A call to the citizens of England!

  • 352 Replies
  • 26005 Views
*

Slemon

  • Flat Earth Researcher
  • 11690
Re: A call to the citizens of England!
« Reply #90 on: June 05, 2010, 03:28:04 PM »
If you've got a weapon, they're going to have the same, and they'll probably have had more practice. So you're outmatched 99% of the time.

Is there supposed to be some magical correlation between what you're carrying and the other guy is?  Whether or not you have a gun has absolutely no effect on whether or not the other guy does.

Quote
If you haven't got a weapon, you're probably still slightly outmatched, but as I said, in public go into public view, at home you can do plenty of things. Hit them with a chair if you have to

You make it sound incredibly simple.  What if the mugging is at night in a deserted alley, with no one around?  Or if the mugger grabs you?  Sometimes you have no choice but to fight back immediately.  As for hitting someone with a chair, the idea of a gun is that you can kill someone from a distance, but with a chair you have to get close to them.  Why make it unfair for you?

Quote
but frankly murder is murder

Killing someone in self-defense is not murder.  If you don't think that people should have the right to fight back, then frankly, I don't think there's anything more I can really say to you.

Quote
If you get enough time to pull a gun out and shoot, you have enough time to run away.

That's not true a lot of the time.  Also, it's not reasonable to expect people to "run away" from their own home.

If you can buy a gun, Why can't the aggressor?
Oh, and as you said: with a gun you can attack from a distance. So how can you defend yourself, even with a gun, against a person at a distance?

Outside that, I guess we'll just have to agree to disagree. The way i say it, even murderers have families.


As a last thought, John Wilkes Booth. The man who killed Abraham Lincoln, and many of his reasons could be equated to self defence, such as anger at the civil war. I'm not advocating what he did, and that's the plain and simple point.

?

Eddy Baby

  • Official Member
  • 9986
Re: A call to the citizens of England!
« Reply #91 on: June 05, 2010, 04:21:36 PM »
The man who killed Abraham Lincoln, and many of his reasons could be equated to self defence

 :-\

*

Slemon

  • Flat Earth Researcher
  • 11690
Re: A call to the citizens of England!
« Reply #92 on: June 05, 2010, 04:23:30 PM »
The man who killed Abraham Lincoln, and many of his reasons could be equated to self defence

 :-\

It's a fact of life. even those we think are evil have motivation. Even Hitler had, however misguided, reasons. Booth simply wanted to defend his country-they were his last words, to my knowledge.

*

Space Cowgirl

  • MOM
  • Administrator
  • 43451
  • Official FE Recruiter
Re: A call to the citizens of England!
« Reply #93 on: June 05, 2010, 04:24:48 PM »
What the hell does that have to do with anything?
I'm sorry. Am I to understand that when you have a boner you like to imagine punching the shit out of Tom Bishop? That's disgusting.

*

Slemon

  • Flat Earth Researcher
  • 11690
Re: A call to the citizens of England!
« Reply #94 on: June 05, 2010, 04:27:12 PM »
What the hell does that have to do with anything?

It was how he saw self defence, and to defend himself, and others, he shot Abraham Lincoln.
A tragedy? Yes.
Misguided? Maybe.
Self defence? To him, it was.


?

Eddy Baby

  • Official Member
  • 9986
Re: A call to the citizens of England!
« Reply #95 on: June 05, 2010, 04:34:56 PM »
What the hell does that have to do with anything?

It was how he saw self defence, and to defend himself, and others, he shot Abraham Lincoln.
A tragedy? Yes.
Misguided? Maybe.
Self defence? To him, it was.



Whut. You know that makes no sense. Self defence = direct threat to self.

*

Space Cowgirl

  • MOM
  • Administrator
  • 43451
  • Official FE Recruiter
Re: A call to the citizens of England!
« Reply #96 on: June 05, 2010, 04:42:19 PM »
What the hell does that have to do with anything?

It was how he saw self defence, and to defend himself, and others, he shot Abraham Lincoln.
A tragedy? Yes.
Misguided? Maybe.
Self defence? To him, it was.



No, that has nothing to do with the kind of self defense that is being discussed in this thread.  You pulled that out of your ass.
I'm sorry. Am I to understand that when you have a boner you like to imagine punching the shit out of Tom Bishop? That's disgusting.

