the driveway, they are in view all the way up to the front porch. And in rifle and shotgun range. To get to me garage, they have to get behind the house, by crossing a 6 foot electric fence that attach to the front porch on both sides. Kinda hard to get to me garage, and if they do, then I know they aren't up to anything good.
-
Originally posted by McFarland
If they come up the driveway, they are in view all the way up to the front porch. And in rifle and shotgun range.
Not if you are sleeping.... I'll bet there are two or three trespassers who sneak into your bedroom just after you turn out the lights... and lurk there in the shadows... waiting... for just the right time to strike.
-
Originally posted by McFarland
I'm new, look at me registration date. I have seen the name on other threads, mentioning it, but what is it?
That's exactly how beat1e would pretend not to realize that the term “beet1e” is a person, if he were trolling as an imposter! He would also pretend not to understand that having a new registration date does not really make one new to the board, especially in the case of a troll. (beat1e’s not clever enough to realize that even McFarland would get this.)
When was the last time you ate a nice juicy Tomato McFarland?
(Watch him pretend not to understand, just like beat1e would if he were trolling as an imposter!)
-
I ate a mater yesterday, on me hamburger. Why? And if I really were beatle, I'm pretty sure I would know how to play the game a bit better. And all these terms you guys use, like IN, and PNG. You can find me on a game called Tribal Wars (http://www.tribalwars.net). Log into world two, and validate the date I started playing this game with Tibus. Me name there is Loch Ness. He'll tell you I'm not beatle, it's posted on the forum there the exact date and time I found this game and downloaded it. And how long it took me to download it. I never even knew Aces High II existed before then, because I was looking for an online flight simulation game, and this was the first one on google.
-
Originally posted by McFarland
I never even knew Aces High II existed before then, because I was looking for an online flight simulation game, and this was the first one on google.
It's the first one? Not on the Google I use.
Imposter talk if you ask me.
-
BTW, beat1e couldn't play this game any better than a newbie.
-
Originally posted by eskimo2
It's the first one? Not on the Google I use.
Imposter talk if you ask me.
Ok, so Google changed. Did you check Tribal Wars? If you do, you'll find that I am not lying.
-
And I just checked google. It was the first one. I searched under "FREE Online Flight Simulation", and it's on the site that is the first one. The link looks like this:
Free Flight Sims / Download Free Flight SimulationsGood free flight sim games are rare. For free flight sim games, ... There is a subscription fee for online play; the download comes with 2 weeks free. ...
compsimgames.about.com/od/downloadfreegames/tp/freeflightsims.htm - 23k -
Aces High II is the first one on that list as well.
-
Originally posted by lazs2
diablo is correct in that with a democrat you know what you are getting.. a loss of your second amendment rights.. the guy is a democrat.
He is also correct that it is a roll of the dice with republicans but... it is a roll where only on or two numbers can bust you.. you still have a really good chance they will support the second amendment. Even if they don't.. they will vote with the party 9 out of ten times which.. in the case of the second... is a good thing.
I can't figure out how any gun owner or believer in the second would vote for a democrat.
lazs
Is the second amendment the only thing you care about? Why is it ok to protect the 2nd amendment yet trample all over the first amendment?
Seems to be the common thing for Republicans to do these days. I tend to love all my freedoms.. it just amazes me that the only one you right wingers ever seem to care about is to protecting your guns.
-
Originally posted by McFarland
Ok, so Google changed. Did you check Tribal Wars? If you do, you'll find that I am not lying.
So someone in another online game, who supposedly must know everything about you, is your proof that you are not beat1e?
-
Mcfarland, how do you feel about losers who beat women? Should they be shot? I think they should my self, beating women and children is far worse then stealing don't you think?
-
Originally posted by GtoRA2
Mcfarland, how do you feel about losers who beat women? Should they be shot? I think they should my self, beating women and children is far worse then stealing don't you think?
Oh man, I just spent all this time dorking around and you cut right to it. Great question!
