Pages: 1 [2] 3 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Xrak
Black Eclipse Corp Band of Brothers
|
Posted - 2008.05.25 04:58:00 -
[31]
The fact of the matter is that countries with high levels of firearms have higher firearm related deaths.
|
Surfin's PlunderBunny
Sebiestor tribe
|
Posted - 2008.05.25 07:12:00 -
[32]
Edited by: Surfin''s PlunderBunny on 25/05/2008 07:15:36 And countries with more landmines have more landmine related deaths
*Edit: Oh yeah, and countries that have more wild boar stampedes have higher deaths due to stampeding boars
See where I going with this?
() () (â;..;)â (")(") |
Xrak
Black Eclipse Corp Band of Brothers
|
Posted - 2008.05.25 07:48:00 -
[33]
Originally by: Surfin's PlunderBunny Edited by: Surfin''s PlunderBunny on 25/05/2008 07:15:36 And countries with more landmines have more landmine related deaths
*Edit: Oh yeah, and countries that have more wild boar stampedes have higher deaths due to stampeding boars
See where I going with this?
Well done, you took my point and tried to make it work for you. You failed.
Without wanting to sound like a character from a certain film, the problem is choice. (Ok I lied, I wanted to sound like the character). You don't choose to have wild boars, and most people wouldn't choose to have landmines either.
Instead you have the selfish people who have guns and can handle them properly, but for everyone one of these people, there are probably 10 people who cant. So when they get attacked by someone they can use their gun, that's fine. But what about the people who dont have or want a gun.
The entire basis of the bit that says about your "right to bear arms" is supposed to be so that you can overthrow the government if they get a bit too much like the British. I think it's kinda ironic that the people who are trying to take away your rights are the ones who dont want gun control.
|
Nomakai Delateriel
Shadow Company Souls of Vengeance
|
Posted - 2008.05.25 07:49:00 -
[34]
That japan has a high rate of crime is indeed bull****.
On a population of roughly 126-127 million they have (per year from 1996 to 2000):
Average of about 1300 murders per year. The comparable figure for the united states (population: 280 mil) is on average 16000+ Average of about 4000 robberies (though with an upwards curve) per year. United states: 400,000+ Average of about 8000 cases of Assault (upwards curve) per year: United states: About 1,000,000. ______________________________________________ -You can never earn my respect, only lose it. It's given freely, and only grudgingly retracted when necessary. |
Surfin's PlunderBunny
Sebiestor tribe
|
Posted - 2008.05.25 08:29:00 -
[35]
Originally by: Xrak
Instead you have the selfish people who have guns and can handle them properly, but for everyone one of these people, there are probably 10 people who cant. So when they get attacked by someone they can use their gun, that's fine. But what about the people who dont have or want a gun.
... That's totally their problem, they have the freedom to leave the country
() () (â;..;)â (")(") |
Jame Malice
|
Posted - 2008.05.25 10:33:00 -
[36]
"cuz i'm prous to be an american where the standards are so low..."
My own version of the song... i wish i was in Austrailia right now. -_-
|
Frezik
Basically Outdated Stereo Equiptment
|
Posted - 2008.05.25 17:25:00 -
[37]
Originally by: Xrak The fact of the matter is that countries with high levels of firearms have higher firearm related deaths.
Both sides of the issue tends to trot out studies that show a higher/lower crime rate due to gun laws. In the end, it's more likely that gun availability is weakly correlated to general crime, so you should look at other factors instead.
|
Father Maynard
|
Posted - 2008.05.25 17:56:00 -
[38]
Edited by: Father Maynard on 25/05/2008 17:58:35
Originally by: Nomakai Delateriel That japan has a high rate of crime is indeed bull****.
On a population of roughly 126-127 million they have (per year from 1996 to 2000):
Average of about 1300 murders per year. The comparable figure for the united states (population: 280 mil) is on average 16000+ Average of about 4000 robberies (though with an upwards curve) per year. United states: 400,000+ Average of about 8000 cases of Assault (upwards curve) per year: United states: About 1,000,000.
Like the other guy said, post proof or its bull****. Not that I don't believe you, or the first guy, but both sides need creditable sources.