*

Saddam Hussein

  • Official Member
  • 35367
  • Former President of Iraq
Re: A call to the citizens of England!
« Reply #97 on: June 05, 2010, 04:45:28 PM »
If you can buy a gun, Why can't the aggressor?

They certainly can.  And they probably can even if you can't.  Criminals are always going to have guns, no matter whether or not they're legal.  Outlawing guns wholesale will only stop innocent, law-abiding people from having guns.

Quote
Oh, and as you said: with a gun you can attack from a distance. So how can you defend yourself, even with a gun, against a person at a distance?

Uh, I think you and I might be misunderstanding each other here.  You just said:

Quote
Oh, and as you said: with a gun you can attack from a distance.

And then you asked:

Quote
So how can you defend yourself, even with a gun, against a person at a distance?

I think you already know how.  You point the gun at your attacker and pull the trigger.

Quote
The way i say it, even murderers have families.

I understand that, and I don't think that the killing of any human being is something to be taken lightly.  If someone can take down an attacker with non-lethal force and let the courts handle him, then by all means, they should do that.  But in a life-or-death struggle, if it's either an innocent citizen or a criminal with murderous intentions who gets killed, then the innocent person is the one who deserves to live more.

Quote
As a last thought, John Wilkes Booth. The man who killed Abraham Lincoln, and many of his reasons could be equated to self defence, such as anger at the civil war.

What Space Cowgirl said.  Also, Booth killed Lincoln for political reasons.  I'm not saying that killing is objectively okay if your own subjective morals find a way to justify it.  I'm saying it's justifiable if you or another innocent person is in imminent danger of death, and killing the attacker is the most reasonable way of stopping him.

*

Slemon

  • Flat Earth Researcher
  • 11690
Re: A call to the citizens of England!
« Reply #98 on: June 05, 2010, 04:53:01 PM »
If you can buy a gun, Why can't the aggressor?

They certainly can.  And they probably can even if you can't.  Criminals are always going to have guns, no matter whether or not they're legal.  Outlawing guns wholesale will only stop innocent, law-abiding people from having guns.

Quote
Oh, and as you said: with a gun you can attack from a distance. So how can you defend yourself, even with a gun, against a person at a distance?

Uh, I think you and I might be misunderstanding each other here.  You just said:

Quote
Oh, and as you said: with a gun you can attack from a distance.

And then you asked:

Quote
So how can you defend yourself, even with a gun, against a person at a distance?

I think you already know how.  You point the gun at your attacker and pull the trigger.

Quote
The way i say it, even murderers have families.

I understand that, and I don't think that the killing of any human being is something to be taken lightly.  If someone can take down an attacker with non-lethal force and let the courts handle him, then by all means, they should do that.  But in a life-or-death struggle, if it's either an innocent citizen or a criminal with murderous intentions who gets killed, then the innocent person is the one who deserves to live more.

Quote
As a last thought, John Wilkes Booth. The man who killed Abraham Lincoln, and many of his reasons could be equated to self defence, such as anger at the civil war.

What Space Cowgirl said.  Also, Booth killed Lincoln for political reasons.  I'm not saying that killing is objectively okay if your own subjective morals find a way to justify it.  I'm saying it's justifiable if you or another innocent person is in imminent danger of death, and killing the attacker is the most reasonable way of stopping him.

First off, i have no idea how to split up quotes, so I'll just answer down here.
The majority of criminals are going to find it very hard to get a gun. You'll be facing less criminals with guns, as opposed to every thug you meet. Plus, all you have to do is get angry with someone and for plenty of people, the temptation will be too much.
My point with the 'how can you defend yourself' argument is simply, by the time you pull a gun out that person would've shot you. If you pull the gun out first, you're the aggressor, pull the gun out second and you're shot.
Booth is a topic and a half. look up battered woman syndrome for a rough analogy: he most likely felt that he and his countrymen were in mortal danger. Lincoln had started the war which had killed many of them after all.