-
People who beat women and children should be:
A. shot
B. beaten with barb wire
C. whipped
-
Isn't B and C a little redundant after A?
-
I didn't mean in that order. Those are their options. And I don't mean a shot to kill, one that will stick with them for the rest of their life, and make them think everyday when they feel that pain that they did wrong. Living with it is usually harder than dying with it.
-
Originally posted by crockett
Is the second amendment the only thing you care about? Why is it ok to protect the 2nd amendment yet trample all over the first amendment?
Seems to be the common thing for Republicans to do these days. I tend to love all my freedoms.. it just amazes me that the only one you right wingers ever seem to care about is to protecting your guns.
Well crockett, once the second is gone, how long do you think it will be until all the others follow. The second protects the first, and all that follow.
I can't speak for anyone else, but I believe that once we lose the ability to defend ourselves against a tyrannical government, exercising free speech could land you in the clink.:noid
I value all of my freedoms too, but I realize thats why the 2nd is so high on the order and why some would like to have it stricken completely. First you exercise your right to free speech, then you defend it!;)
-
Originally posted by eskimo2
So someone in another online game, who supposedly must know everything about you, is your proof that you are not beat1e?
He doesn't know everything aboot me, but I have been playing that game for almost a year, and I put it on the forum asking if anyone knew aboot a free online flight simulation game. When no one could tell me of one, I searched Google and found this one. I was glad to finally find one, so I put it on the forum when I found it. He can validate when I found this game, when I started playing it, and who I am. I am not this "beat1e" person, but if you wish to have me banned on false pretences, then so be it, for I am beginning to beleive that you wouldn't beleive any evidence I gave you to show otherwise. All I can say is this: You'll be losing a fan of Aces High, and not the problematic person called "beat1e".
-
Originally posted by FBBone
Well crockett, once the second is gone, how long do you think it will be until all the others follow. The second protects the first, and all that follow.
I can't speak for anyone else, but I believe that once we lose the ability to defend ourselves against a tyrannical government, exercising free speech could land you in the clink.:noid
I value all of my freedoms too, but I realize thats why the 2nd is so high on the order and why some would like to have it stricken completely. First you exercise your right to free speech, then you defend it!;)
Look I'm not against guns or the rights for normal citizens to own them. I have no issue at all with responsible citizens owning guns.
The problem is, while you guys are worrying about your rights to own guns, this admin has been hacking away at our other constitutional rights.
So I just fail to understand why 1 part of the Constitution is so important to you guys, but the rest doesn't seem to be as important to the typical liberal bashin right winger.
-
Originally posted by crockett
So I just fail to understand why 1 part of the Constitution is so important to you guys, but the rest doesn't seem to be as important to the typical liberal bashin right winger.
Perhaps because the second amendment allows citizens to protect the others?
-
McFarland,
I’m not set on trying to get you banned, even if you are beat1e; folks like you keep this place interesting. Actually since you said, “People who beat women and children should be:
A. shot
B. beaten with barb wire
C. whipped”
You move up a notch in my book, even if you are beat1e.
I am more convinced now than ever that you are indeed a leprechaun, however.
-
One last question:
Should children be shot fer stealin’ yer Lucky Charms?
-
Originally posted by McFarland
People who beat women and children should be:
A. shot
B. beaten with barb wire
C. whipped
oops... missed this one...
What about if you only beat women or children?
I mean... what if you only beat women and nurture children, or really hate kids, but treat women with the utmost respect?
-
Originally posted by eskimo2
One last question:
Should children be shot fer stealing’ yer Lucky Charms?
I thought leprechauns ate the children that stole their lucky charms.
-
To the folks who claim the Second is for defending the rest: have you shot a legislator lately? ;)
-
Originally posted by McFarland
I didn't mean in that order. Those are their options. And I don't mean a shot to kill, one that will stick with them for the rest of their life, and make them think everyday when they feel that pain that they did wrong. Living with it is usually harder than dying with it.