I find the whole gun debate rather pointless. Both sides claim the other side is selfish. Those with guns are selfish for having guns. Those without guns are selfish for wanting to take them away. Its a never ending cycle of stupidity. Having guns is fine. Not having guns is fine. There are countries all over the world that prove both having and not having them works. The one thing that everyone seems to agree on is the education and care of handling guns, or lack there of.
However, there is one thing I see a lot that concerns me. One person with a gun goes crazy and starts shooting people, yet theres never anyone there with a gun to protect themselves. I can't help but think there would be a lot less killing spree related deaths if people could defend themselves in these situations. That would require people being able to carry guns themselves. You can say that if guns where made illegal that this situation would never happen, but thats foolishly naive. Illegal guns = black market goods and its actually easier to get a gun on the black market in the US than it is to do the 5 day wait with a back ground check. I can walk down the street and buy a gun from the drug dealers with no questions asked. Not that I would do such a thing but the option is definitely there. Also consider where the market for illegal guns comes from. Yep, the same people who deal *****, *******, and other drugs. It would just make the criminal element richer and give them more control.
Also keep in mind that making something illegal doesn't make it unaccessible. Countries around the world have been "fighting the war on drugs" for decades to no effect. People have been getting high and dying from it for decades and there is no stopping it. All the while the Columbian drug cartels get richer and richer. Yep, they have guns too. Lots of em. They like to sell those guns as well.
|
Nomakai Delateriel
Shadow Company Souls of Vengeance
|
Posted - 2008.05.25 21:41:00 -
[39]
Edited by: Nomakai Delateriel on 25/05/2008 21:41:04
Originally by: Father Maynard Edited by: Father Maynard on 25/05/2008 17:58:35
Originally by: Nomakai Delateriel That japan has a high rate of crime is indeed bull****.
On a population of roughly 126-127 million they have (per year from 1996 to 2000):
Average of about 1300 murders per year. The comparable figure for the united states (population: 280 mil) is on average 16000+ Average of about 4000 robberies (though with an upwards curve) per year. United states: 400,000+ Average of about 8000 cases of Assault (upwards curve) per year: United states: About 1,000,000.
Like the other guy said, post proof or its bull****. Not that I don't believe you, or the first guy, but both sides need creditable sources.
Statistics(format: xls) from the Japan Statistical Yearbook 2008
Couldn't find that particular paper online, so will that do? ______________________________________________ -You can never earn my respect, only lose it. It's given freely, and only grudgingly retracted when necessary. |
Father Maynard
|
Posted - 2008.05.26 07:56:00 -
[40]
Originally by: Nomakai Delateriel Edited by: Nomakai Delateriel on 25/05/2008 21:41:04
Originally by: Father Maynard Edited by: Father Maynard on 25/05/2008 17:58:35
Originally by: Nomakai Delateriel That japan has a high rate of crime is indeed bull****.
On a population of roughly 126-127 million they have (per year from 1996 to 2000):
Average of about 1300 murders per year. The comparable figure for the united states (population: 280 mil) is on average 16000+ Average of about 4000 robberies (though with an upwards curve) per year. United states: 400,000+ Average of about 8000 cases of Assault (upwards curve) per year: United states: About 1,000,000.
Like the other guy said, post proof or its bull****. Not that I don't believe you, or the first guy, but both sides need creditable sources.
Statistics(format: xls) from the Japan Statistical Yearbook 2008
Couldn't find that particular paper online, so will that do?
That'll do. I don't think the lack of guns is the reason for the lack of crime though.
|
|
Alassra Eventide
Veldspar Industries
|
Posted - 2008.05.26 15:31:00 -
[41]
If you go look up the gun-related incidences in the US from back when gun education was actually involved in the school system (in most cases voluntarily, but it was still offered) compared to nowadays when most of the "education" is done via movies, videos games, tv, and other people without good firearm education, I think you'll see a corresponding trend.