*

Space Cowgirl

  • MOM
  • Administrator
  • 43451
  • Official FE Recruiter
Re: A call to the citizens of England!
« Reply #99 on: June 05, 2010, 04:58:12 PM »
You shouldn't try to debate while you're smoking crack.
I'm sorry. Am I to understand that when you have a boner you like to imagine punching the shit out of Tom Bishop? That's disgusting.

?

Mykael

  • 4249
  • Professor of the Horrible Sciences
Re: A call to the citizens of England!
« Reply #100 on: June 05, 2010, 11:47:44 PM »
The majority of criminals are going to find it very hard to get a gun.
Um, no. Criminals will pretty much always have easy access to guns, thanks to gun-runners and smugglers.

Plus, all you have to do is get angry with someone and for plenty of people, the temptation will be too much.
You think that the first reaction of the majority of armed adults, when offended, will be to pull a gun and blow the other person's face off?

My point with the 'how can you defend yourself' argument is simply, by the time you pull a gun out that person would've shot you. If you pull the gun out first, you're the aggressor, pull the gun out second and you're shot.
What sort of environment are you taking about here? Real life does not equate to Wild West shoot-outs.

Consider a home invasion. You wake up in the middle of the night when someone smashes your window in. Scared, you take your hunting shotgun and creep out your room. You see the burglar on the first floor, he has a crowbar and a flashlight. What would you do?

Booth is a topic and a half. look up battered woman syndrome for a rough analogy: he most likely felt that he and his countrymen were in mortal danger. Lincoln had started the war which had killed many of them after all.
Utterly irrelevant and beyond the scope of this discussion. We are talking about situations of immediate self-defense in which one party is criminal, hostile, and armed.



You shouldn't try to debate while you're smoking crack.
Yes, this.

Re: A call to the citizens of England!
« Reply #101 on: June 06, 2010, 02:25:37 AM »
The majority of criminals are going to find it very hard to get a gun.
Um, no. Criminals will pretty much always have easy access to guns, thanks to gun-runners and smugglers
[/quote]

Protip: Look at Japan.
When I was 5 years old my mum always told me that happiness was the key to life.
When I went to school they asked me what I wanted to be when I grew up.
I wrote down "happy."
They told me I didn't understand the assignment.

*

Slemon

  • Flat Earth Researcher
  • 11690
Re: A call to the citizens of England!
« Reply #102 on: June 06, 2010, 02:36:31 AM »
The majority of criminals are going to find it very hard to get a gun.
Um, no. Criminals will pretty much always have easy access to guns, thanks to gun-runners and smugglers.

Plus, all you have to do is get angry with someone and for plenty of people, the temptation will be too much.
You think that the first reaction of the majority of armed adults, when offended, will be to pull a gun and blow the other person's face off?

My point with the 'how can you defend yourself' argument is simply, by the time you pull a gun out that person would've shot you. If you pull the gun out first, you're the aggressor, pull the gun out second and you're shot.
What sort of environment are you taking about here? Real life does not equate to Wild West shoot-outs.

Consider a home invasion. You wake up in the middle of the night when someone smashes your window in. Scared, you take your hunting shotgun and creep out your room. You see the burglar on the first floor, he has a crowbar and a flashlight. What would you do?

Booth is a topic and a half. look up battered woman syndrome for a rough analogy: he most likely felt that he and his countrymen were in mortal danger. Lincoln had started the war which had killed many of them after all.
Utterly irrelevant and beyond the scope of this discussion. We are talking about situations of immediate self-defense in which one party is criminal, hostile, and armed.



You shouldn't try to debate while you're smoking crack.
Yes, this.

How would you get a gun if you couldn't buy one legally? It's not as easy as TV seems to say. I mean, sure there are smugglers, but you'd have to a) find them and b) buy from them, with out anyone knowing. Not to mention, if you can find them, then chances are plenty of other people, like the police, can.
For some people, I said. Some people may have a strong temper, some may have a mental illness of sorts, whatever. When you're angry, not everyone has full control over their actions, chances are some people will. Not all, but some.

Oh, and the environment I'm talking about is in the street. But, if someone breaks into your home, you can throw a chair at them or something. But if they're a thief, shooting someone over a matter of money is just wrong. Why don't you speak to the thief's family: "Yes, I took your child away because I think his life is worth less than a few dollars".