You are so over the top here it's not even funny, litterally. No one can be that much of a fool as you show your personna to be. You are really just wasting bandwidth here and just like beetle with his obsession with the bbs and with guns. Frankly there's really no doubt in my mind that it's just another beetle shade. Please, just go away.
-
Originally posted by VOR
To the folks who claim the Second is for defending the rest: have you shot a legislator lately? ;)
Sadly enough, theres no season for them.:(
......but, why do YOU think it's there? I'd really like to know.
-
Originally posted by Holden McGroin
Perhaps because the second amendment allows citizens to protect the others?
Humm then they should start pulling out those guns..
-
Originally posted by VOR
To the folks who claim the Second is for defending the rest: have you shot a legislator lately? ;)
That would take a lot of bullets.. I dunno if Walmart has that many in stock.
-
Originally posted by FBBone
......but, why do YOU think it's there? I'd really like to know.
"The people have a right to bear arms for the defence of themselves and the State."
We agree on what it's there for (the intent), but it won't come to any kind of meaningful fruition.
Crockett makes a point about the rest of the Constitution being hacked away (while apparently mistakenly laying the blame solely on the current administration) and I don't recall any form of armed insurrection of patriots taking to the streets to defend their rights. Lots of tough talk in coffee shops, gun shows and NRA rallies, but that's it.
I'm just being honest when I say that my plan is not to paint myself true blue and demand the restoration of my rights at gunpoint. I do get a little bit annoyed with people who claim that they will.
-
crocket... If I was worried about the first amendment I would for sure be more worried about democrats than republicans. It is democrats who came up with "hate speech" and want to shut up radio talk show hosts and who say that so called "man made global warming" is too important to debate.
It is democrats who grow government with social programs that limit my freedom a lot more than republicans.
As for guns.. How do you defend yourself and your family and fellow citizens without em? It is the most basic right of a free man.
If the democrats did not attack that right I wouldn't have to talk about it all the time... but they do.. they work night and day at chipping away at it.. they obsess about it...
finestein has said... "if I could get 51 votes I would say mr and mrs America... turn them in... turn them all in.."
How do I deal with that? Her idea, and most democrats of "responsible gun ownership" is no real ability to defend yourself at all.
I think everyone who is not insane or underage should be able to own any gun they want. If the commit a crime with it they need to go to prison... when they get out they can have their gun back if they haven't been found to be insane.
I can't comprimise with democrats... I can't comprimise on basic rights... no... "hate speech" or banned words.. it is all 1984 crap. helmet laws and seatbelt laws and public schools... it is all crap and it is all democrats leading the way.
Get em to quit trying to take my guns away and I will quit acting like it is the most important thing in my life.
Why aren't you telling them to knock it off? why aren't you asking them why they are so obsessed?
They are the true gun nuts.. the ones who know nothing about guns but are obsessed with taking them away from their fellow citizens.
lazs
-
Originally posted by GtoRA2
I thought leprechauns ate the children that stole their lucky charms.
Eat them ALIVE?:O Thats just gross;)
-
Originally posted by eskimo2
One last question:
Should children be shot fer stealin? yer Lucky Charms?
I don't have nay lucky charms and I'm not a leprechaun. Children only do what you teach them to, and they don't do what you teach them not to. If a child steals, you whip him. Then if he does it again, you whip him again. He will learn not to. "Spare the rod and spoil the child." And it works, I've never seen it not. You don't beat him, you just whip him with a hickory switch. It don't hurt for very long, but it hurts enough they sure don't want it again. And they'll learn not to steal.
And I'm not this so called "beat1e", I've told you where you can check. If you don't want to, then fine, so be it. Just don't say anything aboot it again till you do check, cause when you do, you'll find I'm not lying.