Also, anyone here ever been shot while wearing a kevlar vest? There's still a LOT of impact force translated through that vest. Especially the older ones that didn't have all the ceramics in them. It might stop the bullet from puncturing you, but you still take that hit. A couple moderately spaced shots into you will still shock/put you out of reaction for a couple seconds before you respond if you aren't ready for it/never had it happen before.
|
P'uck
|
Posted - 2008.05.26 15:33:00 -
[42]
Originally by: Xrak The entire basis of the bit that says about your "right to bear arms" is supposed to be so that you can overthrow the government if they get a bit too much like the British. I think it's kinda ironic that the people who are trying to take away your rights are the ones who dont want gun control.
very well put.
|
Nomakai Delateriel
Shadow Company Souls of Vengeance
|
Posted - 2008.05.26 16:16:00 -
[43]
Originally by: Alassra Eventide Also, anyone here ever been shot while wearing a kevlar vest? There's still a LOT of impact force translated through that vest. Especially the older ones that didn't have all the ceramics in them. It might stop the bullet from puncturing you, but you still take that hit. A couple moderately spaced shots into you will still shock/put you out of reaction for a couple seconds before you respond if you aren't ready for it/never had it happen before.
Considering from what I saw in Kosovo, you'll barely feel it if the vest is hit with something similar to a 9mm. Of course the people there were wearing Class IVs with trauma plates (in our case. I think the british only had class III). 7.62 NATO on the other hand would be an entirely different thing (we were shown on a dummy wearing a IV with no trauma plates how much force there would be. That bullet left a serious dent).
Also, so far nobody has designed a class III or IV that covers the entire body and still offers reasonable mobility. Hit someone in someplace where the vest only provides protection against shrapnel (or no protection at all), like the neck/face for example, and they go down anyway. ______________________________________________ -You can never earn my respect, only lose it. It's given freely, and only grudgingly retracted when necessary. |
Admus
Multiverse Corporation Cosmic Anomalies
|
Posted - 2008.05.26 16:16:00 -
[44]
Originally by: Megan Maynard ...You aren't going to stop someone from shooting another person committed to the task. They will still find a gun no matter how many laws are put into place.
I just want to comment on this statement. While this is true that committed criminals will find guns, I wonder if a lot of shootings could be avoided simply if a very troubled and mentally unstable individual didn't have such easy access to them.
---------------------------------------------------------- "Villains always have antidotes. They're funny that way." |
Admus
Multiverse Corporation Cosmic Anomalies
|
Posted - 2008.05.26 16:25:00 -
[45]
Originally by: Kravick Drasari Edited by: Kravick Drasari on 24/05/2008 23:25:20 Edited by: Kravick Drasari on 24/05/2008 23:23:53 Edited by: Kravick Drasari on 24/05/2008 23:20:49
Originally by: Sokratesz Edited by: Sokratesz on 24/05/2008 12:57:34
Originally by: WalksWithCane
Originally by: Xrak
College shootings etc etc.
Yea, it's too bad that a citizen with a concealed gun permit wasn't on campus those days. Perhaps they could have saved lives instead of watching people get slaughtered like sheep while they huddled together praying that someone would stop the shooter....
I don't think the average citizen with a gun permit would have a) the guts and b) the skill to stop a determined shooter, especially not if he's moving fast and wearing kevlar. (see virtech)
You underestimate those who have been properly trained in the use of firearms. Its not like what you see in movies where there are fire fights and nether side can hit anything. As far as the kevlar thing, he wasn't wearing a kevlar lined helmet. If I was there with a firearm I definitely would have done something to try and stop him. I may not leave the situation unwounded but the other guy wouldn't be ether.
I grew up around guns my entire life. They are a tool just like every other weapon. You take guns away and we'll start using knives and baseball bats. There is nothing wrong with firearms themselves as long as everyone has equal access to them. States with concealed to carry laws have less crime than those that don't. Plus, its very very easy to get illegal firearms.
Look at Japan. Firearms are illegal there. Not even the police have them. It doesn't stop their citizens from maiming and killing each other though. Japan has a higher per capita assault with deadly weapons than America does incidents involving firearms. Those people are absolutely violent and the lack of firearms hasn't done anything to stop it.
If someone wants to kill someone the lack of a firearm isn't going to stop them. They will find a way.