Oh, and Booth was simply an example to show the harm buying guns can do, and how some people may see self defence, however misguidedly.

*

Saddam Hussein

  • Official Member
  • 35367
  • Former President of Iraq
Re: A call to the citizens of England!
« Reply #103 on: June 06, 2010, 06:13:25 AM »
How would you get a gun if you couldn't buy one legally? It's not as easy as TV seems to say. I mean, sure there are smugglers, but you'd have to a) find them and b) buy from them, with out anyone knowing. Not to mention, if you can find them, then chances are plenty of other people, like the police, can.

There are criminals who make it their business to deal in weapons.  In fact, most organized crime is done using stolen or sanitized weapons to stop the police from tracking them.

Quote
For some people, I said. Some people may have a strong temper, some may have a mental illness of sorts, whatever. When you're angry, not everyone has full control over their actions, chances are some people will. Not all, but some.

I'm not saying that I support guns being entirely unregulated.  I don't think that people with a possibly dangerous mental illness should be allowed to buy them, and I support requiring training and certification to carry a concealed weapon on your person.  As it is, the vast majority of people with a concealed weapon use them responsibly.

Quote
Oh, and the environment I'm talking about is in the street. But, if someone breaks into your home, you can throw a chair at them or something. But if they're a thief, shooting someone over a matter of money is just wrong. Why don't you speak to the thief's family: "Yes, I took your child away because I think his life is worth less than a few dollars".

Again, you seem to be overestimating the capabilities of the average citizen.  Throwing a chair at someone probably isn't going to incapacitate them.  Also, many criminals would rather kill than go to prison for their crimes.  So if you see someone breaking into your home, it's a good bet that if they see you, they're going to attack you.  So you wouldn't be killing them "over a matter of money", it would be in defense of you and your home.

Quote
Oh, and Booth was simply an example to show the harm buying guns can do, and how some people may see self defence, however misguidedly.

Almost every criminal who has ever lived has found a way to justify their actions to themselves.  Booth may well have believed he was doing the right thing, but it wasn't self-defense by any stretch of the imagination.  We're defining self-defense here as when you are put in reasonable fear of imminent serious harm.  Note the words "reasonable" and "imminent".

*

Slemon

  • Flat Earth Researcher
  • 11690
Re: A call to the citizens of England!
« Reply #104 on: June 06, 2010, 06:59:14 AM »
How would you get a gun if you couldn't buy one legally? It's not as easy as TV seems to say. I mean, sure there are smugglers, but you'd have to a) find them and b) buy from them, with out anyone knowing. Not to mention, if you can find them, then chances are plenty of other people, like the police, can.

There are criminals who make it their business to deal in weapons.  In fact, most organized crime is done using stolen or sanitized weapons to stop the police from tracking them.

Quote
For some people, I said. Some people may have a strong temper, some may have a mental illness of sorts, whatever. When you're angry, not everyone has full control over their actions, chances are some people will. Not all, but some.

I'm not saying that I support guns being entirely unregulated.  I don't think that people with a possibly dangerous mental illness should be allowed to buy them, and I support requiring training and certification to carry a concealed weapon on your person.  As it is, the vast majority of people with a concealed weapon use them responsibly.

Quote
Oh, and the environment I'm talking about is in the street. But, if someone breaks into your home, you can throw a chair at them or something. But if they're a thief, shooting someone over a matter of money is just wrong. Why don't you speak to the thief's family: "Yes, I took your child away because I think his life is worth less than a few dollars".

Again, you seem to be overestimating the capabilities of the average citizen.  Throwing a chair at someone probably isn't going to incapacitate them.  Also, many criminals would rather kill than go to prison for their crimes.  So if you see someone breaking into your home, it's a good bet that if they see you, they're going to attack you.  So you wouldn't be killing them "over a matter of money", it would be in defense of you and your home.

Quote
Oh, and Booth was simply an example to show the harm buying guns can do, and how some people may see self defence, however misguidedly.

Almost every criminal who has ever lived has found a way to justify their actions to themselves.  Booth may well have believed he was doing the right thing, but it wasn't self-defense by any stretch of the imagination.  We're defining self-defense here as when you are put in reasonable fear of imminent serious harm.  Note the words "reasonable" and "imminent".