And to Maverick: It usually is harder to live with something than to die with it. You live with it, it hurts you every day. It's a pain that won't go away. You kill them, they may go to Heaven, and they may go to Hell. But you don't know which, and you can't decide. If they go to Heaven, well, you just rewarded them. They no longer have to deal with the sufferings of this life. You can put a bullet in a man where it will hurt him every day for the rest of his life. And that barb wire beating sure won't go away to awful soon. I've seen men done that way, they remember every day that it happened. And a public whipping puts shame on you for the rest of your life as well, it's one of the worst things you can do to a proud man. It will almost break his spirit. And if it doesn't, it will take a while for those deeps cuts to heal. And he will always have the scars. It just depends on the severity of what he did how much you hurt him.
-
mcfarland/beetle
You really need to get some help. Your trolls here are beyond silly and not terribly entertaining. It's time you went away again beetle.
-
Mav, there's more difference between this avatar and beet than there were between two very similar users (Nuke and Godzilla) that weren't shades..
I'm not taking any conclusions about the person writing them, but as far as his posts are worth, he isn't "beetle".
-
Originally posted by McFarland
I don't have nay lucky charms
Of course you don’t, the children stole them. We’ve already gone over this.
Originally posted by McFarland
…and I'm not a leprechaun.
Yes you are.
Originally posted by McFarland
Children only do what you teach them to, and they don't do what you teach them not to. If a child steals, you whip him. Then if he does it again, you whip him again. He will learn not to. "Spare the rod and spoil the child." And it works, I've never seen it not.
This is where you are terribly confused. Children have been stealing your Lucky Charms for decades; apparently you have been whipping them with a hickory switch all this time and yet they keep stealing the Charms from you. Yet you say, “And it works I've never seen it not.”
Admit it; children will always steal your Lucky Charms because they are irresistible and magically delicious, despite how severely you beat them. Ironically, the only way that you could actually stop the children from stealing your Lucky Charms would be to shoot them dead. Dead children can’t steal yer Lucky Charms. Despite how you come across as being so black and white on issues such as stealing, your own softness towards juvenile thieves has doomed you to a perpetual cycle of beatin children fer stealin yer Lucky Charms. You could break the cycle and just start popin them with yer Lucky Gun, but you’re too much of a softie.
-
Originally posted by Maverick
mcfarland/beetle
You really need to get some help. Your trolls here are beyond silly and not terribly entertaining.
I'm not trolling. I don't mean to entertain, I mean to inform or explain.
It's time you went away again beetle.
And I'm not "beat1e".
-
Who's beat1e?
-
That's what they called him on the last page, now they call him "beetle".
-
Originally posted by GtoRA2
Nope Mcfarland is either Mrblack come back as an Irishmen, or a short yellow bus rider.
He is the type of gun owner that makes gun owners look like ignorant redneck trash to normal people.
If it is beat1e its his greatest troll ever.
See? Now they call him "beetle" on this page. Or maybe it's just that everyone has a different name for him?
-
Originally posted by Holden McGroin
Perhaps because the second amendment allows citizens to protect the others?
Really? So when are they going to start protecting them?
-
Originally posted by lazs2
crocket... If I was worried about the first amendment I would for sure be more worried about democrats than republicans. It is democrats who came up with "hate speech" and want to shut up radio talk show hosts and who say that so called "man made global warming" is too important to debate.
It is democrats who grow government with social programs that limit my freedom a lot more than republicans.
As for guns.. How do you defend yourself and your family and fellow citizens without em? It is the most basic right of a free man.
If the democrats did not attack that right I wouldn't have to talk about it all the time... but they do.. they work night and day at chipping away at it.. they obsess about it...
finestein has said... "if I could get 51 votes I would say mr and mrs America... turn them in... turn them all in.."
How do I deal with that? Her idea, and most democrats of "responsible gun ownership" is no real ability to defend yourself at all.
I think everyone who is not insane or underage should be able to own any gun they want. If the commit a crime with it they need to go to prison... when they get out they can have their gun back if they haven't been found to be insane.
I can't comprimise with democrats... I can't comprimise on basic rights... no... "hate speech" or banned words.. it is all 1984 crap. helmet laws and seatbelt laws and public schools... it is all crap and it is all democrats leading the way.