I also want to point out that mass murders like college shootings would have been much more difficult to perpetrate armed with a chopping knife and a nailbat. Guns are better at killing, so while the crime rate may remain the same, perhaps the fatality rate will decrease.
---------------------------------------------------------- "Villains always have antidotes. They're funny that way." |
Nomakai Delateriel
Shadow Company Souls of Vengeance
|
Posted - 2008.05.26 16:39:00 -
[46]
Originally by: Admus
Originally by: Megan Maynard ...You aren't going to stop someone from shooting another person committed to the task. They will still find a gun no matter how many laws are put into place.
I just want to comment on this statement. While this is true that committed criminals will find guns, I wonder if a lot of shootings could be avoided simply if a very troubled and mentally unstable individual didn't have such easy access to them.
There is also the issue that if a criminal expects you to have a gun they're more likely to have a gun of their own and be ready to use it at the slightest provocation. Here in Sweden even it will take a lot before even the most hardened criminals use their weapons to try to kill.
In any case, it's a complicated issue and I find that both sides (pro-gun and anti-gun) tend to use examples with little or no regard for the other factors that are involved. "Wohoo. Japan. Low crime rate! No guns!" "Wohoo! Switzerland. Low crime rate. Lots of guns!" Looking at for example both Japan and Switzerland (nations with low crimerate) they're both feature fairly isolated and culturally homogeneous populations with a strong sense of community (or at least that's my impression) and a low (cultural) tolerance for anti-social behavior. The more you feel that you belong to a community/family the less likely you are to behave violently against them. Classic group psychology (us/them), no?
I'm sure there are psychological/social studies comparing various areas with high/low-crime rate and different gun-laws and trying to isolate what kind effect gunslaws have on crimerate when social issues have been into account, but for some reason I've never seen anyone cite one of those in the gun debate. ______________________________________________ -You can never earn my respect, only lose it. It's given freely, and only grudgingly retracted when necessary. |
Alassra Eventide
Veldspar Industries
|
Posted - 2008.05.26 17:42:00 -
[47]
Primarily because the number of actual studies done on something like that, and don't have massive logic flaws or leading conclusions in them, is pretty low, unfortunately :(
|
Kravick Drasari
|
Posted - 2008.05.26 18:39:00 -
[48]
Originally by: Admus
I also want to point out that mass murders like college shootings would have been much more difficult to perpetrate armed with a chopping knife and a nailbat. Guns are better at killing, so while the crime rate may remain the same, perhaps the fatality rate will decrease.
You fail to understand how everyone having guns would put a stop to this before more than one person goes down. Walk into a room with 20 people with the intention of going on a killing spree. All 20 of these people have guns themselves. The first bullet you fire will have 19 (20 if the first guy didn't die) other guns pointed and firing back at you. The incident is over as soon as it starts. --- My cat Putter approves of this post. Be a Ninja! You know you want too: http://www.animecubed.com/billy/?Kravick |
Nomakai Delateriel
Shadow Company Souls of Vengeance
|
Posted - 2008.05.26 18:58:00 -
[49]
Originally by: Kravick Drasari You fail to understand how everyone having guns would put a stop to this before more than one person goes down. Walk into a room with 20 people with the intention of going on a killing spree. All 20 of these people have guns themselves. The first bullet you fire will have 19 (20 if the first guy didn't die) other guns pointed and firing back at you. The incident is over as soon as it starts.
*sigh* Go go gunlobby-mobile.
Unless these guys were top notch bodyguards expecting **** to go down it would take a lot longer than that for people to react. Unless they were of course mentally prepared to kill at the slightest provocation. And you REALLY don't want that kind of society. Soldiers, bodyguards and police officers (etc) can have that kind of mentality ON THE JOB, but not 24/7. And they go through a lot of training to be able to handle that kind of pressure.
If you're not in the mindset and expecting trouble it will take a surprising amount of time for people to react and start to think. And from the point where the brain actually realizes "holy crap I'm being shot at" and identifying the threat anything from 1-10 seconds will have passed (if not more). From that point they'll have to draw their guns and respond. The attacker on the other hand is ready to kill from the get go and has a drawn gun. He has the initiative. Depending on the weapon and situation it could be 18, or 15 or 10 vs1. Or 0 vs 1 if he has some form of grenade (If I felt like it I could make a fairly reliable one and have it ready next week).