It's not necessarily going to be easy to find someone with a mental illness-maybe they haven't had much sleep and they're irritable. Little things like that; a worryingly large proportion of murders have motives which are, frankly, pathetic to anyone other than the murderer. Just need to make a mention of that.
Don't forget; not only the typical criminal could end up murderers. Booth again, as an example of what guns can do, simply. An actor; probably wouldn't be considered too criminal, apparently was quite likeable, but due to strong political opinions and anger, became a murderer. Not to mention, the Columbine High School Massacre. Students using the access to guns-not necessarily their own guns, but ones they could easily find. As well as Luby's Massacre and the Virginia Tech massacre.
Throwing a chair at someone or the like will distract a person. At the very least, besides, hiding would by easy. That way it's easy to prevent harm to anyone over a matter of a few dollars. Sure criminals need to be punished, but killing them, well, imagine it was your son or daughter, your brother or sister, your mother or father, your friend who was shot.

*

Space Cowgirl

  • MOM
  • Administrator
  • 43451
  • Official FE Recruiter
Re: A call to the citizens of England!
« Reply #105 on: June 06, 2010, 10:34:02 AM »
I have purchased 2 guns illegally in my life.  It wasn't difficult.  I live in the U.S. so I imagine finding a gun is a lot easier here, but I promise you that where there is a will, there is a way.

You are free to roll over and let some criminal steal everything you own and take your life, but I'd rather go out fighting. 
I'm sorry. Am I to understand that when you have a boner you like to imagine punching the shit out of Tom Bishop? That's disgusting.

Re: A call to the citizens of England!
« Reply #106 on: June 06, 2010, 12:20:36 PM »
You are free to roll over and let some criminal steal everything you own and take your life, but I'd rather go out fighting. 

Meh, better than getting shot
"So now we know. Pigs are horses. Girls are boys. War is peace." -Arundhati Roy

*

Slemon

  • Flat Earth Researcher
  • 11690
Re: A call to the citizens of England!
« Reply #107 on: June 06, 2010, 12:28:29 PM »
I have purchased 2 guns illegally in my life.  It wasn't difficult.  I live in the U.S. so I imagine finding a gun is a lot easier here, but I promise you that where there is a will, there is a way.

You are free to roll over and let some criminal steal everything you own and take your life, but I'd rather go out fighting. 

Tell that to the criminal's family: "Oh, I thought your child's life was a matter of dollars'.

?

Mrs. Peach

  • Official Member
  • 6258
Re: A call to the citizens of England!
« Reply #108 on: June 06, 2010, 12:32:44 PM »
I have purchased 2 guns illegally in my life.  It wasn't difficult.  I live in the U.S. so I imagine finding a gun is a lot easier here, but I promise you that where there is a will, there is a way.

You are free to roll over and let some criminal steal everything you own and take your life, but I'd rather go out fighting. 

Tell that to the criminal's family: "Oh, I thought your child's life was a matter of dollars'.

You missed the bold part; as she'd be dead, it would be difficult for her to apologize to the criminal's family.

*

Space Cowgirl

  • MOM
  • Administrator
  • 43451
  • Official FE Recruiter
Re: A call to the citizens of England!
« Reply #109 on: June 06, 2010, 12:39:01 PM »
Why should I care about the criminal's family, anyway? The criminal didn't give a shit about mine.
I'm sorry. Am I to understand that when you have a boner you like to imagine punching the shit out of Tom Bishop? That's disgusting.

*

Slemon

  • Flat Earth Researcher
  • 11690
Re: A call to the citizens of England!
« Reply #110 on: June 06, 2010, 12:53:25 PM »
I have purchased 2 guns illegally in my life.  It wasn't difficult.  I live in the U.S. so I imagine finding a gun is a lot easier here, but I promise you that where there is a will, there is a way.

You are free to roll over and let some criminal steal everything you own and take your life, but I'd rather go out fighting. 

Tell that to the criminal's family: "Oh, I thought your child's life was a matter of dollars'.

You missed the bold part; as she'd be dead, it would be difficult for her to apologize to the criminal's family.

If she'd shot the criminal, I mean.

And the criminal's family are completely innocent. What if it was your child, sibling, parent, friend that was shot? Would you be happy if they told you it was just to save a few dollars?