Get em to quit trying to take my guns away and I will quit acting like it is the most important thing in my life.
Why aren't you telling them to knock it off? why aren't you asking them why they are so obsessed?
They are the true gun nuts.. the ones who know nothing about guns but are obsessed with taking them away from their fellow citizens.
lazs
I guess you seemed to have forgotten about the right wing "hate" groups whom flooded the FCC offices with calls complaining about boobs and bad words on the TV and radio.
I also don't see many "liberals" protesting about gay people and not allowing them to have the same rights as a stright person. I imagine these same people if it were 50 or 60 years ago would be bashing black people insted of homosexuals today.
I also don't see many "liberals" protesting and trying to telling women that they have no right to do with their body as they choose.
Helmet laws and seatbelt laws are pretty much common sense.. I'm sorry if you have no comon sense to understand that. Seatbelt and helmet laws save lives and save states money. I guess we might as well get rid of the baby seat law too? I mean those damn liberals trying to protect ours kids from stupid parents.
You right wingers are always complaining about democrats wanting to raise taxes or this or that.. Well seatbelt laws have caused 45% reductions in fatal injury and 50% reductions in moderate-to-critical injuries. (stats from wikipedia)
That in turn saves states money because of un-insured motorist. You should be thanking a liberal for saving you your precious tax money.
btw as soon as the helmet law was made optional here in Florida (as long as you have insurance) motorcycle related deaths went up. I guess you right wingers showed them Dem's.
A friend of mine had a guy run into the back of his car.. The guy was on a motorcycle wearing no helmet. My friend had a ladder on his roof.. The guy on the motorcycle's head hit the ladder and put a hole in his skull.
The guy lived but is permanently brain damaged, had he been waerning a helmet the guy wwould have suffred a few bruses and likely walked away from the crash as his main injuries were to his head.
-
Think outside of the "you right-wingers/ you left-wingers" box.
-
I have three children all under the age of 11 that look to me to protect them from all things that go bump in the night. I see two scenarios in my particular case. Finding someone in my yard up to no good. They will get a warning to leave unless I can confirm they are armed. If they're armed they get shot. Period. If they make any move other than running for their lives or their hands going up, they get shot. Period.
If I ever find an intruder inside the confines of my home. They get shot. Period. First warning they get is the pain of a pistol round. I'm not giving someone time to get the drop on me where my family is concerned and I will /always/ assume an intruder in my home is there to cause physical harm.
PS: Libertarian since '86
-
Originally posted by crockett
Helmet laws and seatbelt laws are pretty much common sense.
Yes, it is common sense. It is a direct infringement on ones freedom to choose.
I fought the helmet law tooth and nail for many, many years here. You want to wear a helmet, wear it. I choose not to and don`t. It`s a matter of choice. I'm sorry if you have no common sense to understand that.
What laws will you protest and how far are you willing to allow yourself and your freedom of choice to be stepped on? Mandatory mesh leggings when mowing your lawn? Outlaw boxing? Scissors only to be used by those holding a state or federal users license? Outlaw skydiving? Abolish the vote? Abolish personal freedom and rights all together?
I guess we might as well get rid of the baby seat law too?
The question is why is an required built in on an adult seeking to become a parent? How about not having enough knowledge or trust in yourself as a parent to raise a child and just let everything to do with your kids be governed on a state and federal level? They know best...don`t they? Choice of reading..let the Feds decide?
Well seatbelt laws have caused 45% reductions in fatal injury and 50% reductions in moderate-to-critical injuries. (stats from wikipedia)That in turn saves states money because of un-insured motorist. You should be thanking a liberal for saving you your precious tax money.
Have you decided on a cruise or possibly a new car with the tax reduction savings and the rebate check?
btw as soon as the helmet law was made optional here in Florida (as long as you have insurance) motorcycle related deaths went up. I guess you right wingers showed them Dem's.