The more lethal the weapon, the more things favor the guy with the initiative. ______________________________________________ -You can never earn my respect, only lose it. It's given freely, and only grudgingly retracted when necessary. |
Alassra Eventide
Veldspar Industries
|
Posted - 2008.05.26 20:49:00 -
[50]
I'd like to point out the guy who got a Darwin award for trying to rob a gunstore in texas at gunpoint and didn't get off more than two shots before he was killed by the owner, customers, and the sheriff in the store.
|
|
Surfin's PlunderBunny
Sebiestor tribe
|
Posted - 2008.05.26 21:25:00 -
[51]
Originally by: Alassra Eventide I'd like to point out the guy who got a Darwin award for trying to rob a gunstore in texas at gunpoint and didn't get off more than two shots before he was killed by the owner, customers, and the sheriff in the store.
Shot 57 times, iirc
() () (â;..;)â (")(") |
Kravick Drasari
|
Posted - 2008.05.26 22:45:00 -
[52]
Edited by: Kravick Drasari on 26/05/2008 22:47:06
Originally by: Nomakai Delateriel
Originally by: Kravick Drasari You fail to understand how everyone having guns would put a stop to this before more than one person goes down. Walk into a room with 20 people with the intention of going on a killing spree. All 20 of these people have guns themselves. The first bullet you fire will have 19 (20 if the first guy didn't die) other guns pointed and firing back at you. The incident is over as soon as it starts.
*sigh* Go go gunlobby-mobile.
Unless these guys were top notch bodyguards expecting **** to go down it would take a lot longer than that for people to react. Unless they were of course mentally prepared to kill at the slightest provocation. And you REALLY don't want that kind of society. Soldiers, bodyguards and police officers (etc) can have that kind of mentality ON THE JOB, but not 24/7. And they go through a lot of training to be able to handle that kind of pressure.
If you're not in the mindset and expecting trouble it will take a surprising amount of time for people to react and start to think. And from the point where the brain actually realizes "holy crap I'm being shot at" and identifying the threat anything from 1-10 seconds will have passed (if not more). From that point they'll have to draw their guns and respond. The attacker on the other hand is ready to kill from the get go and has a drawn gun. He has the initiative. Depending on the weapon and situation it could be 18, or 15 or 10 vs1. Or 0 vs 1 if he has some form of grenade (If I felt like it I could make a fairly reliable one and have it ready next week).
The more lethal the weapon, the more things favor the guy with the initiative.
Followed by:
Quote: I'd like to point out the guy who got a Darwin award for trying to rob a gunstore in texas at gunpoint and didn't get off more than two shots before he was killed by the owner, customers, and the sheriff in the store.
Sorry, Nomakai, you lose. Nothing personal of course, but you underestimate how quickly people can react. Its not 10 seconds. Not even close. More like 1.44 to 2.5 seconds (if you're not mentally impared).
Everyone needs to be on equal footing even if they don't like it. Guns arn't going away. They will always exist. Since guns will always be available to the criminal element, no matter what people may say or think. The general public needs to be on equal footing. Anything less and we are at the absolute mercy of said criminal element.
The police can't do anything unless they are actually there and we all know 98% of the time they arn't. They can't be every where all of the time. Police response time is also pretty bad, and even then maybe one or two will show up. You may say let the criminal have what they want but I refuse to submit to anyone trying to rob me or kill me. I will fight back. --- My cat Putter approves of this post. Be a Ninja! You know you want too: http://www.animecubed.com/billy/?Kravick |
Nomakai Delateriel
Shadow Company Souls of Vengeance
|
Posted - 2008.05.26 23:36:00 -
[53]
Right, and "robbery" = "intent on a killing spree" how exactly?
I doubt the robber in that example was intent on a killing spree (since he didn't manage to kill anyone). He was intent on getting money by threatening to use force, and thus gave the other guys the advantage by not acting upon his initiative (and thus giving it away). Which means that killing him was probably a god damn tragedy. 57 shots? That's IMHO not justified violence in self-defense, that's murder (except that in this case it was legal).