*

Space Cowgirl

  • MOM
  • Administrator
  • 43451
  • Official FE Recruiter
Re: A call to the citizens of England!
« Reply #111 on: June 06, 2010, 12:58:58 PM »
My family is completely innocent in this situation, would the criminal's family be happy if my family told them their child shot me for a few dollars? Also, how do you know the criminal's family is completely innocent? After all, they raised a criminal.
I'm sorry. Am I to understand that when you have a boner you like to imagine punching the shit out of Tom Bishop? That's disgusting.

*

theonlydann

  • Official Member
  • 24172
Re: A call to the citizens of England!
« Reply #112 on: June 06, 2010, 01:02:23 PM »
FUCK THE CRIMINAL.

ANd the criminals family.

*

Slemon

  • Flat Earth Researcher
  • 11690
Re: A call to the citizens of England!
« Reply #113 on: June 06, 2010, 01:04:34 PM »
My family is completely innocent in this situation, would the criminal's family be happy if my family told them their child shot me for a few dollars? Also, how do you know the criminal's family is completely innocent? After all, they raised a criminal.

You could hide to avoid being shot, you could run, plenty of things.
Oh, and 'raised a criminal'? Really? What, did they teach the child how to steal and shoot, or did the child ruin their own life? Look at things like Columbine, or even the murder of Lawrence King: the families didn't teach that, the children simply snapped.

A family is not to blame for a child's actions, and the family should not be punished for it. What if it was a relative of yours, or a friend?

*

theonlydann

  • Official Member
  • 24172
Re: A call to the citizens of England!
« Reply #114 on: June 06, 2010, 01:11:18 PM »
My family is completely innocent in this situation, would the criminal's family be happy if my family told them their child shot me for a few dollars? Also, how do you know the criminal's family is completely innocent? After all, they raised a criminal.

You could hide to avoid being shot, you could run, plenty of things.
Oh, and 'raised a criminal'? Really? What, did they teach the child how to steal and shoot, or did the child ruin their own life? Look at things like Columbine, or even the murder of Lawrence King: the families didn't teach that, the children simply snapped.

A family is not to blame for a child's actions, and the family should not be punished for it. What if it was a relative of yours, or a friend?
You're silly, and defending a silly point. Criminals have no excuse, and no expectation of survival if they enter your home. Their is no excuse to break into someones home... or mug someone... or in any other way threaten someone without provocation. Their family... well... thats just to bad for them... but when thinking about me or my family... theirs isnt entering into my mind.

?

Eddy Baby

  • Official Member
  • 9986
Re: A call to the citizens of England!
« Reply #115 on: June 06, 2010, 01:22:40 PM »
And the criminal's family are completely innocent.

Oh, so you're against all forms of punishment then?

*

Space Cowgirl

  • MOM
  • Administrator
  • 43451
  • Official FE Recruiter
Re: A call to the citizens of England!
« Reply #116 on: June 06, 2010, 01:34:37 PM »
My family is completely innocent in this situation, would the criminal's family be happy if my family told them their child shot me for a few dollars? Also, how do you know the criminal's family is completely innocent? After all, they raised a criminal.

You could hide to avoid being shot, you could run, plenty of things.
Oh, and 'raised a criminal'? Really? What, did they teach the child how to steal and shoot, or did the child ruin their own life? Look at things like Columbine, or even the murder of Lawrence King: the families didn't teach that, the children simply snapped.

A family is not to blame for a child's actions, and the family should not be punished for it. What if it was a relative of yours, or a friend?

How do you know I could hide? How do you know I'm not sitting here in a wheelchair, unable to do anything but aim this shotgun at the murdering thief crawling into my window?

And yes, perhaps the child was raised to be criminal by parents who are also criminals. It happens. Regardless, I don't give a shit about this hypothetical criminal's family, I don't give a shit if the person just snapped and did a school shooting, I DON'T CARE.  I will defend myself with whatever I can, if the criminal has to die, so be it.

If It was a relative of mine or a friend who broke into someone's home, or mugged someone on the street, and got shot and killed doing it, then I'd be sad, but I'd also realize they got what they deserved.  Especially considering the fact that if that friend or family member needed "a few dollars" I'd have given it to him/her gladly. 
I'm sorry. Am I to understand that when you have a boner you like to imagine punching the shit out of Tom Bishop? That's disgusting.