That one is so thin it`s see through. :)
A friend of mine had a guy run into the back of his car.. The guy was on a motorcycle wearing no helmet. My friend had a ladder on his roof.. The guy on the motorcycle's head hit the ladder and put a hole in his skull. The guy lived but is permanently brain damaged, had he been waerning a helmet the guy wwould have suffred a few bruses and likely walked away from the crash as his main injuries were to his head
Hehe..................or..he could have been completely decapitated due to the helmet....or he could have broken his neck due to the helmet...........or he could have completely missed the ladder either way and been ran over and killed by a fire truck two blocks down the road. How about banning fire trucks....or possibly people carrying ladders on top of their cars? It`s evident they are dangerous. Man.....we could even take away the right of the individual to own and operate motor vehicles in general. Not much on the face of the earth more dangerous than everyday driving. At what point is too far? How much distrust do you have in yourself and are willing to turn things over to a higher authority for your won safety?
ooops...nearly forgot this one....
I also don't see many "liberals" protesting about gay people and not allowing them to have the same rights as a stright person. I imagine these same people if it were 50 or 60 years ago would be bashing black people insted of homosexuals today.
Not to mention that there is no connection of any type with gays and blacks, let`s go with gays having the same rights as straight people. What rights are you speaking of and how far are you willing to go? A partnership contract won`t do it? It has to be marriage as such? Same tax breaks, the whole nine yards?
The drunk down the road gave up on women years ago. He does wish to marry his pig though. He should get the same benefits and perks as any other family ......shouldn`t he?
-
crokett.. jackal pretty much answered you but a few things..
What did you do with that huge rebate the insurance company gave you when the seatbelt and helmet laws were passed?
do you believe that freedom depends on money... that you can limit anything anyone does if it saves money for someone else? How bout fatty foods? How bout swimming?
I never had a baby seat or seatbelts... no one over the age of about 20 did.. it was a choice that people made... choice is the important thing in freedom... not your choice to tell people how to live.... or what risks they can take..
And.. it costs you nothing. you did not save a cent with the new laws.. it is all stats... I am even willing to pay a premium on my insurance to not wear seatbelts or a helmet.. just as smokers and private aviation people pay a premium on life insurance.
as for uninsured drivers... that is totally different. nothing to do with anything. they are criminals..
every fender bender and every scratch on a helmet these days if some yahoo like yours ticket to tell the "helmet/seatbelt saved my/my boyfriends life" story..
as for a womans right to choose? choose what? the clothes she wears? her purse? or.. to kill another human?
gay rights? what ones are they missing? they have all the same rights as everyone else... exactly the same... why do they want extra rights?
as for racism... the democrats were the ones who fought against civil rights.. now that everyone has equal rights the republicans simply said... that is where it ends... no extra rights for any group based on race.
be a man... stand up to the womanly democrats and their nanny society.
lazs
-
and... even at that... you act like lives saved from death by no seatbelt are the ultimate in savings..
the so called "uninsured" that you are so worried about eating into your hard earned medical insurance money (that you have not gotten a rebate on).
So has anyone done an analysis on how much that saved person costs us if he lives out his life? he doesn't have not only car insurance.. he has no insurance at all.. what will his medical bills be for the new liver transplant or heart valve in 20 years... not to mention.. he has all the time in the world to hang out at hospital waiting rooms... not like you and I...
regardless... you need to go down the list... you could justify ending all swimming by the drownings... or... simply make it a law that you had to wear a lifejacket in every body of water.
The fatalities from head injuries in cars and on motorcycles is the same...if you die it is the same chance that it was from a head injury... do you advocate helmets in cars? Oh wait... you wouldn't like that so... it goes too far?
lazs
-
I’ll take McFarland’s dropping out of this thread as an admission that he is indeed a leprechaun.
-
Originally posted by eskimo2
I’ll take McFarland’s dropping out of this thread as an admission that he is indeed a leprechaun.
