why that was nice

[jrerun21 10+ year member]

So now that we know that they embodied low self-worth, we should render the same conclusion?

 

[mrogowski 5,000+ posts]

We should stop and assess why people are committing crimes like murder and stealing, all those things, then try to think about what's going through their heads, and ultimately just understand them and let them go... not punish them... their thought processes were obviously defective, or their self esteem low. Not their fault!
Hyperbole, right?

I really wish I could say yes, but one local individual actually got house arrest in a manslaughter charge on account of just that...

 

[tRidiot 10+ year member]

So now that we know that they embodied low self-worth, we should render the same conclusion?

Which is what?

 

[jrerun21 10+ year member]

We should stop and assess why people are committing crimes like murder and stealing, all those things, then try to think about what's going through their heads, and ultimately just understand them and let them go... not punish them... their thought processes were obviously defective, or their self esteem low. Not their fault!
Hyperbole, right?

If you don't assess and find ways to rehabilitate... then you're not solving the problem. The problem will just continue. The top reason for crime is poverty. You deal with poverty; you deal with crime. You deal with foreign relations; you deal with terrorism. You deal with globalization; you deal with illegal immigration (to some extent at least.)

 

[jrerun21 10+ year member]

Which is what?

That they are worth less than they should have realized.

 

[mrogowski 5,000+ posts]

We can assess things at face value. We should still look deeper and find out the complexities of each recurring event. Where would we be intellectually if we took everything in at face value.

Well, in this particular instance, the person lying in the shooter's yard would be alive. Not everything needs to be assessed in complexed manners before a logical conclusion could be reached.

 

[jrerun21 10+ year member]

Well, in this particular instance, the person lying in the shooter's yard would be alive. Not everything needs to be assessed in complexed manners before a logical conclusion could be reached.

I don't think that this example is complex at all. The thieves were killed by a neighbor that came out with the intent of shooting at all cost, despite the dispatcher's pleas.

 

[mrogowski 5,000+ posts]

I don't think that this example is complex at all. The thieves were killed by a neighbor that came out with the intent of shooting at all cost, despite the dispatcher's pleas.

Indeed. The shooter also had ample time to assess his risk when he did what he did. He was warned he could get hurt and he accepted that risk. I do not recall the 911 attendant stating that shooting his gun at someone was breaking the law however.

The shooter stated some amendment about having the right to bear arms. He therefore assessed that part of the risk, and accepted it also. Whether the amendment allows him to do such a thing I do not know.

 

[jrerun21 10+ year member]

Indeed. The shooter also had ample time to assess his risk when he did what he did. He was warned he could get hurt and he accepted that risk. I do not recall the 911 attendant stating that shooting his gun at someone was breaking the law however.
The shooter stated some amendment about having the right to bear arms. He therefore assessed that part of the risk, and accepted it also. Whether the amendment allows him to do such a thing I do not know.

I agree with you. The dispatcher neglecting to tell the neighbor that it is illegal probably has to do with his inability to assess the situation properly from his chair though.

 

[slick rick 10+ year member]

I agree with you. The dispatcher neglecting to tell the neighbor that it is illegal probably has to do with his inability to assess the situation properly from his chair though.

irrelevent...his act was mala in se...its common knowledge you cant just go out snipering people. the dispatcher did their job just fine.

 

[mrogowski 5,000+ posts]

I agree with you. The dispatcher neglecting to tell the neighbor that it is illegal probably has to do with his inability to assess the situation properly from his chair though.

Its these types of laws that really begin to convolute everything. For example, where I live it is against the law to shoot someone. I know that - meaning I do not have to take the time to ***** it, nor do I require a police officer to tell me.

If the contents of the amendment does in fact state what the shooter interpreted, then I repeat what I posted earlier - that there should be more instances of this going on.

 

[jrerun21 10+ year member]

irrelevent...his act was mala in se...its common knowledge you cant just go out snipering people. the dispatcher did their job just fine.

sniping*

Agreed.

 

[jrerun21 10+ year member]

Its these types of laws that really begin to convolute everything. For example, where I live it is against the law to shoot someone. I know that - meaning I do not have to take the time to ***** it, nor do I require a police officer to tell me.
If the contents of the amendment does in fact state what the shooter interpreted, then I repeat what I posted earlier - that there should be more instances of this going on.

That law is unconstitutional then. Why would we have the right to bear arms and not the right to use them in the right instance.

 

[mrray13 10+ year member]

Hmm... well I certainly would like to think if my house was being robbed, my neighbor saw it, and had a chance to stop them that he would do it.
A friend of mine had his house robbed -- guess what the law did? Nothing. Worse than nothing... they brought in a suspect TWICE. Let him post bail BOTH times. He skipped town both times -- haven't found him again yet.

If the guy didn't shoot the robbers they would likely never have been caught. Hell, in our society they probably would have sued the home-owners they robbed for stubbing their toe on the way out.

Interesting question about where to draw the line about "vigilantism" -- in this case the dudes neighbor was being robbed, based on what he said on the tape they approached him when he came outside, that makes for a better case in our system.

x2. i would much rather have a neighbor who would do that as do nothing and let the thiefs get away.

and why bring racism into it just because of what the guy looks like in a picture? that's just fucking gay and played the hell out.

wheeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee //content.invisioncic.com/y282845/emoticons/peace.gif.2db28b618ed8d1964ebbe2f5021d2c39.gif

 

[mrogowski 5,000+ posts]

That law is unconstitutional then. Why would we have the right to bear arms and not the right to use them in the right instance.

Forgive the way I worded it - I was referring to what the shooter told the dispatcher. I am not sure if it was an amendment or bylaw or...

My loose wording of the 'right to bear arms' should also be taken FWIW..