*

Marcus Aurelius

  • 4546
  • My Alts: Tom Bishop, Gayer, theonlydann
Re: A call to the citizens of England!
« Reply #117 on: June 06, 2010, 06:44:37 PM »
My family is completely innocent in this situation, would the criminal's family be happy if my family told them their child shot me for a few dollars? Also, how do you know the criminal's family is completely innocent? After all, they raised a criminal.

You could hide to avoid being shot, you could run, plenty of things.
Oh, and 'raised a criminal'? Really? What, did they teach the child how to steal and shoot, or did the child ruin their own life? Look at things like Columbine, or even the murder of Lawrence King: the families didn't teach that, the children simply snapped.

A family is not to blame for a child's actions, and the family should not be punished for it. What if it was a relative of yours, or a friend?

You certainly have the right to protect your life and your property.  When it comes to your life, running is always an option, but because it is YOUR life, you have to do what you believe will give you the highest chance of survival, if it is running and hiding, then go for it, if it is fighting back, you should use whatever means you have to ensure your chances of survival are as high as possible.  In a situation where you are under attack, why should you have to lower your chances of survival?

Lets use a situation here.  Some maniac has just walked into an academic building and started killing people, the doors are chained shut (by the attacker) and he is going room to room executing people.

According to you, the best option is to hide, so lets say you found a perfect hiding space, but only one person can fit inside.  If you choose to take the hiding space, you are increasing your chance of survival, but you are lowering everybody elses chances (since there is one less hiding space).  What right do you have to lower the survival chances of everybody else?

What about when the police come in.  What right do they have to shoot the maniac?  They have no right to take his life, since that would give him equal right to shoot back at them right? What if you have a gun, and the killer is turned away from you executing some innocent people, and you have the perfect shot to the head?  Also consider that rushing the killer would likely bring his attention to you, therefore lowering your chance of survival greatly.  Shooting the killer gives the highest chance of survival for both you and the innocents he is about to execute, but gives the killer a very low chance of survival.  Doing nothing almost ensures the innocents will die, and rushing him will lower your chance of survival, which if you fail will also likely end up in the deaths of the innocents.  Should you take the shot?

?

Christianrocker90

  • 3135
  • Rays Republic
Re: A call to the citizens of England!
« Reply #118 on: June 06, 2010, 07:40:22 PM »
My family is completely innocent in this situation, would the criminal's family be happy if my family told them their child shot me for a few dollars? Also, how do you know the criminal's family is completely innocent? After all, they raised a criminal.

You could hide to avoid being shot, you could run, plenty of things.
Oh, and 'raised a criminal'? Really? What, did they teach the child how to steal and shoot, or did the child ruin their own life? Look at things like Columbine, or even the murder of Lawrence King: the families didn't teach that, the children simply snapped.

A family is not to blame for a child's actions, and the family should not be punished for it. What if it was a relative of yours, or a friend?

Never watched or read something on rapists have you? Most rapists are a product of being raped themselves, most of the time by a  family member, so don't tell me that the family is automatically completely innocent. Th crime can be called "Endangering the welfare of a child".

*

theonlydann

  • Official Member
  • 24172
Re: A call to the citizens of England!
« Reply #119 on: June 06, 2010, 07:43:17 PM »
My family is completely innocent in this situation, would the criminal's family be happy if my family told them their child shot me for a few dollars? Also, how do you know the criminal's family is completely innocent? After all, they raised a criminal.

You could hide to avoid being shot, you could run, plenty of things.
Oh, and 'raised a criminal'? Really? What, did they teach the child how to steal and shoot, or did the child ruin their own life? Look at things like Columbine, or even the murder of Lawrence King: the families didn't teach that, the children simply snapped.

A family is not to blame for a child's actions, and the family should not be punished for it. What if it was a relative of yours, or a friend?

Never watched or read something on rapists have you? Most rapists are a product of being raped themselves, most of the time by a  family member, so don't tell me that the family is automatically completely innocent. Th crime can be called "Endangering the welfare of a child".
or rape