No. He is out tracking and trapping my breeding stock. :)
-
Originally posted by eskimo2
I?ll take McFarland?s dropping out of this thread as an admission that he is indeed a leprechaun.
I didn't drop out. No one made a post that concerned me. Till you did. The others are arguing between themselves, and Lazs and Jackal made some good points.
-
Originally posted by McFarland
I didn't drop out. No one made a post that concerned me. Till you did. The others are arguing between themselves, and Lazs and Jackal made some good points.
So you no longer deny being a leprechaun?
-
I deny being a leprechaun. I'm not a leprechaun. Nice new signiture.
-
By the way, that reminds me, weren't you the one who made the "my little pony", "hello kitty", and a couple of other ridiculous skins on the skin site?
-
Originally posted by McFarland
By the way, that reminds me, weren't you the one who made the "my little pony", "hello kitty", and a couple of other ridiculous skins on the skin site?
I haven’t made a skin or even played AH in over a year, maybe two; and you claim to be new!
-
I saw them on http://www.ah-skins.com. I downloaded every skin there except those, I like having a complete set of things. I've also downloaded every map and skin on this site.
-
Originally posted by McFarland
I saw them on http://www.ah-skins.com. I downloaded every skin there except those, I like having a complete set of things. I've also downloaded every map and skin on this site.
There are 391 skins on http://www.ah-skins.com/ and you have downloaded 380+? And you use AOL? I call BS. You’re an imposter and a leprechaun!
-
It took me a good bit of days, staying up 20 - 24 hours at a time. I feel that sleep is a waste of time, when you could be doing something worthwhile. I've stayed up three days at a time doing things, and it was worth it. I'm not an imposter nor a leprechaun. I'm simply very obstinate and a work-aholic.
-
By the way, thanks for bringing that up, I found there was a new skin. I also noticed that certain skins are missing from me downloads, and I made sure to get every skin I found. Odd.
-
Originally posted by McFarland
I'm not an imposter nor a leprechaun. I'm simple, very obstinate and a manporn-aholic.
Well that's aboot all I need to know:D
-
Sleep is a waste of time? Now that’s leprechaun talk! Too busy guarding your Lucky Charms eh? Everyone knows that leprechauns never sleep.
Downloading skins = work? Downloading skins = worthwhile? You have no idea what real work is. Why? Because you’re a leprechaun! You’ve got all the free time in the world; all you have to do is guard your Charms. You’re digging yourself an awfully deep hole here. It’s just a matter of time before you admit it; you’re a leprechaun. You first gave it away by using “me” for “my” regularly; just like you do on TV. Now the evidence is spilling all over.
-
We have a new standard for a blivet here and it's handle is mcfarland.
-
Originally posted by eskimo2
Sleep is a waste of time? Now that?s leprechaun talk! Too busy guarding your Lucky Charms eh? Everyone knows that leprechauns never sleep.
Downloading skins = work? Downloading skins = worthwhile? You have no idea what real work is. Why? Because you?re a leprechaun! You?ve got all the free time in the world; all you have to do is guard your Charms. You?re digging yourself an awfully deep hole here. It?s just a matter of time before you admit it; you?re a leprechaun. You first gave it away by using ?me? for ?my? regularly; just like you do on TV. Now the evidence is spilling all over.
No, I let the skins download as I do other work. Such as working on me cars, on the tractor, pulling stones out of the horses' hooves, feeding the dogs, etc. And yes, sleep is a waste of time. Ask Thomas Alva Edison. And when you think aboot it, it really is. You just lay there. Doing nothing. Getting nowhere.
-
Originally posted by Maverick
We have a new standard for a blivet here and it's handle is Maverick.
I think I corrected it well.
-
Originally posted by McFarland
I think I corrected it well.
The term "think" and "mcfarland" are contradictory. One definitely does not have a thing to do with the other.
-
Although, you must not know English very well, or math one, as it would correctly be "the terms". Although, I feel sorry that you simply have nothing better to do than to hurl insults at someone you have taken a disliking to.