Every human has a sovereign right to their own body, and that includes self-defense. It does not include jumping on an excuse to kill another human being when it's not necessary, or using excessive force when doing so. ______________________________________________ -You can never earn my respect, only lose it. It's given freely, and only grudgingly retracted when necessary. |
Steakkbone
Helios Incorporated Insurgency
|
Posted - 2008.05.26 23:58:00 -
[54]
This is why I love America.
|
Steakkbone
Helios Incorporated Insurgency
|
Posted - 2008.05.27 00:01:00 -
[55]
Originally by: Admus
Originally by: Kravick Drasari Edited by: Kravick Drasari on 24/05/2008 23:25:20 Edited by: Kravick Drasari on 24/05/2008 23:23:53 Edited by: Kravick Drasari on 24/05/2008 23:20:49
Originally by: Sokratesz Edited by: Sokratesz on 24/05/2008 12:57:34
Originally by: WalksWithCane
Originally by: Xrak
College shootings etc etc.
Yea, it's too bad that a citizen with a concealed gun permit wasn't on campus those days. Perhaps they could have saved lives instead of watching people get slaughtered like sheep while they huddled together praying that someone would stop the shooter....
I don't think the average citizen with a gun permit would have a) the guts and b) the skill to stop a determined shooter, especially not if he's moving fast and wearing kevlar. (see virtech)
You underestimate those who have been properly trained in the use of firearms. Its not like what you see in movies where there are fire fights and nether side can hit anything. As far as the kevlar thing, he wasn't wearing a kevlar lined helmet. If I was there with a firearm I definitely would have done something to try and stop him. I may not leave the situation unwounded but the other guy wouldn't be ether.
I grew up around guns my entire life. They are a tool just like every other weapon. You take guns away and we'll start using knives and baseball bats. There is nothing wrong with firearms themselves as long as everyone has equal access to them. States with concealed to carry laws have less crime than those that don't. Plus, its very very easy to get illegal firearms.
Look at Japan. Firearms are illegal there. Not even the police have them. It doesn't stop their citizens from maiming and killing each other though. Japan has a higher per capita assault with deadly weapons than America does incidents involving firearms. Those people are absolutely violent and the lack of firearms hasn't done anything to stop it.
If someone wants to kill someone the lack of a firearm isn't going to stop them. They will find a way.
I also want to point out that mass murders like college shootings would have been much more difficult to perpetrate armed with a chopping knife and a nailbat. Guns are better at killing, so while the crime rate may remain the same, perhaps the fatality rate will decrease.
Is America a violent country? CHECK. Is America full of diversity which translates to hate? CHECK. Impossible to ban guns in America because they will still be smuggled in, like alcohol during prohibition? CHECK.
Stop calling for gun control, it is simply not feasible.
|
Mr Friendly
|
Posted - 2008.05.27 00:36:00 -
[56]
Originally by: Nomakai Delateriel Right, and "robbery" = "intent on a killing spree" how exactly?
I doubt the robber in that example was intent on a killing spree (since he didn't manage to kill anyone). He was intent on getting money by threatening to use force, and thus gave the other guys the advantage by not acting upon his initiative (and thus giving it away). Which means that killing him was probably a god damn tragedy. 57 shots? That's IMHO not justified violence in self-defense, that's murder (except that in this case it was legal).
Every human has a sovereign right to their own body, and that includes self-defense. It does not include jumping on an excuse to kill another human being when it's not necessary, or using excessive force when doing so.
Sorry, as soon as someone acts like they are going to kill me, I have the right to kill them right back. Once they start actually trying to kill me, I will chase them down the street if need be to kill them.
Tragedy? Are you daft? Children dying of suffocation in a house fire is tragic... making sure a guy is dead after he tried to kill you is justified homicide.
|
Nomakai Delateriel
Shadow Company Souls of Vengeance
|
Posted - 2008.05.27 01:22:00 -
[57]
Originally by: Mr Friendly Sorry, as soon as someone acts like they are going to kill me, I have the right to kill them right back. Once they start actually trying to kill me, I will chase them down the street if need be to kill them.
Tragedy? Are you daft? Children dying of suffocation in a house fire is tragic... making sure a guy is dead after he tried to kill you is justified homicide.
Then you're no better than any criminal. And most legal systems recognize that (if you shoot someone when they're helpless or running away, then pretty much every legal system in the world is going to have you serving time).
Me, I'm not daft. It's just an extension of a logically consistent philosophy. A philosophy that starts with the assumption that the key to civilization and a just society is respect for the individual and an individuals right to his/her own body.
It's a tragedy because they probably killed when it wasn't absolutely necessary. Killing is the most gross violation of someone elses individuality that you can do, and the only justification to do it is when it's absolutely necessary to protect your individual rights and the invididual rights of others. When that justification isn't there, then it's a tragedy. No matter who it is.
Once you start to go beyond the preservation of yourself, and instead enforcing your will upon others when it's not absolutely necessary to protect your own individual rights (or the protection of the individual rights of others). Then you're trying to exert your will on others, and that's on the path to tyranny and oppression. It's especially bad when push comes to shove. I saw that in Kosovo. People who wanted Eye for an Eye (of course all filtered through their own prejudice), and people who wanted more than just to protect their individual rights and the individual rights of others. ______________________________________________ -You can never earn my respect, only lose it. It's given freely, and only grudgingly retracted when necessary. |
Kravick Drasari
|
Posted - 2008.05.27 02:10:00 -
[58]
Edited by: Kravick Drasari on 27/05/2008 02:11:22 Edited by: Kravick Drasari on 27/05/2008 02:10:50
Originally by: Nomakai Delateriel
Originally by: Mr Friendly Sorry, as soon as someone acts like they are going to kill me, I have the right to kill them right back. Once they start actually trying to kill me, I will chase them down the street if need be to kill them.
Tragedy? Are you daft? Children dying of suffocation in a house fire is tragic... making sure a guy is dead after he tried to kill you is justified homicide.
Then you're no better than any criminal. And most legal systems recognize that (if you shoot someone when they're helpless or running away, then pretty much every legal system in the world is going to have you serving time).
Me, I'm not daft. It's just an extension of a logically consistent philosophy. A philosophy that starts with the assumption that the key to civilization and a just society is respect for the individual and an individuals right to his/her own body.
It's a tragedy because they probably killed when it wasn't absolutely necessary. Killing is the most gross violation of someone elses individuality that you can do, and the only justification to do it is when it's absolutely necessary to protect your individual rights and the invididual rights of others. When that justification isn't there, then it's a tragedy. No matter who it is.
Once you start to go beyond the preservation of yourself, and instead enforcing your will upon others when it's not absolutely necessary to protect your own individual rights (or the protection of the individual rights of others). Then you're trying to exert your will on others, and that's on the path to tyranny and oppression. It's especially bad when push comes to shove. I saw that in Kosovo. People who wanted Eye for an Eye (of course all filtered through their own prejudice), and people who wanted more than just to protect their individual rights and the individual rights of others.
I am laughing at you now.
Quote: Sorry, as soon as someone acts like they are going to kill me, I have the right to kill them right back. Once they start actually trying to kill me, I will chase them down the street if need be to kill them.
Tragedy? Are you daft? Children dying of suffocation in a house fire is tragic... making sure a guy is dead after he tried to kill you is justified homicide.
Couldn't have said it better myself. As soon as people start acting like that they lose the right to be treated as a human being IMO. --- My cat Putter approves of this post. Be a Ninja! You know you want too: http://www.animecubed.com/billy/?Kravick |
pwnedgato
|
Posted - 2008.05.27 02:17:00 -
[59]
Partially because it seems to be the consensus already reached and mostly because I feel like linking this. Proper weapon handling is key
Originally by: Crumplecorn These is a forum for this.
|
Kravick Drasari
|
Posted - 2008.05.27 02:49:00 -
[60]
Originally by: pwnedgato Partially because it seems to be the consensus already reached and mostly because I feel like linking this. Proper weapon handling is key
That guy is definitely not "shooting blanks". --- My cat Putter approves of this post. Be a Ninja! You know you want too: http://www.animecubed.com/billy/?Kravick |
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 [2] 3 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |