View Full Version : Father of murdered child vows to kill the murderer when he is released
BJJ-Blue
03-08-2011, 08:21 AM
"The father of a 5-year-old boy killed in 1975 is vowing to murder his son's killer if the man is released, as scheduled, several years early from a 40-year sentence.
John Foreman said in an interview Monday with WPRO-AM radio that he will kill convicted murderer Michael Woodmansee "as aggressively and as painfully" as he killed his son if Woodmansee is released from prison early.
Woodmansee, who was 16 years old at the time, kidnapped and killed Jason Foreman in 1975 in South Kingstown, R.I. He confessed and was convicted of second-degree murder eight years later.
Jason Foreman was presumed to be missing until 1982, when Woodmansee tried to lure another boy into his home. The boy escaped and police began to question Woodmansee about Foreman's disappearance.
Authorities found the boy's skull and bones on Woodmansee's , along with a journal that detailed the gruesome killing. John Foreman told the radio station that Woodmansee wrote about eating his son's flesh in the journal.
"That's what he thinks about. That's what is still on his mind I'm sure, if gets out again, to do this again," Foreman said.
Woodmansee pleaded guilty to second-degree murder in 1983 and was sentenced to 40 years in jail. This was part of a plea bargain meant to spare the Foreman family from hearing the details of their son's death.
But Woodmansee is set to be released 12 years earlier than was previously expected, the Providence Journal reports, sparking outrage from the Foreman family.
"I do intend, if this man is released anywhere in my vicinity, or if I can find him after the fact, I do intend to kill this man," Foreman told the radio station.
Amy Kempe, a spokeswoman for Attorney General Peter Kilmartin, said in a statement Monday that he was concerned and outraged about Woodmansee's scheduled release, and said he was urging the Department of Corrections to consider all avenues available to keep him behind bars. Kempe said the office would work with the Department of Corrections to review all legal options available.
Patricia Coyne-***ue, chief legal counsel for the Department of Corrections, said Monday she had not yet heard from the attorney general's office, but that typically the only way an inmate can lose good time he's earned for early release is if he misbehaves.
She explained that Woodmansee is eligible for early release under a longstanding law, first put in place in 1872, and last significantly changed in 1960. That law allowed Woodmansee to earn up to 10 days off his sentence for every month he behaved. Because he also had a job in prison, he was eligible to receive up to two additional days per month off his sentence for every month he worked at least 15 days, she said.
For his own protection, Woodmansee served nearly all of the last 28 years of his sentence in prisons in Massachusetts instead of Rhode Island, but returned to the state last week, the newspaper said."
Source:
http://www.foxnews.com/us/2011/03/08/father-says-murder-5-year-olds-killer/
MasterKiller
03-08-2011, 08:37 AM
I'd do it, too.
sanjuro_ronin
03-08-2011, 08:45 AM
Why is he being released early ??
MasterKiller
03-08-2011, 09:06 AM
Why is he being released early ??
Time off for good behavior.
David Jamieson
03-08-2011, 09:14 AM
For his own protection, Woodmansee served nearly all of the last 28 years of his sentence in prisons in Massachusetts instead of Rhode Island, but returned to the state last week, the newspaper said."
Unfortunately, the boy did not get to live for one second of those 28 years that he has by the grace of a justice system been maintaining breath in his body.
There is no such thing as good behaviour because time has passed.
He took a life and has therefore forfeited his own in doing so. There should be no early release and he should be happy he is still drawing breath, eating food and able to think about the mysteries of life.
I don't blame the father for his thoughts. I would say wisen up though. public announcements of uttering threats can get this guy locked up too and there's no sense in being stupid because you think you have public favour and though you might, the law cannot favour you when you break it.
sanjuro_ronin
03-08-2011, 09:30 AM
Time off for good behavior.
Boggles the mind...
Did this person get therapy while in Jail at least ?
BJJ-Blue
03-08-2011, 09:35 AM
I would say wisen up though. public announcements of uttering threats can get this guy locked up too and there's no sense in being stupid because you think you have public favour and though you might, the law cannot favour you when you break it.
Actually that's legally a sign of insanity. Part of the insanity (or temporary insanity) defense is that you don't know what you are doing is wrong, and covering your tracks has been used by prosecutors to beat those pleading insanity or temporary insanity. They say if you are trying to cover it up, you must know it's wrong. The fact that the kid's father is openly not trying to "get away with it" actually lends credence to the insanity defense he will likely have to plead if he indeed kills the guy.
I also have to say I agree with MK 100% on this one. And if I'm ever on a jury where this happens, I'd never convict they guy.
Lucas
03-08-2011, 10:08 AM
i wouldnt convict him either. i would do the same thing if my child was taken... and i dont even have kids so i know if i did that feeling would be magnified greatly.
and DJ is right. he did the crime, there is no 'good behavior' after the fact...you cannot erase blood. you were convicted and you should serve the entire punishment sentenced...
if i were filthy rich i would hire that man the best lawyer in the country to defend him after he blows that ******* away.
David Jamieson
03-08-2011, 10:32 AM
I wonder what the murderer has done for the family of the child since the murder?
I wonder what steps has the murderer taken to make amends?
What has he done to reverse the harm and start doing good?
has he taken the initiative on anything? Fund raising for children help groups? Talking with other high risk offenders to tell his story so they may avoid it.
working with psych pros to help them understand the mind of a child killer, etc etc.
Even with all these things done, if done and somehow, I am not certain there has been any rehab effort and even if there was, the simple fact of the matter is that if he truly realizes the gravity of his crime and te cost, then he would gladly forfeit his time and his interests to correcting the problem in a larger way.
Getting out for good behaviour? Killing children is not good behaviour and It is irrelevant if he says please and thank you in a prison setting.
Responsibility and accountability do not include time off for "behaving" well.
MasterKiller
03-08-2011, 10:35 AM
The guy ate part of the kid. He should have been killed in prison a long time ago.
BJJ-Blue
03-08-2011, 10:37 AM
And the murderer was 16 when he did it. If you kidnap, murder, and eat a child at 16, imo you cannot be rehabilitated.
Neither Ted Bundy, John Wayne Gacy, the Green River Killer, the Nightstalker, etc killed at that young an age, and those guys went on to kill dozens of victims over many years.
BJJ-Blue
03-08-2011, 10:39 AM
The guy ate part of the kid. He should have been killed in prison a long time ago.
They moved him to another friggin State to serve his time. But you're right, I'm still surprised no one killed him in prison.
Dale Dugas
03-08-2011, 12:15 PM
Pieces of offal as this convict we are talking about are kept segregated from gen pop as they would be killed.
Crybaby liberal wussbag mentalities need to be removed from prisons and they should be places you never want to go, EVER. People should never be segregated, and if they are offed in prison, well, you did commit a heinous crime and you deserve what you get. Man up, and if you do not want to do the time, then do not do the crime.
This POS deserves nothing other than a painful death for what he did.
unacceptable actions by any means.
I will give an alibi for the father as he is just over the border in RI.
David Jamieson
03-08-2011, 12:29 PM
I kind of agree and disagree with you Dale.
As an Ideal, I agree.
within context to the reality, I disagree.
Fact of the matter is that the prison system has become an extension of the welfare system.
In the states, it's privatized and open to all sorts of corruptions by that fact alone! IN fact there are cases of judges conspiring with prisons to convict people in order to get the numbers up for a given prison or juvenile detention center! yikes!
Also, you will have guys who have stolen some tires from an old garage that had crappy lawyers getting tossed into prison and right next to them is a guy who killed 3 people with a lawnmower blade.
Of course you need to segregate populations in prisons. You can't have continuation of crime occurring in the institutions that are intended to remedy that! lol
But, getting back to the ideal, the thing with ideals is that they require buy in from all involved and the prisoner will never participate in something that requires uprightness.
Lucas
03-08-2011, 12:44 PM
our big mistake as humans was getting rid of dungeons. save prisons for regular criminals and send the sickos to the dungeon. to save space it can be under our prisons and our regular criminals can feed the dungeon via slop holes to save on waste and protect our landfills from more prison waste. man im good
thug justice huh... hope its worth it... better get all he can from it... coz he'll go down for it... this isnt the kind of thing one could expect to get away with...
Lucas
03-08-2011, 01:23 PM
i just would have done it and never got caught...not announce it on the radio. the matter of if its 'right' or 'wrong' is up in the air imo.
is it wrong to kill? depends on the circumstances...we kill in the name of greed all to often and have it glorified and justified to the masses based on common acceptance...so it really is just a matter of perspective....religious beliefs aside, we cant all adhere to those beliefs as some of us do not hold those religions to heart.
for instance when someone says to me 'in the bible' or 'god says' it holds no weight because i am not of that faith so that god is not in my heart so to me, i cannot make my decisions based on a faith i dont hold.
in this case i think it is not 'wrong' to kill this man. i dont think it is 'right' either, but i do believe it completely justified.
Hardwork108
03-08-2011, 02:14 PM
Pieces of offal as this convict we are talking about are kept segregated from gen pop as they would be killed.
Crybaby liberal wussbag mentalities need to be removed from prisons and they should be places you never want to go, EVER. People should never be segregated, and if they are offed in prison, well, you did commit a heinous crime and you deserve what you get. Man up, and if you do not want to do the time, then do not do the crime.
This POS deserves nothing other than a painful death for what he did.
unacceptable actions by any means.
I will give an alibi for the father as he is just over the border in RI.
I am 100% with you, on that one!
Hardwork108
03-08-2011, 02:16 PM
Time off for good behavior.
Well, he behaved "good", because he could not find any little boys to kill in the prison premises....
Hardwork108
03-08-2011, 02:19 PM
I kind of agree and disagree with you Dale.
As an Ideal, I agree.
within context to the reality, I disagree.
Fact of the matter is that the prison system has become an extension of the welfare system.
In the states, it's privatized and open to all sorts of corruptions by that fact alone! IN fact there are cases of judges conspiring with prisons to convict people in order to get the numbers up for a given prison or juvenile detention center! yikes!
Also, you will have guys who have stolen some tires from an old garage that had crappy lawyers getting tossed into prison and right next to them is a guy who killed 3 people with a lawnmower blade.
Of course you need to segregate populations in prisons. You can't have continuation of crime occurring in the institutions that are intended to remedy that! lol
But, getting back to the ideal, the thing with ideals is that they require buy in from all involved and the prisoner will never participate in something that requires uprightness.
I think what Dale is trying to say is that prisons should be places where people do NOT want to be in. If criminals start liking prisons, or feel protected in prisons, then the idea of imprisonment does looses some its deterence factor.
Besides, getting bumped off in prison will just make more room for other dirt bags, who hopefully will be bumped off too.... ;)
Drake
03-08-2011, 02:22 PM
Back when I was into cultural anthropology and developing nations, I came across a statement basically saying that we are one of the few civilizations (western) that are more focused on punishment than we are making things right. We've gotten to a point where we believe punishment DOES make the situation right.
Short of making people feel better... what would killing this guy do? Be honest... what result are we looking for by killing someone who is quite possibly reformed? How does doing so enhance society?
Not playing devil's advocate... I'm honestly curious as to what it solves...
BJJ-Blue
03-08-2011, 03:17 PM
thug justice huh... hope its worth it... better get all he can from it... coz he'll go down for it... this isnt the kind of thing one could expect to get away with...
It is possible though.
Gary Plauche shot and killed his son's Karate instructor who had kidnapped and molested his son. The shooting was actually caught on tape. The Karate instructor was handcuffed and in the custody of law enforcement. Mr Plauche waited at the airport with a loaded gun and shot him in the head when he passed by. The prosecuters were worried no jury would convict Mr Plauche, so they offered him a plea deal with no jail/prison time, just probation. This happened in Louisiana btw.
Video of the shooting: (Warning - it is graphic)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Oi3Hyxuf5AE
BJJ-Blue
03-08-2011, 03:26 PM
Short of making people feel better... what would killing this guy do? Be honest... what result are we looking for by killing someone who is quite possibly reformed? How does doing so enhance society?
Sex offenders have one of (if not the) the highest rates of reoffending. And this guy killed first at 16 and ATE some of the boy's body. You can't rehabilitate that, imo.
So it wouldn't just make people feel better, it would make them feel safer.
As an aside, in Texas we have a registered sex offender database which is easy to use. You can type in any address and see what registered sex offenders live nearby. It says what crime they were convicted of, the age of the victim, the sentence, and the risk of reoffending, among other things. My friend had one a few houses down from him, and at Halloween the guy put up decorations and left his porch light on (which means you are giving away candy). That is a violation of the law, and my friend reported him. He got to see the police haul the guy away. Everytime we move, we always check the database to see if any live nearby.
It is possible though.
Gary Plauche shot and killed his son's Karate instructor who had kidnapped and molested his son. The shooting was actually caught on tape. The Karate instructor was handcuffed and in the custody of law enforcement. Mr Plauche waited at the airport with a loaded gun and shot him in the head when he passed by. The prosecuters were worried no jury would convict Mr Plauche, so they offered him a plea deal with no jail/prison time, just probation. This happened in Louisiana btw.
Video of the shooting: (Warning - it is graphic)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Oi3Hyxuf5AE
yeah but he did get caught... and a properly instructed jury would have no choice but to convict in that situation... that was a breakdown in the rule of law, not the law itself...
if that guy gets killed the first person they will talk to will be the guy who made the death threats... once you know who and why, how is alot easier to figure out... usually its the other way around...
if they are truly interested in justice and they believe in their laws, they will have to convict...
Drake
03-08-2011, 03:35 PM
Sex offenders have one of (if not the) the highest rates of reoffending. And this guy killed first at 16 and ATE some of the boy's body. You can't rehabilitate that, imo.
So it wouldn't just make people feel better, it would make them feel safer.
As an aside, in Texas we have a registered sex offender database which is easy to use. You can type in any address and see what registered sex offenders live nearby. It says what crime they were convicted of, the age of the victim, the sentence, and the risk of reoffending, among other things. My friend had one a few houses down from him, and at Halloween the guy put up decorations and left his porch light on (which means you are giving away candy). That is a violation of the law, and my friend reported him. He got to see the police haul the guy away. Everytime we move, we always check the database to see if any live nearby.
I was talking in general.
This guy sounds broken, genetically. Probably be doing him a favor by putting him down.
BJJ-Blue
03-08-2011, 03:36 PM
yeah but he did get caught... and a properly instructed jury would have no choice but to convict in that situation... that was a breakdown in the rule of law, not the law itself...
if they are truly interested in justice and they believe in their laws, they will have to convict...
If the State in question allows for a temporary insanity defense, the jury could well come back 'Not Guilty by reason of Temporary Insanity' verdict. And it would not be a case of jury nullification.
If the State in question allows for a temporary insanity defense, the jury could well come back 'Not Guilty by reason of Temporary Insanity' verdict. And it would not be a case of jury nullification.
temporary insanity is insanely hard to prove... it used to be something to fall back on when somebody committed a crime that everyone wanted to forgive them for... but it was bullsh1t then and its bullsh1t now...
he got outta jail so the dad went crazy and planned his death... well in advance... but that day, he was crazy... i mean, he lost his child... crazy crazy... its all bullsh1t... if you just wanna let him go, have the nuttz to just come out and say what everyone is really thinking... we like him so its ok this time...
Hardwork108
03-08-2011, 04:24 PM
Back when I was into cultural anthropology and developing nations, I came across a statement basically saying that we are one of the few civilizations (western) that are more focused on punishment than we are making things right. We've gotten to a point where we believe punishment DOES make the situation right.
Well, the right way for all of this is for those in charge to promote healthy family lifes together with values that go with it. A good education system where certain basic moral codes are emphasized to the children, not the usual, "everybody has rights and everybody is right", together with the culture of relative morality. People have to be stirred away from extreme materialism.
Having the approach and combining it with a no mercy treatment with criminals is the right way, a Yin and Yang approach, shall we say.
Having said that, it is clear that the powers that be do want a divided society in chaos, as this is the best way to control and rip the population off....
Short of making people feel better... what would killing this guy do? Be honest...
Well, will decrease the world carbon polution by one, to start with.:D
what result are we looking for by killing someone who is quite possibly reformed? How does doing so enhance society?
I don't think that at this point in time anyone wants to just kill him. They prefer him to stay in jail and serve sentence. That is the least a criminal justice system can do when they have their men, yes even a corrupt to the core, one....
Lucas
03-08-2011, 04:32 PM
Not playing devil's advocate... I'm honestly curious as to what it solves...
Solve? Only matters of personal concern. Vengeance. Now I know some dont believe in vengeance, but some do. I am one that does...I'm a ten fold kind of guy. Dont care what someones religion says either. You take a life from me in an act of evil, if I can I will take yours for retribution. I know I am the minority. At least I'm honest with myself though.
and i would do the same thing if i was in the fathers position
"what would killing this guy do? Be honest..."
take a person whos likely to kill children again off the planet
and i would do the same thing if i was in the fathers position
"what would killing this guy do? Be honest..."
take a person whos likely to kill children again off the planet
you dont know that... and the reason people stick up for almost anyone is because its a slippery slope... next thing its ok to kill for a bit less, and then less... and so on... theres a reason why even scumbags are protected, and it has little to do with protecting scumbags and more to do with preventing perversions of justice led by people with too much emotion invested in the case...
Hardwork108
03-08-2011, 05:54 PM
you dont know that... and the reason people stick up for almost anyone is because its a slippery slope... next thing its ok to kill for a bit less, and then less... and so on... theres a reason why even scumbags are protected, and it has little to do with protecting scumbags and more to do with preventing perversions of justice led by people with too much emotion invested in the case...
The reason why in Western societies the scumbags are protected is to keep the citizens powerless, scared and dependent on the "good" government to take care of him.
The governments use the same arguments that you used above, while they themselves invade and/or destablize other countries, rob their natural resources and kills 10s of thousands of their innocent citizens, while maiming even more of them.
So if a "vigilante" takes a weapon and shoots some child rapist/murderer in the head, he will most probably be arrested and made an example of, while some politician who wholeheartedly supports illegal wars (mass murders) in foreign lands will make a speech as to why citizens cannot take the law into their own hands because it is not acceptable in a "civilized" society....
Don't you see something wrong in that picture?
Drake
03-08-2011, 07:18 PM
The reason why in Western societies the scumbags are protected is to keep the citizens powerless, scared and dependent on the "good" government to take care of him.
The governments use the same arguments that you used above, while they themselves invade and/or destablize other countries, rob their natural resources and kills 10s of thousands of their innocent citizens, while maiming even more of them.
So if a "vigilante" takes a weapon and shoots some child rapist/murderer in the head, he will most probably be arrested and made an example of, while some politician who wholeheartedly supports illegal wars (mass murders) in foreign lands will make a speech as to why citizens cannot take the law into their own hands because it is not acceptable in a "civilized" society....
Don't you see something wrong in that picture?
If you watched the clip BJJ put up, the guy shot that child molestor point blank in the head in front of everyone... judge gave him 5 years parole.
If you watched the clip BJJ put up, the guy shot that child molester point blank in the head in front of everyone... judge gave him 5 years parole.
and that is wrong... where in the law books does it say that its all up to the discretion of over-emotional people..? like its wrong, except when we are angry enough... thats bullsh1t... and its wrong... its very hippocritical... what people feel is irrelevant... you have these laws written down for a reason... just another case of perversion of justice for personal reasons...
you dont know that... and the reason people stick up for almost anyone is because its a slippery slope... next thing its ok to kill for a bit less, and then less... and so on... theres a reason why even scumbags are protected, and it has little to do with protecting scumbags and more to do with preventing perversions of justice led by people with too much emotion invested in the case...
there are various level of "scum baggery" however and the harshest punishments should apply to the harshest criminals Ie child moslestors/ murderers
While of course we dont know if he will do it again the risk isn't worth taking especially when you consider statistically he has a high chance of doing it again
imo rehabilitation is more affective at a young age when the child has the warning sings but hasnt committed a violent or sexual crime
there are various level of "scum baggery" however and the harshest punishments should apply to the harshest criminals Ie child molesters/ murderers
While of course we dont know if he will do it again the risk isn't worth taking especially when you consider statistically he has a high chance of doing it again
imo rehabilitation is more affective at a young age when the child has the warning sings but hasnt committed a violent or sexual crime
"scum-baggery" is my new word(s) of the day...
28 years is a long time to change... im not sticking up for the guy, im just sayin... you dont know...
now if i ruled the world... lol... he wouldnt have gone to prison... we know he's guilty, the crime was horrific... i would have just put one in the back of his head on day one... but legally... thru the system of law... coz in my world it would be a death penalty for such crimes that there is ZERO doubt as to his guilt...
Reading The ancient law of Hammurabi had an impression on me since a young age. It was a very eye for and eye type of law in Babylonia that was constructed to where the punishments were so harsh they essentially scared others from trying the same thing
and i think if the law could be a bit tamer and approached logically and kept that way we would live in a much happier and safer world
Lucas
03-08-2011, 11:36 PM
guess what happens when you get your hand cut off for stealing? guess what happens to a guy that watches you get your hand cut of for stealing? guess what happens when that guy tells his son that he saw a guy get his hand cut of for stealing?
no theft from these 3 people....there are ups and downs to our system. personally i think we are way to lax of a society and in some cases far to weak. i dont rape or murder or abuse, and i think anyone that does should be punished accordingly.
mad dogs, mad people, they all need to be put down.
Reading The ancient law of Hammurabi had an impression on me since a young age. It was a very eye for and eye type of law in Babylonia that was constructed to where the punishments were so harsh they essentially scared others from trying the same thing
and i think if the law could be a bit tamer and approached logically and kept that way we would live in a much happier and safer world
yup but harsh penalties should only be doled out when evidence is conclusive... nobody should die on subjective and circumstantial evidence... shakey witness testimony or testimoney that has reasonable doubt (which is quite subjective as it is)... and confessions made under any sort of duress arent enough to kill over...
but now we live in a time of science and forensics that can do things we couldnt do ever before... but even then, theres room for error... also theres nothing stopping a cop from framing a guy he considers bad but just cant catch the guy doing wrong... so in his mind he does the right thing and plants evidence and frames a possibly innocent person...
guess what happens when you get your hand cut off for stealing? guess what happens to a guy that watches you get your hand cut of for stealing? guess what happens when that guy tells his son that he saw a guy get his hand cut of for stealing?
no theft from these 3 people....
maybe, maybe not... depends why they are stealing... and what they are stealing... its not cool to cut the hand off a hungry kid that stole an apple...
but the guy who takes everything in sight and steals from even their own mother? sure, cup off both hands... just make sure he's actually guilty first...
but you do realize if you take their hands all they can do is beg or steal, right?
Lucas
03-08-2011, 11:50 PM
I agree. The types of punishments that need to be provided for these types of heinous crimes cannot be given lightly. There must be no doubt. Full confession or irrefutable proof. if that is not there and yet they are still convicted...send them to my dungeons. :D
Hardwork108
03-08-2011, 11:51 PM
If you watched the clip BJJ put up, the guy shot that child molestor point blank in the head in front of everyone... judge gave him 5 years parole.
That does not matter, because the general legal trend in many Western countries is to punish severly those "who take the law into their own hands", while there seems to be a "revolving door" policy with actual criminals. This of course makes sense when you consider the fact that the system is run by psychopathic criminals!!!
"Put them in the iron maiden"
"EXCELLENT!!!"
"EXECUTE THEM!!!"
"Bogus..."
Lucas
03-08-2011, 11:52 PM
maybe, maybe not... depends why they are stealing... and what they are stealing... its not cool to cut the hand off a hungry kid that stole an apple...
but the guy who takes everything in sight and steals from even their own mother? sure, cup off both hands... just make sure he's actually guilty first...
but you do realize if you take their hands all they can do is beg or steal, right?
its an extreme example yes. in 'my world' no kids would be punished as an equal to an adult for something petty like theft. kids get caught can watch their adults who are condemed recieve punishment. ;)
thats just following the extreme example... i wouldnt really cut anyones hand of for stealing. a finger, sure, they get more chances that way. its my 'second chance' program.
its an extreme example yes. in 'my world' no kids would be punished as an equal to an adult for something petty like theft. kids get caught can watch their adults who are condemed recieve punishment. ;)
thats just following the extreme example... i wouldnt really cut anyones hand of for stealing. a finger, sure, they get more chances that way. its my 'second chance' program.
i dunno... in some cases it could be a good idea... but we can make more money off em if we lock em up indefinitely and make em work for us...
get em!!!
get paid...
HELLO?
WINNING!!!
fun torture fact...
the inquisitors created the rack because torture was illegal and was defined as drawing blood and breaking bones... pope daddy never said nada bout tearing limbs from their sockets slowly tho... nice huh... and in some sick twisted way, their methods were met with approval... of course thats because every pagan they killed, their property would go to those doing the killing, which was ultimately rome...
Lucas
03-08-2011, 11:58 PM
rofl!
what if we sell all the fingers to voodoo priests? then once they lost all the fingers from one hand we can put them in prison to work pulling levers. :D
its my 'second chance' program.
so would they get 9 more chances then??? :p
Lucas
03-09-2011, 12:01 AM
fun torture fact...
the inquisitors created the rack because torture was illegal and was defined as drawing blood and breaking bones... pope daddy never said nada bout tearing limbs from their sockets slowly tho... nice huh... and in some sick twisted way, their methods were met with approval... ofcourse thats because every pagen they killed, their property would go to those doing the killing, which was ultimately rome...
same deal with why branding became so popular as a method of torture. in skilled hands the kiss of a white hot iron can peel the secrets from a mans tongue faster than ol trailer park wilma can suck a hard boiled egg through a garden hose....or so ive been told...
Lucas
03-09-2011, 12:02 AM
so would they get 9 more chances then??? :p
depends on them lol
BJJ-Blue
03-09-2011, 08:18 AM
If you watched the clip BJJ put up, the guy shot that child molestor point blank in the head in front of everyone... judge gave him 5 years parole.
The State and Mr Plauche agreed to a plea bargain that said he would not do any prison/jail time. The judge could not give him prison time. I actually watched the whole show that clip was from. The prosecutor said he had serious doubts he could find 12 people who would convict Mr Plauche, so he offered him the deal.
Reading The ancient law of Hammurabi had an impression on me since a young age. It was a very eye for and eye type of law in Babylonia that was constructed to where the punishments were so harsh they essentially scared others from trying the same thing
As did I.
And I'm flat out cold-hearted when it comes to me being a victim of crime. A year or so ago we had a rash of car break-ins in the neighborhood. I kept the assault rifle loaded and by the bed. I told my wife if I caught someone breaking into our cars, they were getting shot. And I said if it was a minor and the car was damaged in the process, I'd sue his parents for the damage. In Texas parents are responsible for damage their kids cause.
MasterKiller
03-09-2011, 08:25 AM
As did I.
And I'm flat out cold-hearted when it comes to me being a victim of crime. A year or so ago we had a rash of car break-ins in the neighborhood. I kept the assault rifle loaded and by the bed. I told my wife if I caught someone breaking into our cars, they were getting shot. And I said if it was a minor and the car was damaged in the process, I'd sue his parents for the damage. In Texas parents are responsible for damage their kids cause.
Shooting a kid for breaking into your car is hardly "an eye for eye."
sanjuro_ronin
03-09-2011, 08:36 AM
Violence begets violence and hatred begets hatred, it is a vicious circle that only love and forgiveness ( along with professional help) can break.
THAT SAID, while the science is still out in regards to whether being a sociopath/psychopath is genetic, some people are born "evil" and most be seggregated from society.
They have no notion of right and wrong, they in short have no conscience and have no sense of accountability.
The State and Mr Plauche agreed to a plea bargain that said he would not do any prison/jail time. The judge could not give him prison time. I actually watched the whole show that clip was from. The prosecutor said he had serious doubts he could find 12 people who would convict Mr Plauche, so he offered him the deal.
As did I.
And I'm flat out cold-hearted when it comes to me being a victim of crime. A year or so ago we had a rash of car break-ins in the neighborhood. I kept the assault rifle loaded and by the bed. I told my wife if I caught someone breaking into our cars, they were getting shot. And I said if it was a minor and the car was damaged in the process, I'd sue his parents for the damage. In Texas parents are responsible for damage their kids cause.
dont be stupid.... ur willing to take a life over ur car??? ur a dumb@ss... one day you'll play toughguy to the wrong cat and your gonna get somebody else hurt, like ur wife... seems like ur ego is more important than ur fams safety... real nice... you shoot some kid for taking change from ur car then his dad gets to shoot you in public and get away with it, right?
and if a prosecutor cant find 12 people to convict a man who shot some1 infront of everyone, he sucks at his job and it speaks volumes about the locals... i feel sorry for that community... not anyone i wanna get to know...
Violence begets violence and hatred begets hatred, it is a vicious circle that only love and forgiveness ( along with professional help) can break.
THAT SAID, while the science is still out in regards to whether being a sociopath/psychopath is genetic, some people are born "evil" and most be seggregated from society.
They have no notion of right and wrong, they in short have no conscience and have no sense of accountability.
very rare...
and if we're gonna start taking care of defective people, why not just kill down syndrome babies too? it would save alot of money and time and heartache...
besides, tons of sociopaths and psychopaths go thru life just fine without doing anything to anyone.. lots never even get outed for what they are... what about them? do we wait for them to offend or do we just test em , out em and lock em up young???
Lucas
03-09-2011, 10:15 AM
please dont test me. :(
sanjuro_ronin
03-09-2011, 10:41 AM
very rare...
and if we're gonna start taking care of defective people, why not just kill down syndrome babies too? it would save alot of money and time and heartache...
besides, tons of sociopaths and psychopaths go thru life just fine without doing anything to anyone.. lots never even get outed for what they are... what about them? do we wait for them to offend or do we just test em , out em and lock em up young???
Yes, they are very rare, but to those that have been victimized, the rareness is irrelevant.
My post was about those that are NOT able to be redeemed and you will notice that I don't advocate killing them but those that can't live within a society must be cared for and dealt with.
Of course it is crucial to find the reason and, if possible, the cure for this behaviour.
As for those that:
" tons of sociopaths and psychopaths go thru life just fine without doing anything to anyone.. lots never even get outed for what they are. "
Where are your stats ?
I don't see TONS of sociopaths and psychos going through life "just fine".
well, you wouldnt know either way if they arent discovered for what they are... my point is that not all psychopaths do bad things... they may not feel the way we do but they can learn how to behave just the same... its just a different incentive for them... they arent burdened by morals, but they do have a sense of self preservation...
i know a psychopath who has a wife, kids a good job and he's really good at faking it for those around him... he's just an actor doing what he was taught to do... he's fine, and his fam thinks he's great...
btw, im just playing devils advocate here, i agree with you on alot of things...
sanjuro_ronin
03-09-2011, 11:27 AM
I understand your point, my point is simply that I feel we need to do more than just lock them up, we need to not only treat the disease but prevent it.
David Jamieson
03-09-2011, 12:27 PM
I understand your point, my point is simply that I feel we need to do more than just lock them up, we need to not only treat the disease but prevent it.
"Mandatum novum do vobis ut diligatis invicem sicut dilexi vos" :)
sanjuro_ronin
03-09-2011, 01:00 PM
"Mandatum novum do vobis ut diligatis invicem sicut dilexi vos" :)
And what greater love can we show but to help those that need our help the most?
:p
David Jamieson
03-09-2011, 01:02 PM
And what greater love can we show but to help those that need our help the most?
:p
true.
We must also recognize that all who are hurting are needing love and humanity.
ALL.
:)
BJJ-Blue
03-09-2011, 01:06 PM
Shooting a kid for breaking into your car is hardly "an eye for eye."
Correct. But it solves the problem. You won't have to worry about him breaking into your car again, and I'm sure word will spread fast among the thieves that you don't mess with my stuff.
dont be stupid.... ur willing to take a life over ur car??? ur a dumb@ss... one day you'll play toughguy to the wrong cat and your gonna get somebody else hurt, like ur wife... seems like ur ego is more important than ur fams safety... real nice... you shoot some kid for taking change from ur car then his dad gets to shoot you in public and get away with it, right?
I can't be the only one, as Texas law gives you the right to use deadly force to protect your property at night.
And no, I doubt he would walk. If the dad shot me, he would be shooting a crime victim. Mr Plauche shot the guy who committed the crime.
and if a prosecutor cant find 12 people to convict a man who shot some1 infront of everyone, he sucks at his job and it speaks volumes about the locals... i feel sorry for that community... not anyone i wanna get to know...
If he sucked, he would have got nothing. He at least got something. Mr Plauche said he would demand a trial unless he got a deal with no prison time. Had there been a trial, and Mr Plauche was found Not Guilty, he would have gotten off scot free.
As to the community, I'd live there. Any community that allows a father to protect his child is a good place to live, imo.
BJJ-Blue
03-09-2011, 01:09 PM
I'm fixing to move, and whenever I look at houses to move to I always check the Texas Registered Sex Offender Database to see if any garbage lives nearby. It's a great tool, and I believe many other States do this as well. I'd highly recommend you do it if your State offers it, especially if you have children. You never know what you will find.
well thats all mighty christian of you blue... seems kind of hippovrytical that you would shoot someone cause your allowed to... over a broken window and some loose change at that... nice... you tell that story in church too??? but then im sure you would just get smiles and agreement there...
MasterKiller
03-09-2011, 02:40 PM
WTF is with 1bad and his attributing the wrong quotes to people. I would hate to think it's intentional.
MasterKiller
03-09-2011, 02:41 PM
Correct. But it solves the problem. You won't have to worry about him breaking into your car again, and I'm sure word will spread fast among the thieves that you don't mess with my stuff.. Or you would attract some pipe-hitting fellows looking to get even....
i was just assuming he's a lil slow in the head... i dont even do that when im stoned...
yeah ive seen so many hard-asses get targeted simply because they were hard-asses...
BJJ-Blue
03-09-2011, 04:06 PM
well thats all mighty christian of you blue... seems kind of hippovrytical that you would shoot someone cause your allowed to... over a broken window and some loose change at that... nice... you tell that story in church too??? but then im sure you would just get smiles and agreement there...
It's not that I'd shoot someone just because I'm allowed to, it's that I'd shoot someone trying to steal my ****, or worse. Whose to say they wouldn't be satisfied with what was in the car and decide to break into my house?
And the cost is moot. A law-abiding citizen has the right to sleep soundly and feel safe in his home. He has the right to not have a criminal steal his hard-eanred possessions. And that's not even counting the mental effects, being burglarized makes people feel violated and unsafe. If you're home isn't a safe place, what is?
Or you would attract some pipe-hitting fellows looking to get even....
I'm not worried at all about that. We recently had a guy down here who shot 3 teens who broke into his house, he killed 2 of them. He hasn't been killed or assaulted. Let's be honest, how many news stories do you read about how a guy shot a tresspasser/burglar/etc and ended up getting killed by the guy's friends?
I stick by my friends, but if one got killed stealing someone else's stuff, the last thing I'd do is go mess with the guy who shot him. First off, I'd be now committing a serious crime, and second, the guy is obviously someone who can and will shoot people who endanger him and his property.
BJJ-Blue
03-09-2011, 04:11 PM
i was just assuming he's a lil slow in the head... i dont even do that when im stoned...
I wasn't stoned at the time. I just screwed up.
yeah ive seen so many hard-asses get targeted simply because they were hard-asses...
I'm not a "hard ass". I'm just a regular guy who doesn't like criminals and will use deadly force to defend myself, my family and friends, and my property from criminals. Nothing "hard ass" about that, I actually thought that that attitude is pretty normal.
I'm actually a pretty nice guy in person. I'd give my friends the shirt off my back, but I won't let someone steal it without a fight.
id just beat someone up if i caught them breaking in my car
i think shooting thems a bit much unless they pull out a weapon of their own
Lucas
03-09-2011, 04:38 PM
i wouldnt approach them without a weapon drawn...i know all to well how that can end if you arent already prepared. try to beat a criminal up while he is working you might get shot or stabbed.
personally i would pull my gun, announce my intent clearly, give opportunity to cease action, and then shoot if i deem it appropriate based on the criminals response. i would not shoot to kill, i would aim for below the waist and try for thigh.
Lucas
03-09-2011, 04:51 PM
i understand blues mentality, dont resent him for it. i think he would have done well in the frontier days. ;)
curenado
03-09-2011, 05:06 PM
Where I live we shoot. I believe that is why we hardly ever hear about anyone having problems.
Every time we do hear about one though, we hear that the owner started shooting and solved the problem.
If someone is on your property out here, they should have a big white flag......
I am not really taking sides as much as pointing out that there are a lot of places/people where it is the norm and being run over is not.
A car pulled up here once at 2 AM with malicious intent. I just opened the door and shot. They hauled ass away pretty quick.
If I had not known them and that they were two sixteen year old ****e bags I would have shot them flat ass dead. Shooting mostly over the windshield WAS being nice aout it. I also often wonder in hindsight if I should not have gone ahead and let them get out of the car - they are a ugly bane on the earth and to folks in general.....
look, if you are in danger, by all means, blast away... but for property??? you gonna shoot some cat for stealing ur lawnmower??? thats fukced up...
Where I live we shoot. I believe that is why we hardly ever hear about anyone having problems.
Every time we do hear about one though, we hear that the owner started shooting and solved the problem.
If someone is on your property out here, they should have a big white flag......
nice way to live... so do you just carry a white flag around or do you always call ahead?
i feel totally secure with mine... sure there are breakins, shootings, whatever... but im capable of dealing with each issue seperately and im able to judge whats appropriate and whats not as far as my response goes...
i probably wouldnt even kill you if you came in my house... i'd put the hurt on ya, but no need to mess up the place with bodies...
Lucas
03-09-2011, 05:24 PM
look, if you are in danger, by all means, blast away... but for property??? you gonna shoot some cat for stealing ur lawnmower??? thats fukced up...
but what if its a sweet riding lawnmower with 20" chromes and NOS? :D
but what if its a sweet riding lawnmower with 20" chromes and NOS? :D
well, then he's a fukcing dead man... chromies are another story all together...
curenado
03-09-2011, 05:47 PM
<<nice way to live... >>
It very much is. Very peaceful and uncomplicated.
<<so do you just carry a white flag around or do you always call ahead?>>
Don't have to. Lived here long enough to be known and known to have manners.
<<i feel totally secure with mine... sure there are breakins, shootings, whatever... but im capable of dealing with each issue seperately and im able to judge whats appropriate and whats not as far as my response goes...>>
That is too much bother. I don't have that much time for fools. If you just shoot it is easy and expected. People here expect to be shot at for screwing around where they shouldn't. Hence the lack of that type of crime...
<<i probably wouldnt even kill you if you came in my house... i'd put the hurt on ya, but no need to mess up the place with bodies... >>
Well, if you have the time to calculate and decide all that as well as accomplish it.....but I am one of those weird looking little guys who is actually about dangerous as hell, so what if your invader is like me? Do you think he will take time to assess the situation or jusr right fast make someone a boo-boo?
I like these guys out here and I know how tough they are. That is why I am glad they know I will shoot them sure as sunshine. That way we always have a good friendship.
I tell fools often that it is nice to have a nature preserve but that they are still playing with bears.
I just think it is wild that the most passive about it are always the one's that have to live in zoos with about 1000 times the boogers we do. You would think they would get a lot more shooting in....
Drake
03-09-2011, 06:56 PM
Wow.... completely contrary to our nation's values. Shooting someone over theft? REALLY? I'd like to see what happens when you shoot an unarmed thief. You think you'll walk away without a nifty homicide charge? I doubt it.
Fact is, most people talk big about their right to shoot thieves, but most of them have never fired a gun, much less own one. I take these types of statements with a grain of salt. It comes across like a rooster puffing his chest.
I would shoot an armed thief. I would scare/terrify an unarmed one.
curenado
03-09-2011, 08:29 PM
Wow.... completely contrary to our nation's values. Shooting someone over theft? REALLY? I'd like to see what happens when you shoot an unarmed thief. You think you'll walk away without a nifty homicide charge? I doubt it.
Fact is, most people talk big about their right to shoot thieves, but most of them have never fired a gun, much less own one. I take these types of statements with a grain of salt. It comes across like a rooster puffing his chest.
I would shoot an armed thief. I would scare/terrify an unarmed one.
That may be against your values, but your values are hardly the values of the nation - not at all. That was my main point. Just because some portions or sections of this country have been completely pacified and tricked into paying the price for it does not mean that is "America" at all or that it is "what people do" (only some). It just seemed to me that there were some people posting here who thought that there personal policies or ideas spoke for everybody and that is very far from true.
I also never really set any conditions or terms - you have set all these conditions and rules in theory about what you think you will do in such and such a case. I never got that complicated and so whether or not I would shoot someone for theft has not yet been an issue.
<<You think you'll walk away without a nifty homicide charge? I doubt it.
>>
That is only true for certain places and people. It is not here. So, again, all I am really saying is that you are not speaking for "everyone", "America" or anybody but yourself where you are. That is why it is still some semblance of America.
<<Fact is, most people talk big about their right to shoot thieves, but most of them have never fired a gun,>>
Well I have more than once and I find it quite enjoyable. If one of the neighbors shoots while you are gone you say "Oh Good! Thank you! I'll look out for your place when you are gone too!"
<<It comes across like a rooster puffing his chest.
>>
Maybe it does to a hen like you...(heh)...sorry, but you started it with the saying theoretical things and alluding to my sincerity...
pacified and tricked into being more civil to eachother and showing mercy and not capping a theif??? call me pacified then... there are alot of things i would kill for... but property isnt one of them...
i spent the better part of my youth around violence... im happy to be done with that... atleast over dumb sh1t...
i stole things when i was young... but if you shot at us? we would just come back again, but ready... and this time in anger, not greed... nobody ever shot at me... but we did hospitalize a few vigilante wannabes... they used to have guardian angels here, but they kept getting beat up, so they were forced to disband... and this is vancouver, pretty nice place...
curenado
03-09-2011, 09:48 PM
pacified and tricked into being more civil to eachother and showing mercy and not capping a theif??? call me pacified then... there are alot of things i would kill for... but property isnt one of them...
i spent the better part of my youth around violence... im happy to be done with that... atleast over dumb sh1t...
i stole things when i was young... but if you shot at us? we would just come back again, but ready... and this time in anger, not greed... nobody ever shot at me... but we did hospitalize a few vigilante wannabes... they used to have guardian angels here, but they kept getting beat up, so they were forced to disband... and this is vancouver, pretty nice place...
No, pacified into tolerating being invaded and over run as if it were "normal" or "acceptable" and paying the price in injury and crime rate. That is not being more civil to each other, it is just the "imagination" of that while the situation becomes worse. That is how it seems anyway. People seem to be nicer to each other here, have more respect for each other and we don't have the invasion and other problems that you would think would be rampant out here. They aren't.
Again - I never set any specific terms at all. You did. I just said that yet you still keep trying to insist this is about shooting some poor little thief just because they were stealing. I think this is manipulative on your part.
The posters who have said "never held a gun" has only offered imagination and theory about "how it is" and "what we should do" and I at least offered one incidence from actual experience.
The poster who keeps hiking his skirts about shooting thieves says "I was a thief and me and my gang of punky thugs would have got you!" - that was not only pretty goofy to a person like me or our people here, I bet it is why you keep encouraging tolerance and victimization, calling it civil, and trying to villanize me.
<<i stole things when i was young... but if you shot at us? we would just come back again, but ready... and this time in anger, not greed... nobody ever shot at me... but we did hospitalize a few vigilante wannabes... they used to have guardian angels here, but they kept getting beat up, so they were forced to disband... and this is vancouver, pretty nice place... >>
That was really so goofy and hypocritical (punks can hospitalize people defending their home, but people defending their home suck.....U B Illin!) and your sadly delinquent and sociopathic "the gaurdian angels kept getting beat up" (wow) is exactly the reason that many people have a shoot policy - because as you say in your case, it would not just be shooting a poor widdle baby thief but also a violent gang thug enforcing criminal rights against law abding citizens rights on their own property.
I have clarified the fact that many places and people DO NOT agree or respond like you think and you have been the most perfect testifier of exactly why people like me do not waste their time with theory or fools. How much damage and "hospitalizations of property owners" would have been saved if you had done the world a favor and robbed my house first? (heh)
ok - I guess I have offered all I could really. I do not blame the father and I would not bother him about it. As to the diversion, it has pretty much all been said.
<<i stole things when i was young... but if you shot at us? we would just come back again, but ready... and this time in anger, not greed... nobody ever shot at me... but we did hospitalize a few vigilante wannabes... they used to have guardian angels here, but they kept getting beat up, so they were forced to disband... and this is vancouver, pretty nice place.>>
(Rolling on floor, laughing out loud)
Drake
03-09-2011, 09:53 PM
Stop making up some fictional America... here's what Jefferson said...
"No man having a natural right to be the judge between himself and another, it is his natural duty to submit to the umpirage of an impartial third." --Thomas Jefferson to Francis Gilmer, 1816. ME 15:24
"[Montesquieu wrote in Spirit of the Laws, VI,c.2:] 'In moderate governments, where the life of the meanest subject is deemed precious, no man is stripped of his honor or property until after a long inquiry; and no man is bereft of life till his very country has attacked him--an attack that is never made without leaving him all possible means of making his defense. Hence it is when a person renders himself absolute, he immediately think of reducing the number of laws. In a government thus constituted, they are more affected with particular inconveniences than with the liberty of the subject, which is very little minded.'" --Thomas Jefferson: copied into his Commonplace Book.
"It [is] more dangerous that even a guilty person should be punished without the forms of law, than that he should escape." --Thomas Jefferson to William Carmichael, 1788. ME 7:30
"It [is] more a duty [of the Attorney General] to save an innocent than to convict a guilty man." --Thomas Jefferson: Biographical Sketch of Peyton Randolph. ME 18:139
And...
"[Montesquieu wrote in Spirit of the Laws, VI,c.9:] 'The severity of punishments is fitter for despotic governments, whose principle is terror, than for a monarchy or a republic, whose spring is honor and virtue. In moderate governments, the love of one's country, shame, and the fear of blame are restraining motives, capable of preventing a multitude of crimes. Here, the greatest punishment of a bad action is conviction. The civil laws have therefore a softer way of correcting, and do not require so much force and severity. In those states a good legislator is less bent upon punishing than preventing crimes; he is more attentive to inspire good morals than to inflict penalties.'" --Thomas Jefferson: copied into his Commonplace Book.
Now on to Washington....
"Laws made by common consent must not be trampled on by individuals. "
It will be found an unjust and unwise jealousy to deprive a man of his natural liberty upon the supposition he may abuse it. "
Going into other eras of US History..
Justice cannot be for one side alone, but must be for both. Eleanor Roosevelt
Though force can protect in emergency, only justice, fairness, consideration and cooperation can finally lead men to the dawn of eternal peace. Dwight Eisenhauer
"No man is above the law and no man is below it: nor do we ask any man's permission when we ask him to obey it. " Theodore Roosevelt
"The end of law is not to abolish or restrain, but to preserve and enlarge freedom. For in all the states of created beings capable of law, where there is no law, there is no freedom. " John Locke
"Whenever men take the law into their own hands, the loser is the law. And when the law loses, freedom languishes. " Robert Kennedy
There's a ton more where that came from...
So, stop making up your own bizarro country where you think someone out there supports your demented view of justice, and take a cue from what those throughout history, ESPECIALLY US HISTORY, and learn something instead of pretending you know something.
If you shoot a man dead for stealing, you are now part of the death of freedom as well. You, as a person under the law of the United States, have no right to make up your own judgment and punishment on the spot. To think otherwise is dangerously naive.
And you call me a hen... has it occured to you that I've been to combat? Going for my second tour this summer. Not some fantasy internet world where you can puff your chest. Real **** being fired. Real **** blowing up. Try it.
curenado
03-09-2011, 10:31 PM
<<Stop making up some fictional America... here's what Jefferson said...>>
I'm not, and what Jefferson said has nothing to do with this topic or the diversion we are presently discussing.
<<There's a ton more where that came from...>>
...and likewise, they have nothing to do with castle law or laws about invasion, felony theft, assault etc - they are more about rights and freedom and of course how we should take people to court instead of allow mob justice. You have gone completely "bizzaro" yourself trying to blur it up when I have tried to keep it really simple.
If you were going to try and argue about great quotes they should be relevant actually to what you are quothing about.
<<So, stop making up your own bizarro country>>
I am not. I have not "made up" anything.
<< where you think someone out there supports your demented view of justice,>>
You are still trying to manipulate and blur this up by assiging me my "views" and then telling me how wrong they are - This has all been about the terms and rules you are making up in a theory as you go along. I have yet to get that complicated or nit pick situations - I just keep pointing out how some people do and then insist I was.
<< and take a cue from what those throughout history, ESPECIALLY US HISTORY, and learn something instead of pretending you know something.>>
Again, it would have to be relative history in some sort of context and it is just a bunch of quotes about usng a court system - that has nothing to do with castle law or this discussion beyond the fact that the laws you say we should abide by are the source of the castle laws....except that part. It is like a lot of hot air but it is not meaning anything about me or this discussion except your personla, general opinion which I think is weak and gross. I was gentle about that until you started with the "twisted" and "bizzaro" - and all this is because I said something different.
I would never "take a cue" from a stupid victim and US history has more thieves shot and hung than a lot of other places so again - even if I had said to shoot a thief, your argument about "THE US" is really in fact pretty silly.
<<If you shoot a man dead for stealing, you are now part of the death of freedom as well.>>
That is such BS as to be beneath contempt. That is absolutely absurd! "The death of freedom!" that is total BS.
Y<<ou, as a person under the law of the United States, have no right to make up your own judgment and punishment on the spot. To think otherwise is dangerously naive.>>
You, clearly having no idea of the laws of the United States can say whatever you want to and do whatever you want to. Trying to project all this BS on me and put words in my mouth just seems to me like there is something a little wrong in your head. But I don't care. Your precious thieves gotta eat too and I guess for all your protesting they can have the right to eat you and I swear, I won't lift a finger against them. As long as it's just you and yours who feel so strongly about it.
<<And you call me a hen... >>
Well, you talk like one?
<<has it occured to you that I've been to combat?>>
WHat does that have to do with property rights and castle law? You are going to die so thieves can beat up old people without fear? I don't think that is what you were hired for, but whatever....
<<Going for my second tour this summer. Not some fantasy internet world where you can puff your chest.>>
You have been the main puffer here - you need to get off that because it ain't working and weakens your position that much more.
<<Real **** being fired. Real **** blowing up. Try it. >>
Well if I were in the military or if it occurs here I will, but I fail to see what all this drama, blurring and attempting to assert two people's views as "gospel and law" when they just plain are not have to do with my need to trying blowing a few people away? You are really dramatizing and trying to make some hero thing of something that is not as hard as going all the way out to the mailbox and back.
But that is just how it seems to me. You have not really come up with anything solid because you have spent the whole time personalizing it at me and complicting it to assert your positions.
I'm sorry you think you are fighting so thieves and worse can do what they want to people who weren't doing anything - to me, and where I live, (a lot of military come from here) that is what is "made up" "bizzaro" "twisted" and etc.
But since you will be there making it less people in the world I am afraid fo now you will have to leave your "freedom denied" thugs the 50/50 chance that they are going to get shot, maybe dead, and so they won't be around to get a free check and whine about whatever happens to the person that shot them.
When you come back, you can let whoever rob you all they want. It's all good!
well said man... and for the record, ive never been in combat, but for some odd reason i would like to... im just over 30 and im an electrician and it suuuucks... im totally thinking about it... and they need all the help they can get right now... i just gotta find t5hat switch that turns my politic machine off or i will end up in the brigg, no doubt about it... im a bit of a punch first then talk kinda guy, and that wont fly...
oh, and i dont put much time into my responses to curenado... awhile ago, i thought he was somehow connected to DCF for some reason and asked him for stats, he wrote me some massive PM about how we are moles doing the good work or some sh1t like that... he's an odd cat...
No, pacified into tolerating being invaded and over run as if it were "normal" or "acceptable" and paying the price in injury and crime rate. That is not being more civil to each other, it is just the "imagination" of that while the situation becomes worse. That is how it seems anyway. People seem to be nicer to each other here, have more respect for each other and we don't have the invasion and other problems that you would think would be rampant out here. They aren't.
Again - I never set any specific terms at all. You did. I just said that yet you still keep trying to insist this is about shooting some poor little thief just because they were stealing. I think this is manipulative on your part.
The posters who have said "never held a gun" has only offered imagination and theory about "how it is" and "what we should do" and I at least offered one incidence from actual experience.
The poster who keeps hiking his skirts about shooting thieves says "I was a thief and me and my gang of punky thugs would have got you!" - that was not only pretty goofy to a person like me or our people here, I bet it is why you keep encouraging tolerance and victimization, calling it civil, and trying to villanize me.
<<i stole things when i was young... but if you shot at us? we would just come back again, but ready... and this time in anger, not greed... nobody ever shot at me... but we did hospitalize a few vigilante wannabes... they used to have guardian angels here, but they kept getting beat up, so they were forced to disband... and this is vancouver, pretty nice place... >>
That was really so goofy and hypocritical (punks can hospitalize people defending their home, but people defending their home suck.....U B Illin!) and your sadly delinquent and sociopathic "the gaurdian angels kept getting beat up" (wow) is exactly the reason that many people have a shoot policy - because as you say in your case, it would not just be shooting a poor widdle baby thief but also a violent gang thug enforcing criminal rights against law abding citizens rights on their own property.
I have clarified the fact that many places and people DO NOT agree or respond like you think and you have been the most perfect testifier of exactly why people like me do not waste their time with theory or fools. How much damage and "hospitalizations of property owners" would have been saved if you had done the world a favor and robbed my house first? (heh)
ok - I guess I have offered all I could really. I do not blame the father and I would not bother him about it. As to the diversion, it has pretty much all been said.
<<i stole things when i was young... but if you shot at us? we would just come back again, but ready... and this time in anger, not greed... nobody ever shot at me... but we did hospitalize a few vigilante wannabes... they used to have guardian angels here, but they kept getting beat up, so they were forced to disband... and this is vancouver, pretty nice place.>>
(Rolling on floor, laughing out loud)
youre projecting...
just because i wont shoot a petty theif or somebody unfamiliar that got too close doesnt mean im willing to allow my hood to be over-run with a$$holes... thats a huge leap... huge asumption... which is silly, coz i already told you how i feel about that... and nowhere did i say im ok with being run down by crooks...
unless you live waaaay off in the boons, pulling a piece on somebody walking up is just rediculous... if the closest house to you is 5 miles away and help from town is 30 minutes away, then fine, fair enough... but i didnt read that anywhere in what you wrote... if i missed it, my bad, i appologize...
curenado
03-09-2011, 10:43 PM
Syn - I simply gave you the national link to the human services information you wanted. You were too lazy (or incapable) to search for it and tried to get me to compile your info for you - so at least tell the truth about that.
You could also say that you really don't care about any of the issues you fight about so much when it comes to the work and actually doing it - like saving the orphans dropped out the second you would have had to enter the couinties and work the stats instead of just demanding something. That is more like it.
Your idea that I would be connected to DCF can only have come from your usual projecting onto others and then carrying on as if it is real, which is part of what makes it so hard to have any discussion with you.
Now that those couple things are better straight....for the record....Again, I don't think there is anything else relative I could contribute that hasn't already been said.
Syn - I simply gave you the national link to the human services information you wanted. You were too lazy (or incapable) to search for it and tried to get me to compile your info for you - so at least tell the truth about that.
You could also say that you really don't care about any of the issues you fight about so much when it comes to the work and actually doing it - like saving the orphans dropped out the second you would have had to enter the couinties and work the stats instead of just demanding something. That is more like it.
Your idea that I would be connected to DCF can only have come from your usual projecting onto others and then carrying on as if it is real, which is part of what makes it so hard to have any discussion with you.
Now that those couple things are better straight....for the record....Again, I don't think there is anything else relative I could contribute that hasn't already been said.
look, im not going to post the PM but you know what you said... and i did go to the link and i did look... and i just said i assumed the dcf thing, untill i asked you and you told me... all i knew is you had something to do wityh kids that way... either way you gave me what i wanted... all i wanted was links... not a novel about moles...
but whetever... im at peace with it...
but seriously, shooting somebody for walking up your driveway unannounced is insane... if you are really that afraid, sure, pull your weapon and do your intimidating face... but shooting people over property crime is bullsh1t... unless you live in a place that you have to protect yourself that way by no choice of your own, and you dont, theres no excuse for that... un-called for man... we dont have to go on about it, im happy with where im standing... s'all good... im at peace with it... i just don't have that fear... at all...
curenado
03-10-2011, 12:16 AM
<<but seriously, shooting somebody for walking up your driveway unannounced is insane... >>
What I said is that around here (meaning the whole mounta and whole area) even if you are known, you better come in piece owing to the likelihood of ending up in pieces.
<<if you are really that afraid, sure, pull your weapon and do your intimidating face... >>
It is not fear, it is assertion bordering on extreme assertion> The point is rather "not afraid". But that is mosy anybody here.
<<but shooting people over property crime is bullsh1t...>>
(we have got to get somewhere with this) when did I say what I would shoot somebody for? BUT - for closures's sake, we also never really considered the unpredictability of such situations and the nature of some bad asses - beyond my allusion to "what if the robber /robbery doesn't turn out like you think?"
But God! We are nearing some better place so let it be and let us on -
<< unless you live in a place that you have to protect yourself that way by no choice of your own, >>
I was mostly saying I don't have to because of that local tradition and it seemed to me that it would be those who live amidst so much crap that they have to register even the tiniest bit of it as "normal" that were worse off than us. The irony or paradox seems to be that in a place where the odds are highger that you "picked the wrong person", we have less incidence of it and shots fired or people killed.
We have pot and hoo-ha and everything else, but violent crimes against people on their property and invasions and stuff are nil.
<<and you dont, theres no excuse for that... un-called for man... we dont have to go on about it, im happy with where im standing... s'all good... im at peace with it... i just don't have that fear... at all... >>
My real life experience and even urban folks as well (more people just shot during invasions - not simple theft) tells me that those things are unpredictable, but you can usually tell the second after it is too late whether or not you are in for worse. I do not think a noble person should risk injury or death for a thug or thief and unless they have a crystal ball......
(...and come on...just imagine that you lived in a place where some guys were sneaking in to either set your place on fire or kill your dogs and you don;t even need to speak words - just roll the door open and ka-blooey! You go to admit you're just a litttle bit jea;ous. I already said I shot mostly over the windshield anyway...)
What is interesting is the fear that one person can generate - which I see now as essentially being rooted in the "variable unknown" i.e. no person of good will or intent would ever have anything to fear of us, but people who shouldn't be worried get MIGHTY worried as if they were a likely target when they do not have a reason why they would be.
It should also be said that one should check the castle laws where they live. That is very important. They have not gotten weaker here, they have gotten stronger and I know that is true for some other States here in the US.
i wouldnt charge a person who shot somebody who came into their room while they were sleeping and got spooked, thought he had a gun, and was there to kill... fair enough... but there are tons of times when you can make good judgment calls and shooting somebody walking up your driveway is a bad idea unless they look menacing and are clearly armed(although in some places just being black or brown is menacing aparently)... if not, retreat, find cover and wait... if they come at you make ur intentions clear, if they dont leave, plug em... you said coming onto property without a white flag gets you shot, and i realize that was generalization and an exaggeration, but it shows a certain mentality... and i feel its a dangerous one... if you use good judgement, the law shouldnt even be a consideration... the right thing is the right thing, doesnt matter what county ur in... some just let people off with murder, thats all... not the other way around...
curenado
03-10-2011, 12:51 AM
I believe here in the US, murders are statiscally done moe by the robbers than the home defenders.
The police have gotten rather "shoot-U-dead" in a lot of places, but still, the home defenders are way behind the robbers and invaders for doing murders.
None the less, I agree with you about judgement. I myself have only shot at poachers, arsonists and dog killers. People out here don't like that.
sanjuro_ronin
03-10-2011, 06:40 AM
Some people talk about taking another life like it was nothing, THAT worries me.
Drake
03-10-2011, 07:45 AM
Some people talk about taking another life like it was nothing, THAT worries me.
I agree with you there. Even capital offenses should only be followed through after a lengthy and deliberate process.
BJJ-Blue
03-10-2011, 08:09 AM
Some people talk about taking another life like it was nothing, THAT worries me.
Some people talk about stealing other's property like it's nothing.
Look, Texas has it's laws. We can use deadly force to protect our property at night. The "Castle doctrine" now applies to our cars as well as our houses. It doesn't matter if the thief is armed or not. It doesn't matter if you are 6'3 250lbs of solid muscle and the thief is 5'5 125lbs. The law is clear and we have laws that favor the victim, not the criminals, down here. And none of our cities are like Newark, DC, Detroit, LA, etc in terms of violent crime.
David Jamieson
03-10-2011, 08:12 AM
Some people talk about stealing other's property like it's nothing.
Look, Texas has it's laws. We can use deadly force to protect our property at night. The "Castle doctrine" now applies to our cars as well as our houses. It doesn't matter if the thief is armed or not. It doesn't matter if you are 6'3 250lbs of solid muscle and the thief is 5'5 125lbs. The law is clear and we have laws that favor the victim, not the criminals, down here. And none of our cities are like Newark, DC, Detroit, LA, etc in terms of violent crime.
A life, no matter how low, is worth more than dollars or property.
Taking a life for a material thing is moral bankruptcy. It means you value a material thing more than you value a gift of god.
I don't see what is so difficult to understand about that.
curenado
03-10-2011, 09:18 AM
<<A life, no matter how low, is worth more than dollars or property.>>
That is only your personal opinion, it is not universal or a law. Many people do not agree that every life is sacred at all.
<<Taking a life for a material thing is moral bankruptcy. >>
No, intentionally being a victim and encouraging crime is moral bankruptcy. Allowing people to think that crime is easy and cost free is also moral bankruptcy and selfish - you mught be morally pure but have thought nothing of the fool who might be deterred and find better ways.
<<It means you value a material thing more than you value a gift of god.>>
Not all persons are "gifts of God" - not even the bible says that.
<<I don't see what is so difficult to understand about that. >>
Because it is essentially psychotic to many people to imagine the sanctity of a life that has no regard for other lives. It sounds like a "rationale", like the idea that you are going to treat a mugger like you reverence them and they won't beat you up. They do beat you up and many thieves kill - that argument is not realistic.
It does not even sound high and wise to say, especially if you asked crime victims.
AND AGAIN, the only people who have tried to assign petty theft as the sole reason and death as the absolute outcome have been the protestors - I see that as trying to minimize the crime when it is not minimized and glorify the assailant, when they are not to be glorified.
You are entitled to your opinion but that does not make it "godly" or "right" - just yours.
Drake
03-10-2011, 09:21 AM
Some people talk about stealing other's property like it's nothing.
Look, Texas has it's laws. We can use deadly force to protect our property at night. The "Castle doctrine" now applies to our cars as well as our houses. It doesn't matter if the thief is armed or not. It doesn't matter if you are 6'3 250lbs of solid muscle and the thief is 5'5 125lbs. The law is clear and we have laws that favor the victim, not the criminals, down here. And none of our cities are like Newark, DC, Detroit, LA, etc in terms of violent crime.
You may want to read that law, buddy. Especially parts like duty to retreat, and what conditions must be met to use deadly force.
Considering that if you blow away a 14 year old kid for stealing your X-Box, thinking you'll get off scott free, you could be in for a very rude awakening.
The law is clear, and you clearly don't understand it.
Drake
03-10-2011, 09:25 AM
<<A life, no matter how low, is worth more than dollars or property.>>
That is only your personal opinion, it is not universal or a law. Many people do not agree that every life is sacred at all.
<<Taking a life for a material thing is moral bankruptcy. >>
No, intentionally being a victim and encouraging crime is moral bankruptcy. Allowing people to think that crime is easy and cost free is also moral bankruptcy and selfish - you mught be morally pure but have thought nothing of the fool who might be deterred and find better ways.
<<It means you value a material thing more than you value a gift of god.>>
Not all persons are "gifts of God" - not even the bible says that.
<<I don't see what is so difficult to understand about that. >>
Because it is essentially psychotic to many people to imagine the sanctity of a life that has no regard for other lives. It sounds like a "rationale", like the idea that you are going to treat a mugger like you reverence them and they won't beat you up. They do beat you up and many thieves kill - that argument is not realistic.
It does not even sound high and wise to say, especially if you asked crime victims.
AND AGAIN, the only people who have tried to assign petty theft as the sole reason and death as the absolute outcome have been the protestors - I see that as trying to minimize the crime when it is not minimized and glorify the assailant, when they are not to be glorified.
You are entitled to your opinion but that does not make it "godly" or "right" - just yours.
It makes your opinion illegal. You clearly don't understand the law, and you clearly don't understand how society works. You also clearly fail to understand the spirit of the law, as well as the expectations of you as a citizen.
True, you can shoot a mugger for what he's done, because he's a threat to your physical safety. You CANNOT shoot someone for stealing your lawnmower. You call the police...you know...like you are supposed to.
curenado
03-10-2011, 09:31 AM
We already established that people should check the laws in thier State and 14 or not, they can still get shot.
I think it is hard for people to accept that the party of losers is getting over and while you try to interpret the law pro-criminal, it is not being interpreted by the people and in the courts that way.
One of the most morale uplifting things that happened down there in Texas is that a thief team was stealing and got shot dead - here came all the big mouth protestors "It's because they were colored!" and guess what? NOBODY CARED. (because they shouldn't) People were glad to see that two thugs just couldn't walk away scot free for once.
Getting all growly and threatening over who shot a punk doesn't mean anything either - all that means anything is awareness of the law and shooting within it. That is what it is for - NOT protecting criminals. That is tragically misguided.
<<It makes your opinion illegal. You clearly don't understand the law, and you clearly don't understand how society works. You also clearly fail to understand the spirit of the law, as well as the expectations of you as a citizen. >>
I'm sorry. You keep insisting that people don't understand as a means and what other adults are saying is that they think maybe it is you who don't understand and perhaps are a cowardly, criminal loving and useless excuse of a "citizen" - are YOU so sure you "understand the law" so clearly because the things you say are not factually, practically true in real life - or they would have arrested the 80 year old man in the next town tha just drove off two invaders by shooting......they didn't and people here thought it was great!
Too bad, so sad.
As for the upside down and backwards view of society, criminals have never had it so good as they do here (even in our own history) and most people in most places do not tolerate crime easily. Only where it is m9st rampant and out of control is such ridiculousness even countenanced.
<<True, you can shoot a mugger for what he's done, because he's a threat to your physical safety. You CANNOT shoot someone for stealing your lawnmower. You call the police...you know...like you are supposed to.>>
No one is required to be psychic and know what a invader will do. The potential danger is too great and I don't think one owes anyone the goofy task of asking them what their intentions are so they know what to do in advance.
Lucas
03-10-2011, 09:32 AM
the problem with home invasions are you dont know why the criminal is there. Are they after your XBOX or after kidnapping and raping your 9 year old daughter? You dont get the chance to sit down and talk when someone comes into your home with malicous intent. In my personal experience at being invaded you get very little time to take action if you actually are in a position to confront your invader/attacker.
It depends on whats in your home if you feel you are in the position to use deadly force at contact. You simply dont know. The criminal does. He also knows he is in your home and you have the right to shoot his ass. He is taking that gamble. Thats on him/her.
I am NOT saying to shoot and kill all home invaders. But...you just dont know. There are many more factors involved than the simple fact of someone possibly just stealing your stuff. Are you sure they only want to steal something?
Drake
03-10-2011, 09:37 AM
We already established that people should check the laws in thier State and 14 or not, they can still get shot.
I think it is hard for people to accept that the party of losers is getting over and while you try to interpret the law pro-criminal, it is not being interpreted by the people and in the courts that way.
One of the most morale uplifting things that happened down there in Texas is that a thief team was stealing and got shot dead - here came all the big mouth protestors "It's because they were colored!" and guess what? NOBODY CARED. (because they shouldn't) People were glad to see that two thugs just couldn't walk away scot free for once.
Getting all growly and threatening over who shot a punk doesn't mean anything either - all that means anything is awareness of the law and shooting within it. That is what it is for - NOT protecting criminals. That is tragically misguided.
You may want to research Castle Doctrine. You can't just haul off and shoot someone just because they are committing petty theft. That isn't just un-American... that's freaking Hammurabi style vigilantism.
READ THE LAW. You can only kill them if they are threatening you, and you have nowhere else to go. The intent of the law is so that if someone breaks into your home with knives, crowbars, or guns, you have free reign to shoot them in order to protect yourself.
I was a punk once, and had your twisted view of the law been a reality, I would be dead now, and someone else would have to take my place as a soldier. Instead, I was "scared straight", and for the last twenty or so years have been a clean cut individual.
You can't make up some barbaric, unlawful rule based solely off your opinion that those who do something you don't like should be shot.
All Texas and the other states are trying to do is make it so you can defend your family with lethal force when threatened, with no risk of being imprisoned over it. NOT to shoot a child for stealing a Snickers bar.
Lucas
03-10-2011, 09:39 AM
NOT to shoot a child for stealing a Snickers bar.
But i was saving that snickers for a special occasion! :(
Drake
03-10-2011, 09:41 AM
the problem with home invasions are you dont know why the criminal is there. Are they after your XBOX or after kidnapping and raping your 9 year old daughter? You dont get the chance to sit down and talk when someone comes into your home with malicous intent. In my personal experience at being invaded you get very little time to take action if you actually are in a position to confront your invader/attacker.
It depends on whats in your home if you feel you are in the position to use deadly force at contact. You simply dont know. The criminal does. He also knows he is in your home and you have the right to shoot his ass. He is taking that gamble. Thats on him/her.
I am NOT saying to shoot and kill all home invaders. But...you just dont know. There are many more factors involved than the simple fact of someone possibly just stealing your stuff. Are you sure they only want to steal something?
Right, and that's the point. It's not a "kill em all" act. It says, pointblank... if someone breaks into your home, and you feel threatened, you can react with deadly force if no other option is available. My personal view is in a small home, it'll be difficult to prove the ability to retreat, as someone could quickly close in on me or my family and do them harm, and there's no way of knowing their intent.
However, like my NCO said the other day... nothing runs off criminals more than the metallic sound of a round being chambered. And if that's all you need, then you shouldn't shoot them.
But when it's dark, you are scared, and you don't know what they have on them, and your daughter is sleeping in the room next to you... that's why the Castle Doctrine exists. So you can defend yourself and loved ones, and it's based on what YOU perceive as a threat to them.
curenado
03-10-2011, 09:55 AM
You may want to research Castle Doctrine. You can't just haul off and shoot someone just because they are committing petty theft. That isn't just un-American>>
Actually, it seems like you are most un-American.
<<READ THE LAW. You can only kill them if they are threatening you, and you have nowhere else to go. >>
You again try the failed effort of settin up a theoretical scenario to demand you are right - no matter about others safety. You keep re-creating the argument....
<<I was a punk once, and had your twisted view of the law been a reality, I would be dead now, >>
Who says you shouldn't be? Who says you have a right to be a punk and everybody just tolerate it? What is twisted is Y-o-u, that's why you're so mad at the idea of someone telling a punk "no".
<<and someone else would have to take my place as a soldier. >>
Are you somehow disturbed that we don't know about? Maybe that is karma - you spent time being a criminal punk and now you are making up for it.
<<Instead, I was "scared straight", and for the last twenty or so years have been a clean cut individual.>>
That is fine, but when you brag about being a punk and how wrong someone would be for taking a shot at a precious punk it kind of detracts from your accomplishments, for me anyway.
<<You can't make up some barbaric, unlawful rule based solely off your opinion that those who do something you don't like should be shot.<<
No, or it would be a better place to live! But we can and will pop them here where threatening invaders are "zero tolerance" - I am actually glad that makes you mad in a way. To a lot of people it seems like encouragement though to particiapte in better society instead of using our society as a dump pit baby sitting service for non-viable undesirables.
Shootong an aggresor is not barbaric. Certainly not anymore than shooting some arab for oil and being the virgin mary overmuch about it. At least people are talking about the potential for someone to get killed defending home and family - not so we can have more oil and cash! Lol!
<<All Texas and the other states are trying to do is make it so you can defend your family with lethal force when threatened, with no risk of being imprisoned over it. NOT to shoot a child for stealing a Snickers bar.>>
Again, only the self bragged "ex-punks" have demanded we are talking about shooting a kid dead over a snickers bar. Dramatizing and catastrophying are not substantial.
Now this really did happen up in Springfield last year - a teenager threw a snowball at a car and the driver reached out the window with a 9mm and shot him dead right there - no charges filed.
Therefor it would seem to me that warning people that in these times it can be dangerous and their actions might be "misconstrued" is a better idea than defending the misunderstood...it might deter and keep more of them alive or at least wholly un-leaded...
BJJ-Blue
03-10-2011, 09:57 AM
It makes your opinion illegal. You clearly don't understand the law, and you clearly don't understand how society works. You also clearly fail to understand the spirit of the law, as well as the expectations of you as a citizen.
True, you can shoot a mugger for what he's done, because he's a threat to your physical safety. You CANNOT shoot someone for stealing your lawnmower. You call the police...you know...like you are supposed to.
You are wrong.
"In Texas (c), the law for using deadly force in defense of property is not new and is very broad. Texas law says a person is justified in using deadly force if they reasonably believe that this is necessary and the only way to prevent a serious crime such as burglary or theft or to prevent someone from fleeing with stolen property from your home or property.
Texas law (http://tlo2.tlc.state.tx.us/statutes/pe.toc.htm) goes even further by adding the justifiable use of deadly force to protect someone else's property if a person "reasonably believes the unlawful interference constitutes attempted or consummated theft of or criminal mischief to the tangible, movable property." This means that you can use deadly force in Texas not only to protect your own property, but also the property of someone else. There have been incorrect reports in the media that you may only do this in Texas if you have been formally asked or legally required to protect the property of someone else. However, this is not a provision of the law as it is currently written."
So not only can you use deadly force on ANYONE trying to steal your property, you can also use it against someone trying to vandalize it as well.
Source:
http://www.associatedcontent.com/article/852831/deadly_force_and_self_defense_to_protect_pg2.html? cat=17
Aditional sources from the article:
http://www.legallawhelp.com/legal_law_channels/criminal_law/codes_by_state.html
http://tlo2.tlc.state.tx.us/statutes/pe.toc.htm
http://www.cga.ct.gov/2007/rpt/2007-R-0052.htm
http://janus.state.me.us/legis/statutes/17-A/title17-Asec105.html
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2008/06/30/national/main4221859.shtml
BJJ-Blue
03-10-2011, 09:58 AM
You may want to research Castle Doctrine. You can't just haul off and shoot someone just because they are committing petty theft.
READ THE LAW.
You can in Texas. And the law allows for it.
David Jamieson
03-10-2011, 10:05 AM
<<A life, no matter how low, is worth more than dollars or property.>>
That is only your personal opinion, it is not universal or a law. Many people do not agree that every life is sacred at all. It's not just my opinion alone. It is the belief of a great many people.
<<Taking a life for a material thing is moral bankruptcy. >>
No, intentionally being a victim and encouraging crime is moral bankruptcy. Allowing people to think that crime is easy and cost free is also moral bankruptcy and selfish - you mught be morally pure but have thought nothing of the fool who might be deterred and find better ways. No one is intentionally a victim and no one encourages crime. You are making the victims the bad guys here.
<<It means you value a material thing more than you value a gift of god.>>
Not all persons are "gifts of God" - not even the bible says that. the bible is not the final authority. The life in and of itself is the beacon. Life is not yours or mine to judge as worthy or unworthy and the bible DOES say that. It also says though shalt not kill. When you kill for a material thing, that's murder according to the bible.
<<I don't see what is so difficult to understand about that. >>
Because it is essentially psychotic to many people to imagine the sanctity of a life that has no regard for other lives. It sounds like a "rationale", like the idea that you are going to treat a mugger like you reverence them and they won't beat you up. They do beat you up and many thieves kill - that argument is not realistic.
It does not even sound high and wise to say, especially if you asked crime victims.
AND AGAIN, the only people who have tried to assign petty theft as the sole reason and death as the absolute outcome have been the protestors - I see that as trying to minimize the crime when it is not minimized and glorify the assailant, when they are not to be glorified.
You are entitled to your opinion but that does not make it "godly" or "right" - just yours. No, you want it to be that way so you can excuse your own lock of ethics and morality. By painting it on others as mere opinions, you free yourself to side with immoral actions and unethical things and to justify your own materialistic bent where you place value on a material thing of no consequence above the life of a human being because you have cast judgment upon them.
You don't really think that argument would hold much water did you?
I would reiterate, if you think some little pile of money is worth more than a human life, you are in fact morally bankrupt and perhaps need to review your world view. There is no one who has the right to take anyone else's life over material possessions. You can always get more possessions, you can never get a taken life back and yo can never clean the blood from your hands when you take a life in such a circumstance.
so, yes, some of it is my opinion. But on the meat of it, I could present to you some simple scenarios that would outline how your position is wrong. But, if you are not prepared to hear the value of life, then you simply aren't and by reading what you have responded with, I'd have to say you do not recognize the sanctity of life, all life. I suppose that's my opinion too. :)
curenado
03-10-2011, 10:14 AM
I value life that values it's life and the life of others. We just disagree.
I'll support lives that seem to wish to be more worthwhile and you can carry the rest on your back at your expense for God - I'll support the ones that are just trying to be ok and seek their chance. Clearly, they could use friends too and serving God is not always about dragging sinking ships along and moaning.
If you think a life of intention is equal to a life or rank criminality and that serving man or God is facilitating and tolerating them - have them at your house. I value the lives here too much to easily let the waste of the world demoralise and harm them.
Lucas
03-10-2011, 10:43 AM
I grew up in Texas. One thing I know is that Texans have a different outlook than most of the country....its a Texas thing. Not making excuses, but its the way it is. Most Texans feel this way on crime, home/property protection and deadly force. Thus the existance of Texas laws...
Isnt horse theft still punishable by hanging in Texas?
My point is that it is pointless to argue this with Texans on this topic...lol...they will never have a different outlook.
:p
Drake
03-10-2011, 11:05 AM
Calling someone un-American because they don't believe the same as you, especially when your beliefs are contrary to the core beliefs of our Founding Fathers, is un-American and pretty much barbaric and 3rd World level.
I have selflessly served this nation for over a decade, putting myself in harms' way to defend our freedom. You rant over the internet about how you have the right to take the law into your own hands. Who is the real American here? You may want to reevaluate your assessment.
You are the un-American person, because you think your opinion trumps law, and you clearly think your opinion is better than those who created the nation you currently enjoy living in.
Drake
03-10-2011, 11:08 AM
You are wrong.
"In Texas (c), the law for using deadly force in defense of property is not new and is very broad. Texas law says a person is justified in using deadly force if they reasonably believe that this is necessary and the only way to prevent a serious crime such as burglary or theft or to prevent someone from fleeing with stolen property from your home or property.
Texas law (http://tlo2.tlc.state.tx.us/statutes/pe.toc.htm) goes even further by adding the justifiable use of deadly force to protect someone else's property if a person "reasonably believes the unlawful interference constitutes attempted or consummated theft of or criminal mischief to the tangible, movable property." This means that you can use deadly force in Texas not only to protect your own property, but also the property of someone else. There have been incorrect reports in the media that you may only do this in Texas if you have been formally asked or legally required to protect the property of someone else. However, this is not a provision of the law as it is currently written."
So not only can you use deadly force on ANYONE trying to steal your property, you can also use it against someone trying to vandalize it as well.
Source:
http://www.associatedcontent.com/article/852831/deadly_force_and_self_defense_to_protect_pg2.html? cat=17
Aditional sources from the article:
http://www.legallawhelp.com/legal_law_channels/criminal_law/codes_by_state.html
http://tlo2.tlc.state.tx.us/statutes/pe.toc.htm
http://www.cga.ct.gov/2007/rpt/2007-R-0052.htm
http://janus.state.me.us/legis/statutes/17-A/title17-Asec105.html
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2008/06/30/national/main4221859.shtml
I did read it, and you are misinterpreting it. Read the legal guidance about it.
Only a twisted and morally questionable individual would shoot someone over physical property. You suggest a law that grants you more rights to kill someone than the military. And yet you refuse to accept that you have misintepreted it? I mean, for crying out loud... look at the URL for your first link.
Ok...how about this... you or me, doesn't matter who, will e-mail a TX rep and ask them what the law really means. Deal?
curenado
03-10-2011, 11:22 AM
Calling someone un-American because they don't believe the same as you, especially when your beliefs are contrary to the core beliefs of our Founding Fathers, is un-American and pretty much barbaric and 3rd World level.>>
You started that based on your personal interpretation of some parts of judicial law - I just said being weak and without character or grit in the face of simple right and wrong is un-American to me and plenty of other people as well - after you started using the slur. It is my opinion that it is your idea of the founding fathers being against home defense or hanging horse thieves that makes me feel like you are just saying what you think makes you sound good - not the real facts or truth about America or the founding fathers in specific things like this.
<<I have selflessly served this nation for over a decade, putting myself in harms' way to defend our freedom. You rant over the internet about how you have the right to take the law into your own hands. Who is the real American here? You may want to reevaluate your assessment.>>
I am not ranting about anyting - you are the one who is getting hysterical and claiming a special status which gives you the right above me when it is a simple right that everyone has. You have tried to accuse me of things falsely to (ad hominum) make your case and that is considered to be the lowest level on the rung there in case you did not know. You have been the first with all the slurs and attempted accusations - I consider that weak and full of it and I wish you would stop calling me un-Amercican and being mad, because you started ALL that and then said
"Calling someone un-American because they don't believe the same as you, especially when your beliefs are contrary to the core beliefs of our Founding Fathers, is un-American and pretty much barbaric and 3rd World level.
So all you have really said is you can sure dish it out but can not take it and are also a hypocrite. You can't be mad if people won't go there with you.
<<You are the un-American person, because you think your opinion trumps law, and you clearly think your opinion is better than those who created the nation you currently enjoy living in.>>
BAM! That is what I think about you exactly - because you have consistently tried to use your status as a soldier to dictate domestic law and how it should be in your opinion regrdless of the law for everyone.
That is what it really seems like. Not all soldiers agree with you and at least the ones here do not try to use their service as a justification to accuse and enforce as if your opinion was somehow more than your own and others is irrelevant or as you began with it "un-American"
I think it is rather fascist to try to point the finger and cry "UnAmerican!" to try and push your petty argument.....that is more revealing than most other points of this discussion have been.
sanjuro_ronin
03-10-2011, 11:25 AM
Some people talk about stealing other's property like it's nothing.
Look, Texas has it's laws. We can use deadly force to protect our property at night. The "Castle doctrine" now applies to our cars as well as our houses. It doesn't matter if the thief is armed or not. It doesn't matter if you are 6'3 250lbs of solid muscle and the thief is 5'5 125lbs. The law is clear and we have laws that favor the victim, not the criminals, down here. And none of our cities are like Newark, DC, Detroit, LA, etc in terms of violent crime.
A thief can give back what he took, a killer can't.
To compare the two is ridiculous.
No offense Bro, but I expected more from you.
Drake
03-10-2011, 11:26 AM
>>
BAM! That is what I think about you exactly - because you have consistently tried to use your status as a soldier to dictate domestic law and how it should be in your opinion regrdless of the law for everyone.
That is what it really seems like. Not all soldiers agree with you and at least the ones here do not try to use their service as a justification to accuse and enforce as if your opinion was somehow more than your own and others is irrelevant or as you began with it "un-American"
I think it is rather fascist to try to point the finger and cry "UnAmerican!" to try and push your petty argument.....that is more revealing than most other points of this discussion have been.
Uh...you brought it up, not me. Bam? And I quoted our founding fathers as well as other leaders throughout history. Are they shoving their historical status as the creators of the country you live in as a way of dictating domestic law too?
curenado
03-10-2011, 11:34 AM
<<A thief can give back what he took, a killer can't.>>
Exactly! That is why most people do not wait to find out what they may not be able to get back and the real answer is to warn people more that it is getting riskier and more dangerous screwing around with people, because they aren't psychic and might let them have it.
We must do our American duty and make sure killers and thieves know that they might be resisted and the one that ends up getting what they were serving might be them! God forbid we should fail in our duty to make sure everybody knew what they were getting themselves into before they do!
(Because that is about all you can do really)
In a case of invader versus person that belongs there, the burden of justification is kind of on the invader - the invader was the one tresspassing with undeclared intent or in malicious action (whatever) and so the first question is really "What were you doing there and what were your intentions for them?"
BJJ-Blue
03-10-2011, 11:55 AM
Isnt horse theft still punishable by hanging in Texas?
It may still be, I'm not sure. But I do know you can use deadly force to protect your livestock.
My point is that it is pointless to argue this with Texans on this topic...lol...they will never have a different outlook.
And our outlook has made us a very successful State.
Remember, we used to hang horse thieves and cattle rustlers, while Northeasterners used too burn witches. ;)
BJJ-Blue
03-10-2011, 12:01 PM
I did read it, and you are misinterpreting it. Read the legal guidance about it.
Only a twisted and morally questionable individual would shoot someone over physical property. You suggest a law that grants you more rights to kill someone than the military. And yet you refuse to accept that you have misintepreted it? I mean, for crying out loud... look at the URL for your first link.
Drake, it's not exactly an uncommon occurence down here. And we've never convicted a guy of murder for shooting a burglar or someone breaking into their car at night. Look it up if you don't believe me.
Several years ago we had a guy and his gf who went Downtown for a night out. They returned to his truck and saw someone breaking into it. The thief fled with some of his property and the victim followed him and shot him in the back, killing him. No charges were filed on him.
Ok...how about this... you or me, doesn't matter who, will e-mail a TX rep and ask them what the law really means. Deal?
Go right ahead.
Ask specifically, "Are you allowed to use deadly force to protect your property at night in Texas?" You can also ask if that includes your car too, or just your house.
A thief can give back what he took, a killer can't.
To compare the two is ridiculous.
No offense Bro, but I expected more from you.
Sorry to disappoint.
But you know I'm big into personal responsibility. You choose to steal from someone, be ready to face the repercussions for it.
i wouldnt approach them without a weapon drawn...i know all to well how that can end if you arent already prepared. try to beat a criminal up while he is working you might get shot or stabbed.
personally i would pull my gun, announce my intent clearly, give opportunity to cease action, and then shoot if i deem it appropriate based on the criminals response. i would not shoot to kill, i would aim for below the waist and try for thigh.
i agree with most of of this
but home invasions a different matter shoot on sight imo
Lucas
03-10-2011, 12:07 PM
i agree with most of of this
but home invasions a different matter shoot on sight imo
I agree home invasions are a different matter. imo if you come into my locked home, you are asking to get killed. its the risk you knowingly take in entering the sanctity of my domain. i would expect to get killed breaking into someones home if i got caught. whether i would kill a person in my home would depend on several factors. personally i would rather use a sword. i have one in every room lol
Lucas
03-10-2011, 12:13 PM
in the paper recently a guy broke into some ladies house and was....taking a shower...he heard the people come home...a mother and daughter...mother told daughter to leave and got outside the door to the b-room with 2 dogs and announced she was calling 911. the tresspasser was afraid for his life (rightfully so) and said he was calling 911 also. he stayed in the locked room until he was arrested because he knew he might die otherwise.
she did not have a gun. but at least the criminal was wise, had she a gun, he saved his own life.
Drake
03-10-2011, 12:14 PM
Yep...home invasions should be ok for lethal force, because most of the time there's violence and intent to harm. And even if there wasn't, it sure does look like it, which would fall into the "reasonable person" category.
I have valueables,pets and occasionally loved ones who stay with me so i cant afford to play the guessing game if some one tries to break in.They deserve whatever they get
plus as an epileptic i cant afford to get in a scuffle under those circumstances like that if i happen to get beat up i could start siezing and then i cant protect anybody in that condition so i would shoot immediately and to kill
Drake
03-10-2011, 12:26 PM
I have valueables,pets and occasionally loved ones who stay with me so i cant afford to play the guessing game if some one tries to break in.They deserve whatever they get
plus as an epileptic i cant afford to get in a scuffle under those circumstances like that if i happen to get beat up i could start siezing and then i cant protect anybody in that condition so i would shoot immediately and to kill
That's why those laws are in place. So you don't have to sit there and waste time trying to figure out the danger. My argument was the idea that people are floating that it's ok to shoot someone who you KNOW is harmless, and essentuially shoot them as they are running away.
Lucas
03-10-2011, 12:28 PM
That's why those laws are in place. So you don't have to sit there and waste time trying to figure out the danger. My argument was the idea that people are floating that it's ok to shoot someone who you KNOW is harmless, and essentuially shoot them as they are running away.
what if i just throw some knives at them instead of shooting them as they run away? lol
they probably wont die but they wont ever forget it haha
just chase them for a few blocks kicking them in the arse all the while :D
Lucas
03-10-2011, 12:33 PM
8 point shuriken are your friends :D
unless you release them to late and impale your own foot:D
Lucas
03-10-2011, 12:37 PM
hahaha...Ninja Bloopers
sanjuro_ronin
03-10-2011, 01:04 PM
i agree with most of of this
but home invasions a different matter shoot on sight imo
Yes, home invasions are a completely different matter and are treated as such.
Shooting someone because they stole your ipod is not the same thing.
I have a friend that was a victim of a home invasion, him and his family, and I am so grateful that it was a professional invasion, they took the jewelery and cash and nothing else and where out in minutes and no one was harmed physically.
I have read about ones that turn very, very bad.
Hardwork108
03-10-2011, 04:05 PM
true.
We must also recognize that all who are hurting are needing love and humanity.
ALL.
:)
Well then, let me send you my love.....:D
Some people talk about stealing other's property like it's nothing.
Look, Texas has it's laws. We can use deadly force to protect our property at night. The "Castle doctrine" now applies to our cars as well as our houses. It doesn't matter if the thief is armed or not. It doesn't matter if you are 6'3 250lbs of solid muscle and the thief is 5'5 125lbs. The law is clear and we have laws that favor the victim, not the criminals, down here. And none of our cities are like Newark, DC, Detroit, LA, etc in terms of violent crime.
come on... morals dont change by county... right and wrong is right and wrong... anywhere... and shooting somebody for rooting through your ride is wrong... period...
somebody kicks ur door in and comes at you, sure by all means, have at em... but not over dumb sh1t like property... i have no issue with people defending themselves... and i have no problem with people defending their shiny things... but there is a type of reason that needs to be applied there...
the fact that all this isnt just obvious to you speaks volumes about who you are...
Right, and that's the point. It's not a "kill em all" act. It says, pointblank... if someone breaks into your home, and you feel threatened, you can react with deadly force if no other option is available. My personal view is in a small home, it'll be difficult to prove the ability to retreat, as someone could quickly close in on me or my family and do them harm, and there's no way of knowing their intent.
However, like my NCO said the other day... nothing runs off criminals more than the metallic sound of a round being chambered. And if that's all you need, then you shouldn't shoot them.
But when it's dark, you are scared, and you don't know what they have on them, and your daughter is sleeping in the room next to you... that's why the Castle Doctrine exists. So you can defend yourself and loved ones, and it's based on what YOU perceive as a threat to them.
hhmmm... common sense... well said...
BJJ-Blue
03-11-2011, 08:24 AM
come on... morals dont change by county... right and wrong is right and wrong... anywhere... and shooting somebody for rooting through your ride is wrong...
Whether it's right or wrong morally doesn't matter in the eyes of the law. And it is allowed by law in Texas.
the fact that all this isnt just obvious to you speaks volumes about who you are...
Yup, I'm somebody who values those things I bust my butt to acquire. And I'll defend them from someone looking to steal or vandalize them. I openly admit it. You want to let thieves steal your stuff, fine. But I wont.
curenado
03-11-2011, 08:43 AM
<<come on... morals dont change by county... right and wrong is right and wrong... anywhere... and shooting somebody for rooting through your ride is wrong... period...>>
That is only your personal opinion - many people disagree so you continue pressing a worthless argument because it has already been repeatedly stated and the exercise of continually repeating "It's wrond dood" is not a magic spell that somehow makes that true.
You can't really be right or change anything by insisting that it is wrong. That is each persons choice and maybe you have influeneced some people but I bet on a poll most would shoot.
I mean, the three people most upset here are two former thieves (that were lucky) and one "every sperm is sacred" guy.....of those, one person is a person whose job it is to shoot civilians for taking groceries out of the store if the power fails.
(The military shoots citizens for taking groceries - not steroes, but those too, anytime there is a disaster. So how can a military person whose job it is in their own country to "protect assets" be so mad I don't know, but there it is...)
You'll get further warning thieves....the problem is only getting worse and people are only getting more frustrated so I don't see it going away -
MasterKiller
03-11-2011, 09:06 AM
Whether it's right or wrong morally doesn't matter in the eyes of the law. And it is allowed by law in Texas.
Yup, I'm somebody who values those things I bust my butt to acquire. And I'll defend them from someone looking to steal or vandalize them. I openly admit it.
LOL at the Christian who would kill a kid over a car stereo. Pathetic.
curenado
03-11-2011, 09:13 AM
LOL at the Christian who would kill a kid over a car stereo. Pathetic.
Lol at the empty bag of hot air opinion who doesn't pay for the kid, doesn't have a job for the kid, doesn't spend time with the kid and doesn't have anything to offer the kid - or the victim - just a opinion that should matter without actual responcibility, to endorse unknown lives....for one's own reasons.
sanjuro_ronin
03-11-2011, 09:25 AM
LOL at the Christian who would kill a kid over a car stereo. Pathetic.
Lets make it clear that Christ's view on these things is quite clear:
Killing is inexcusable, period.
One may have to kill when we have no other choice, but we will still answer for that, even worse if we take a life and DO HAVE a choice.
As for stealing, Christ is also clear:
Thou shall not Steal
AND:
Matthew 5:
38 You have heard that it was said, An eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth. 39 But I say to you, Do not resist an evildoer. But if anyone strikes you on the right cheek, turn the other also; 40 and if anyone wants to sue you and take your coat, give your cloak as well; 41 and if anyone forces you to go one mile, go also the second mile. 42 Give to everyone who begs from you, and do not refuse anyone who wants to borrow from you.
Now, these two are not in contridiction, Jesus is making it clear about the issue of retaliation in a time where stoning and killing were the common punishment for most crimes.
Jesus was trying to explain how to break the cycle of hate and violence and retaliation.
It's not easy for us to do this and understand it,much less agree, but this is not a case of let anyone do what they will to you but a case of social responsibility.
If someone is stealing, WHY are they and what can we do to help them NOT steal.
MasterKiller
03-11-2011, 09:34 AM
Lets make it clear that Christ's view on these things is quite clear:
Killing is inexcusable, period.
One may have to kill when we have no other choice, but we will still answer for that, even worse if we take a life and DO HAVE a choice.
As for stealing, Christ is also clear:
Thou shall not Steal
AND:
Matthew 5:
38 You have heard that it was said, An eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth. 39 But I say to you, Do not resist an evildoer. But if anyone strikes you on the right cheek, turn the other also; 40 and if anyone wants to sue you and take your coat, give your cloak as well; 41 and if anyone forces you to go one mile, go also the second mile. 42 Give to everyone who begs from you, and do not refuse anyone who wants to borrow from you.
Now, these two are not in contridiction, Jesus is making it clear about the issue of retaliation in a time where stoning and killing were the common punishment for most crimes.
Jesus was trying to explain how to break the cycle of hate and violence and retaliation.
It's not easy for us to do this and understand it,much less agree, but this is not a case of let anyone do what they will to you but a case of social responsibility.
If someone is stealing, WHY are they and what can we do to help them NOT steal.
Those are just the parts of the Bible that 1bad doesn't take literally.
curenado
03-11-2011, 09:40 AM
...if they are willing to do something besides steal, because many of them steal because it is easy and lucrative.
I have met many hardcore people who laugh at those trying to "help" them and only consider them a dumber mark that deserves it.
There is a big difference between someone who wants a chance and someone who will only escalate in severity and damages.
I think our current socio/political/economic situation creates circumstances and people that might not normally be there in a more balanced society. I mean that conversion will not seem like a option for many people.
If you are a person who thinks they can and has the lifespace to maybe pull someone up out of it that is a fine thing - but it doesn't happen often enough, even for the people who do it full time.
Also - and this is just for fun because we can always be considering the things that Jesus said and do well by it but - I can't resist!
<<Jesus was trying to explain how to break the cycle of hate and violence and retaliation>>
Us too! We just propose a faster and more economical method! (ok - lol...it was just there..)
For all this theory that has gotten some people so over boiled, I myself have not killed anyone with a gun yet. I think the main reason I have not is because I just look like I would without blinking, so a triangular poker face with high cheek bones is just as scary as actually drawing. (Master Don can do it too. He is a half bred Cherokee)
I perhaps could have not shot the times I have but as I recall it seemed necessary then so I will trust memory there. No one I have shot at ever went to the sherrif and complained - of course around here it is hard to say "I was just doin a petty crime and doc shot at me!" because they will probably laugh and say "must have been in a good mood or you'd be pickin' shot."
There was a person I never shot at, I just shot in the air every time he came around - the sherrif did say I could not shoot him, but it worked anyway because he did not move his disease-y crack house out on the mountain. He decided to keep it in Little Rock for them instead.
So you guys are right, you don't always have to shoot them or shoot them dead except when you have to. (even if you sorta want to)
But For Sure check your laws where you are. We are used to ours here.
Lucas
03-11-2011, 10:14 AM
42 Give to everyone who begs from you, and do not refuse anyone who wants to borrow from you.
i dont know even one person that does this. so i guess no one takes it literally....
Lucas
03-11-2011, 10:14 AM
hey guys, can i beg 1000 dollars from each of you, i really need it.
:D
I would also like to borrow your cars.
sanjuro_ronin
03-11-2011, 10:54 AM
i dont know even one person that does this. so i guess no one takes it literally....
Some do, it's not easy but Christ didn't say to give when you have nothing to give or to give when giving would cause your suffering.
Remember, even for those that have issues with giving money, one can give food, or clothes or whatnot.
BJJ-Blue
03-11-2011, 11:00 AM
LOL at the Christian who would kill a kid over a car stereo. Pathetic.
Whats even more pathetic is when someone who makes fun of religion blasts others for not being religious enough.
The Bible says 'Thou shall not steal' and it says 'Thou shall not murder'. If I shoot a thief, I wont be worried about having to answer to God over it.
BJJ-Blue
03-11-2011, 11:03 AM
If someone is stealing, WHY are they and what can we do to help them NOT steal.
I agree. And for the record, I don't feel the same about someone stealing to feed their family as a I do about a guy stealing a plasma TV.
MasterKiller
03-11-2011, 11:07 AM
I agree. And for the record, I don't feel the same about someone stealing to feed their family as a I do about a guy stealing a plasma TV.
So you make children fill out a questionaire about their intended use of your devices before you shoot them?
God doesn't say "Thou shalt not steal...unless you need a cheeseburger."
BJJ-Blue
03-11-2011, 11:25 AM
So you make children fill out a questionaire about their intended use of your devices before you shoot them?
God doesn't say "Thou shalt not steal...unless you need a cheeseburger."
Just stop embarrassing yourself.
If someone is breaking into a car, I'll go out on a limb and guess it's not because they are looking for food. And I can't think of any home burglars who only ransack the fridge.
MasterKiller
03-11-2011, 11:35 AM
Just stop embarrassing yourself. You're the one proving your hypocritical life view every time you open your mouth.
If someone is breaking into a car, I'll go out on a limb and guess it's not because they are looking for food. And I can't think of any home burglars who only ransack the fridge. You think the money made from these crimes just goes into crack rocks? People steal for all sorts of reasons, but since you shoot children first and ask questions later, I guess that point is lost on you.
Drake
03-11-2011, 11:48 AM
Whats even more pathetic is when someone who makes fun of religion blasts others for not being religious enough.
The Bible says 'Thou shall not steal' and it says 'Thou shall not murder'. If I shoot a thief, I wont be worried about having to answer to God over it.
I think if I believed in a higher power, I'd be VERY concerned about my fate if I were to shoot someone dead over material possessions.
BJJ-Blue
03-11-2011, 11:56 AM
I'm not gonna play with you tit-for-tat for months on end. :rolleyes:
I'll shoot anyone who tries to steal or vandalize the stuff I work hard for. I don't care what you, or anyone else here, thinks. In Texas, we have the legal right to do so. I'll take the responsibility both legally and with the Lord, and I don't worry a bit about it. I'll also say I hope I never have to do this, but I value my hard-earned property more than I value the life of a thief or a vandal. Texas also values the lives and property of law abiding citizens more than the lives of criminals. That's how I feel about it, and I'm not changing my mind anytime soon.
MasterKiller
03-11-2011, 12:21 PM
I'm not gonna play with you tit-for-tat for months on end. :rolleyes:
I'll shoot anyone who tries to steal or vandalize the stuff I work hard for. I don't care what you, or anyone else here, thinks. In Texas, we have the legal right to do so. I'll take the responsibility both legally and with the Lord, and I don't worry a bit about it. I'll also say I hope I never have to do this, but I value my hard-earned property more than I value the life of a thief or a vandal. Texas also values the lives and property of law abiding citizens more than the lives of criminals. That's how I feel about it, and I'm not changing my mind anytime soon.
Unless, on their exit questionaire, they check the box marked "Stealing this item for food."
I suppose then he just tazes children and curb-kicks their teeth out. You know. Because it's the Christian thing to do.
I'm not gonna play with you tit-for-tat for months on end. :rolleyes:
I'll shoot anyone who tries to steal or vandalize the stuff I work hard for. I don't care what you, or anyone else here, thinks. In Texas, we have the legal right to do so. I'll take the responsibility both legally and with the Lord, and I don't worry a bit about it. I'll also say I hope I never have to do this, but I value my hard-earned property more than I value the life of a thief or a vandal. Texas also values the lives and property of law abiding citizens more than the lives of criminals. That's how I feel about it, and I'm not changing my mind anytime soon.
thats pretty sad... no wonder you guys are falling faster than anyone else can keep up with... i feel sorry for the good people you take down with you... enjoy your shiny stuff, its the best you can do with that mentaility...
Unless, on their exit questionaire, they check the box marked "Stealing this item for food."
I suppose then he just tazes children and curb-kicks their teeth out. You know. Because it's the Christian thing to do.
i bet american history x made him feel hard...
Drake
03-11-2011, 12:31 PM
I'm not gonna play with you tit-for-tat for months on end. :rolleyes:
I'll shoot anyone who tries to steal or vandalize the stuff I work hard for. I don't care what you, or anyone else here, thinks. In Texas, we have the legal right to do so. I'll take the responsibility both legally and with the Lord, and I don't worry a bit about it. I'll also say I hope I never have to do this, but I value my hard-earned property more than I value the life of a thief or a vandal. Texas also values the lives and property of law abiding citizens more than the lives of criminals. That's how I feel about it, and I'm not changing my mind anytime soon.
Thieves and vandals are people. Did you just dehumanize them? I have stolen and vandalized when I was a child, and even a young man. Should I deserve to be shot? Not everyone who steals, steals for life.
Unless it is self defense... and you kill someone... that is murder, like it or not. You cannot justify it any other way.
curenado
03-11-2011, 12:55 PM
<<Thieves and vandals are people. Did you just dehumanize them? I have stolen and vandalized when I was a child, and even a young man. Should I deserve to be shot? Not everyone who steals, steals for life.>>
Well, they take their lives into their hands when they do.
One is better advised not to bet their future than to listen to criminal encouraging morons who say "Go ahead! It is safe if you are just taking stuff!" - because it isn't, even if someone thinks it should be.
<<Thieves and vandals are people. Did you just dehumanize them?>>
Oh bull! Lol! Says you! They dehumanize the victim - not the other way around.
What a ridiculous and shameless thing to say.
They dehumanize themselves - it is goofy to try to lay blame at the feet of the victim.
I am also sorry about the convenient, infantile reality you have made up and are trying to shove on everyone but - BS! YES! you deserved to be shot! All of you who have claimed you were thieves and dramatically hiked up your skirts at the idea of getting what you deserve are not only funny but sad.
You seriously expect people to buy it! It's like the boys too - over and over, louder and louder, more dramatic and still wrong all the way.
How is someone supposed to take a alcoholic's opinion about alcohol seriously, especially when they are still talking about the good 'ol liquor store days?
It is also evidence (sorry) that it is no loss if they do get popped because they will grow up upside down and backwards, like they had no father.
sanjuro_ronin
03-11-2011, 12:58 PM
In Islam a thief has his hand cut off and a vandal is whipped.
MasterKiller
03-11-2011, 01:03 PM
In Islam a thief has his hand cut off and a vandal is whipped.
Luckily for 1bad, he's a card carrying Christian and is allowed to kill them.
MasterKiller
03-11-2011, 01:06 PM
It is also evidence (sorry) that it is no loss if they do get popped because they will grow up upside down and backwards, like they had no father. And yet, aren't you anti-abortion?
i honestly wouldnt feel bad if a thief ends up killed during the act of robbery
you know the risks youre taking when you do it
and whippings a good idea i believe i part of india they cane petty thieves as well
curenado
03-11-2011, 01:10 PM
And yet, aren't you anti-abortion?
No - we have population problems and poor quality yields...
Lucas
03-11-2011, 01:19 PM
so im curious....dont some religious people believe that evil (like all the actions of the sins) is because of the devil? so like these people are being influenced or controled by the devil?
so im curious....dont some religious people believe that evil (like all the actions of the sins) is because of the devil? so like these people are being influenced or controled by the devil?
some do yes
they also believe people are born evil as well instead of being products of our society
sanjuro_ronin
03-11-2011, 01:29 PM
so im curious....dont some religious people believe that evil (like all the actions of the sins) is because of the devil? so like these people are being influenced or controled by the devil?
No, not really in THAT way.
Sin is the result of human's being "fallen and broken" for the "original sin" of the frist Humans, Adam and Eve.
Its the heriditary state of pride and arrogance that we all have, the notion that we don't need God, that we can be like God and that there is no consequences for that.
That is THE sin, Pride and arrogance of Man.
We are broken untill we realise that, as being in the image of God, we need God to be complete.
We can't do it without God, we can't controll anything and are doomed to fail over and over until we realise that.
Satan is our accuser and opposer, he is not the rival of God, he is OUR rival, pointing out to God how much we suck ass, LOL !
Does he involve himself directly?
Some believe so, but his power is what is given to him by humans.
He was the original fallen angel who, like humans, wanted to be like God and didn't need God, his jealousy of the gift given to the humans is what drove him to rebel.
Lucas
03-11-2011, 01:32 PM
okay so ive always wondered. if God is all powerful in the literal sense of the meaning that god has no boundaries and can do all then why wasnt everything created as all good and no bad?
is it that it cant do everything or that it is a sadistic entity that for some reason is unwilling to remove suffering to 'prove a point' to its own creation that it must imbue with evil since it creates all. why doesnt it just remove evil entirely then there is no reason for any suffering.
not trying to offend, simply curious.
ShaolinDan
03-11-2011, 01:40 PM
okay so ive always wondered. if God is all powerful in the literal sense of the meaning that god has no boundaries and can do all then why wasnt everything created as all good and no bad?
is it that it cant do everything or that it is a sadistic entity that for some reason is unwilling to remove suffering to 'prove a point' to its own creation that it must imbue with evil since it creates all. why doesnt it just remove evil entirely then there is no reason for any suffering.
not trying to offend, simply curious.
I can't resist.
so the Intro to Philosophy of Religion 101 answer is that evil allows for even greater goods, such as perseverance, courage, transcendence, etc.
Personally, I like to think of God as an artist. There is nothing interesting about a piece with no conflict/contrast.
I've seen you make some posts on LOTR...if you've read the beginning of the Silmarillion, I think that explains Satan's role pretty well.
sanjuro_ronin
03-11-2011, 01:43 PM
okay so ive always wondered. if God is all powerful in the literal sense of the meaning that god has no boundaries and can do all then why wasnt everything created as all good and no bad?
is it that it cant do everything or that it is a sadistic entity that for some reason is unwilling to remove suffering to 'prove a point' to its own creation that it must imbue with evil since it creates all. why doesnt it just remove evil entirely then there is no reason for any suffering.
not trying to offend, simply curious.
Removal of evil?
Not sure what you mean...
Evil is a human trait, perhaps even an angelic trait, that comes with free will, God can't remove evil it would be going against the very essence that God is.
Hurricanes aren't evil, earthquakes aren't evil, people commit evil acts because they know the difference between right and wrong and doing wrong is "evil" and for God to stop that it would mean eliminating free will.
No, not really in THAT way.
Sin is the result of human's being "fallen and broken" for the "original sin" of the frist Humans, Adam and Eve.
Its the heriditary state of pride and arrogance that we all have, the notion that we don't need God, that we can be like God and that there is no consequences for that.
That is THE sin, Pride and arrogance of Man.
We are broken untill we realize that, as being in the image of God, we need God to be complete.
We can't do it without God, we can't control anything and are doomed to fail over and over until we realize that.
you can see how that would be offensive to some, right? how can you not discriminate if you really believe that?
personally, i dont really care... it annoys me that i have to live in a society whos laws are based on your values, but it could be worse, thats for sure...
i wish people had the same faith in a real democracy...
Lucas
03-11-2011, 01:45 PM
totally...okay so i understand the duality aspect of the relationship...but the only thing that irks me is that God shouldnt be concerned with boredom....can we even apply a thing like that to an entity of that magnitude and nature? Does God have emotions? if so is God swayed as easily as humans by those emotions? if not are they truly emotions?
Lucas
03-11-2011, 01:47 PM
Removal of evil?
Not sure what you mean...
Evil is a human trait, perhaps even an angelic trait, that comes with free will, God can't remove evil it would be going against the very essence that God is.
Hurricanes aren't evil, earthquakes aren't evil, people commit evil acts because they know the difference between right and wrong and doing wrong is "evil" and for God to stop that it would mean eliminating free will.
you tricky b@stard lol
ShaolinDan
03-11-2011, 01:50 PM
If God didn't get bored, then why the F**** are we here? I just can't come up with any other reason, even if this one doesn't quite make sense? :)
Maybe that's why Buddhas are higher than Gods?
i thought his reasons were for love...
curenado
03-11-2011, 01:52 PM
<<Maybe that's why Buddhas are higher than Gods?>>
Buddhas are higher than Gods because what they smoke...
sanjuro_ronin
03-11-2011, 01:58 PM
you tricky b@stard lol
LMAO !!!
*bows head*
sanjuro_ronin
03-11-2011, 01:59 PM
you can see how that would be offensive to some, right? how can you not discriminate if you really believe that?
personally, i dont really care... it annoys me that i have to live in a society whos laws are based on your values, but it could be worse, thats for sure...
i wish people had the same faith in a real democracy...
I don't understand your post...discriminate?
sanjuro_ronin
03-11-2011, 02:00 PM
totally...okay so i understand the duality aspect of the relationship...but the only thing that irks me is that God shouldnt be concerned with boredom....can we even apply a thing like that to an entity of that magnitude and nature? Does God have emotions? if so is God swayed as easily as humans by those emotions? if not are they truly emotions?
Us trying to understand God and his nature is like an ameoba trying to understand quantum physics.
MasterKiller
03-11-2011, 02:31 PM
No, not really in THAT way.
Sin is the result of human's being "fallen and broken" for the "original sin" of the frist Humans, Adam and Eve.
Its the heriditary state of pride and arrogance that we all have, the notion that we don't need God, that we can be like God and that there is no consequences for that.
That is THE sin, Pride and arrogance of Man.
We are broken untill we realise that, as being in the image of God, we need God to be complete.
We can't do it without God, we can't controll anything and are doomed to fail over and over until we realise that.
Satan is our accuser and opposer, he is not the rival of God, he is OUR rival, pointing out to God how much we suck ass, LOL !
Does he involve himself directly?
Some believe so, but his power is what is given to him by humans.
He was the original fallen angel who, like humans, wanted to be like God and didn't need God, his jealousy of the gift given to the humans is what drove him to rebel.
This is hippy mumbo jumbo.
God got ****ed because Adam became self-aware. No more. No less. And he rained hell down on humans because of it.
The whole story is ridiculous, anyway. But to worship a diety that still punishes people for the acts of a man and woman 1,000 generations before is asinine.
YouKnowWho
03-11-2011, 02:39 PM
I'd do it, too.
I would commit some crime so I could go to jail and finish that task earlier. Trying to help a bad guy to go to hell sooner is always a good deed.
MasterKiller
03-11-2011, 02:41 PM
Us trying to understand God and his nature is like an ameoba trying to understand quantum physics.
We have the knowledge of God.
"For God knows that in the day you eat from it your eyes will be opened, and you will be like God, knowing good and evil."
Not eating from the Tree of Life and becoming immortal is the only difference between humans and God after they eat from the Tree of Knowledge.
Then the LORD God said, "Behold, the man has become like one of Us, knowing good and evil; and now, he might stretch out his hand, and take also from the tree of life, and eat, and live forever "--
God just wanted us to be dumb apes, but Adam and Eve defy him and become self-aware, which is the ultimate slap in the face for him because he just wanted some stupid drones that never questioned his authoirty.
Sounds like more of a slave-owner than a divine being worthy of my adoration.
BJJ-Blue
03-11-2011, 02:49 PM
no wonder you guys are falling faster than anyone else can keep up with...
Huh?
Texas is one of (if not the) best States for jobs and real estate markets. You can't drive to the store without seeing at least one car with out of State tags full of refugees fleeing their home States to come here for opportunity. California is the most common one. Gee, I wonder why...
i feel sorry for the good people you take down with you... enjoy your shiny stuff, its the best you can do with that mentaility...
If we are taking so many people down with us, why is Texas one of the fastest growing States?
I do enjoy my things. I work hard and I enjoy the fruits of my labor.
And I'm putting some new mods on the Stang this weekend too! :D
BJJ-Blue
03-11-2011, 02:52 PM
Sounds like more of a slave-owner than a divine being worthy of my adoration.
Yeah, those slave owners were notorious for giving their only begotten sons so the slaves could have salvation.
MasterKiller
03-11-2011, 02:55 PM
Yeah, those slave owners were notorious for giving their only begotten sons so the slaves could have salvation.
His only begotten son that was also himself? Incest is best, I suppose.
How did God (who is also Jesus) "give" his son (who is also God), if Jesus (who is also God) sacrificed himself to show God (who is also Jesus) that people were worth better treatment from God (who is also Jesus)?
curenado
03-11-2011, 03:34 PM
His only begotten son that was also himself? Incest is best, I suppose.
How did God (who is also Jesus) "give" his son (who is also God), if Jesus (who is also God) sacrificed himself to show God (who is also Jesus) that people were worth better treatment from God (who is also Jesus)?
You gotta be careful MK - even if religious people think about religion too long it'll make ya go cross-eyed....
I was going to say "God of a people that will set themselves on fire in the street to protest the government..." to point out that we are crazy as he is...but I really don't know....
Drake
03-11-2011, 04:20 PM
Like it or not, the book was written by a bunch of dudes... you can say they were influenced or whatever by whatever...
but in the end... it was written by a bunch of dudes... why people take it as the truth without a second glance is utterly beyond me.
Hardwork108
03-11-2011, 04:55 PM
Like it or not, the book was written by a bunch of dudes... you can say they were influenced or whatever by whatever...
but in the end... it was written by a bunch of dudes... why people take it as the truth without a second glance is utterly beyond me.
I hope that you are sitting down, because I agree with what you said above. The book was written by a bunch of "dudes" as you put it. The "dudes" in question regurgitated a lot of ideas and concepts from earlier religions which themselves had their own sons of gods, and just unleashed an updated brainwashing/belief /control system on the masses. The same control/dumbing down model had worked for thousands of years before then, so why not keep it going?
Then the decendents of the creators of this religion went on to create Islam and now we have many "Christian" and "Islamic" factions slaughtering each other both within their religion and beyond. One couldn't invent this kind of madness. Talk about divide and conquer.
And just in case people are wondering, for the most part the idea behind these religions had nothing to do with spirituality. Actually, it has taken millions of people away from spirituality towards a meat market level existance.
Knowing what kind of job you do, it may be advisable for you to see who funds the religious organizations (and their followers) where you live, not to mention those in places such as Afghanistan and Pakistan.;)
Drake
03-11-2011, 05:02 PM
I hope that you are sitting down, because I agree with what you said above. The book was written by a bunch of "dudes" as you put it. The "dudes" in question regurgitated a lot of ideas and concepts from earlier religions which themselves had their own sons of gods, and just unleashed an updated brainwashing/belief /control system on the masses. The same model had worked for thousands of years before then, so why not keep it going?
Then the decendents of this religion went on to create Islam and now we have many "Christian" and "Islamic" factions slaughtering each other bother within their religion and beyond. One couldn't invent this kind of madness. Talk about divide and conquer.
Knowing what kind of job you do, it may be advisable for you to see who funds the religious organizations (and their followers) where you live, not to mention those in places such as Afghanistan and Pakistan.;)
You have no idea of what's really going on out there. Let me throw you a clue. You have a lot of imperfect people trying to do the right thing with a bad situation, and to sit there from a place where you'll never have to worry about making decisions which could cost thousands of lives is disrespectful and critically naive.
Everything is easy when you are sitting on your sofa typing away on an internet forum. Try the basic level of leading a group of 41 folks out into a chaotic fight and see how that works for you. Not so easy. Now, multiply that by several thousand, and throw in political, tribal, economical, and international complications into the mix.
You couldn't control this world if you tried. It's a **** hornets nest of crazy *******s.
they didnt plagiarize some, they plagiarized all of it... everything can be found from earlier cultures... the crucifixion for the people, immaculate conception, coming back to life, dec 25th, easter, the cross, christian symbols... all plagerized... and very easy to confirm...
Hardwork108
03-11-2011, 05:33 PM
You have no idea of what's really going on out there.
I might just have more idea than you.;)
Let me throw you a clue. You have a lot of imperfect people trying to do the right thing with a bad situation,
You are right, they are imperfect people, but not in the way that you think. These IMPERFECT people are there to create death and mass murder to further agendas that you refuse to believe in.
and to sit there from a place where you'll never have to worry about making decisions which could cost thousands of lives is disrespectful and critically naive.
Of course not! I have no right to make decisions that effect the lives of thousands of people on the other side of the world. And if I happen to want them to live in peace and harmony, which I actually do, then I would not supply them with weapons and arms, together with military training, including for their cut throat (Pakistani) Intelligence Services.
Simple, no?
Everything is easy when you are sitting on your sofa typing away on an internet forum. Try the basic level of leading a group of 41 folks out into a chaotic fight and see how that works for you.
Again, I have no interest in going to far away lands and fight a largely fabricated enemy, nor should you, since that enemy has been mainly armed and trained by your own government....LOL
Not so easy. Now, multiply that by several thousand, and throw in political, tribal, economical, and international complications into the mix.
The complications you speak of exist because of USīs (and UK's) colonial interests and involvments in the region. You don't want complications, then let them be.
Stop training insurgents, stop your false flag operations that result in thousands of deaths, not just in Pakistan but in other countries in the region.
In short stop your deadly mind games that destroy thousands of lives abroad and have serious repercussions back at home with the ordinary US citizen in the street who is extorted out of the little wealth he may possess, to fight these d@mn FANTASY wars against FANTASY, read, FABRICATED enemies!!!
So please stop presenting the problems in the Middle East as some Hollywood movie for simpletons....."Yes, we the heroes are there against all odds to help the people"....:rolleyes:
You couldn't control this world if you tried. It's a **** hornets nest of crazy *******s.
The secret behind controlling the "hornets nest" is to establish who is nurturing it!
Hardwork108
03-11-2011, 05:38 PM
they didnt plagiarize some, they plagiarized all of it... everything can be found from earlier cultures... the crucifixion for the people, immaculate conception, coming back to life, dec 25th, easter, the cross, christian symbols... all plagerized... and very easy to confirm...
Yep, they have kept these ceremonies because at the higher levels of the religious pyramid, they have certain meanings and significances, while at the lower level the goats, sorry I mean the masses, are told Jesus this and Jesus that; Madonna this and Madonna that.....Total and absolute BS.....but people accept this mumbo jumbo because it make THEM feel good...so they see it as valid, while not realizing that their emotional/psychological reaction is part of the brain washing and control mechanism.
The fact is that Jesus did not exist, nor did the Madonna! The sooner the people realize this the sooner they can snap out of this mass hypnotism!!!
Then they can find true spirituality by looking within, not reading fantasy books that are only designed to herd them away from who they really are!!!
The Catholic Church is based on the earlier Babylonian and Egyptian models. Have a look at some of the clothes worn by the Pop and other clergy at the Vatican.
jesus the christ didnt exist... but i think there is alot of evidence pointing to jesus of the essenes... i think the jerusalem assembly exists to this day... by now they probably have a ton of fronts... and i think after he died his brother james the just took over... nothing mystical about it though... they were jews...
Drake
03-11-2011, 07:46 PM
Hardwork... you don't know the first thing about the ISI. I've seen the photos you'll never get to see. No matter how hard you Google.
Your understanding of that region is elementary, at best, and too bad you didn't have a clearance, because I'd be able to show you how awfully wrong you really are.
Hardwork108
03-11-2011, 10:14 PM
jesus the christ didnt exist... but i think there is alot of evidence pointing to jesus of the essenes... i think the jerusalem assembly exists to this day... by now they probably have a ton of fronts... and i think after he died his brother james the just took over... nothing mystical about it though... they were jews...
In my opinion Jesus never existed. The fact that people keep rationalizing his supposed existance has more to do with their emotional investment into this myth than anything. I would not be surprised if some archeologist eventually uncover evidence of the existance of a man called, say Pablo, who was a great guy and a preacher. Of course, if this happens, then the Jesus crowd are going to jump up and say, "hey this is our Jesus, and the reason his name was Pablo but not Jesus, is not for us to ask as god works in mysterious ways...":rolleyes:
Hardwork108
03-11-2011, 10:32 PM
Hardwork... you don't know the first thing about ISI
Well, I know that they do the dirty work for the Western Intelligence agencies such as the CIA and British Intelligence. It seems that their services include finding and grooming patsies who later on go on to attempt totally idiotic and retarded "terrorist" acts....therefore giving the Western governments the excuses they need to clamp down on their populations' freedoms, including the implementation of an ever growing surveillance society- by keeping them in a constant state of fear and insecurity.
I've seen the photos you'll never get to see. No matter how hard you Google.
Which photos are they? Oh I see, they must be the photos of ISI torturing "suspects" on behalf of their Western masters to get any confession that they need out of them. Well, I have not seen the photos but I can imagine......
Your understanding of that region is elementary,
My understanding of that region is much better than yours. Firstly because I have lived in that region, and secondly because your compartmentalized (by design)career stops you from seeing the bigger picture.
at best, and too bad you didn't have a clearance, because I'd be able to show you how awfully wrong you really are.
Whoops sorry, I was wrong, the ISI, just like their masters at the CIA and MI6, are actually a bunch nice guys that you can trust and believe in.
They do what they do and are just there to protect us from the big bad "Terrorists", who are armed, supplied and trained by the same people who are hunting them down, no less through the nice guys at the ISI.
Of course, anything goes against the "sophisticated and highly trained terrorists", otherwise they may destroy us all with their inflamable underwears and home made car bombs that do not explode......:rolleyes:
Look, the ISI is one of the organizations that recruit, groom and then supply Western Intelligence agencies with "Islamic terrorists", to be used as patsies for their mind wars against their own populations!
See, you learn something new every day...;)
man you repeat yourself ALOT...
Wayne LaPierre (NRA) said that violent crime in jurisdictions that recognize the 'right to carry' is lower than in areas that prevent it.
uuummm, no.....
http://politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2011/feb/16/national-rifle-association/wayne-lapierre-said-violent-crime-jurisdictions-re/
Drake
03-12-2011, 07:59 AM
Well, I know that they do the dirty work for the Western Intelligence agencies such as the CIA and British Intelligence. It seems that their services include finding and grooming patsies who later on go on to attempt totally idiotic and retarded "terrorist" acts....therefore giving the Western governments the excuses they need to clamp down on their populations' freedoms, including the implementation of an ever growing surveillance society- by keeping them in a constant state of fear and insecurity.
Which photos are they? Oh I see, they must be the photos of ISI torturing "suspects" on behalf of their Western masters to get any confession that they need out of them. Well, I have not seen the photos but I can imagine......
My understanding of that region is much better than yours. Firstly because I have lived in that region, and secondly because your compartmentalized (by design)career stops you from seeing the bigger picture.
Whoops sorry, I was wrong, the ISI, just like their masters at the CIA and MI6, are actually a bunch nice guys that you can trust and believe in.
They do what they do and are just there to protect us from the big bad "Terrorists", who are armed, supplied and trained by the same people who are hunting them down, no less through the nice guys at the ISI.
Of course, anything goes against the "sophisticated and highly trained terrorists", otherwise they may destroy us all with their inflamable underwears and home made car bombs that do not explode......:rolleyes:
Look, the ISI is one of the organizations that recruit, groom and then supply Western Intelligence agencies with "Islamic terrorists", to be used as patsies for their mind wars against their own populations!
See, you learn something new every day...;)
Actually that was completely and utterly wrong. I mean... not a single fact there. Where did you get your "facts"? The internet? You got your "facts" from the internet, didn't you? In fact, you just read something on a webage and believed it, didn't you?
Western masters... heh.
Drake
03-12-2011, 08:17 AM
Oh lookie....ISI with their "masters". I'll give you the first hint... the guy on the right is a high-level ISI agent. Now, who on EARTH do you think the guy on the left is? Come on... since you are so in tune with everything going on... who is that fella?
http://www.theodoresworld.net/pics/0709/terroristourenemyImage3.jpg
Lucas
03-12-2011, 12:29 PM
Dirty Santa!!!!!!!!!
Hardwork108
03-12-2011, 02:30 PM
Oh lookie....ISI with their "masters". I'll give you the first hint... the guy on the right is a high-level ISI agent. Now, who on EARTH do you think the guy on the left is? Come on... since you are so in tune with everything going on... who is that fella?
http://www.theodoresworld.net/pics/0709/terroristourenemyImage3.jpg
The one on the right looks like general Hamid, a former ISI director, the other looks like some kind of a Taliban leader, maybe a Mullah called Omar?
However, my money is on the guy on the left being a young George W Bush disguised with a beard and Taliban clothing....maybe running errands for his CIA affiliated psychopathic father, George Bush Senior......:D
By the way, whoever these guys are, one thing is for sure, that they are not "masters" of any sorts. Their real masters are sitting in London and Washington, and I would say, in that order!
Drake
03-12-2011, 03:46 PM
If you don't know who that is, you really have business discussing what is happening in Afghanistan. It's not Mullah Omar... jesus... are you THAT ignorant?
You browse youtube clips. I speak to diplomats. You read conspiracy nut jobs pleas/solicitations, I sit down and have discussions with Aghan historians who have lived in Qandahar.
You watch whatever the news decides to show you. I read reports that you'll never, EVER see, even if they were made public.
I don't know why you continue, short of your usual attempts to drive me to the point where I'm just tired of discussing the same crap with you, and you somehow chalk that up as a "win".
You have ZERO evidence, only wild accusations with nothing to back it up except other accusations. You have committed virtually every logical fallacy known, and you seem happy as a clam to be doing so.
Syn... he's all yours. I'm done with this circus.
OMG, HW, you really think thats omar??? youre just making some bad joke right??? i mean, COME ON....!!!
no no drake... quite alright old chap, quite alright... im happy observing and heckling from the peanut gallery...
Hardwork108
03-12-2011, 05:33 PM
If you don't know who that is, you really have business discussing what is happening in Afghanistan. It's not Mullah Omar... jesus...
I actually thought it was George W Bush in a beard, but then whoever it is, I doubt that his is Jesus...LOL
are you THAT ignorant?
You mean ignorant enough not to know (from a previous discussion) that the Federal Reserve was a private banking cartel? No, I am not that ignorant.;)
You browse youtube clips. I speak to diplomats.
Diplomats are bought and sold; they come and go, and they all have their masters, just like the people in that photo....;)
You read conspiracy nut jobs pleas/solicitations, I sit down and have discussions with Aghan historians who have lived in Qandahar.
Interesting, are they the same type of historians that tell us that JFK was killed by Mr Patsy Oswald and his "magic bullet", or that the US invaded Iraq to "liberate" the Iraqi people from that nasty tyrant, Sadam Hussain, and of course to find his advanced Weapons of Mass Destruction, that were infact so advanced that they have not been able to locate them with their normal five senses....LOL
Hey kiddo, historians are a dime a dozen, just like politicians, or diplomats, if you will.
You watch whatever the news decides to show you. I read reports that you'll never, EVER see, even if they were made public.
I don't know why you continue, short of your usual attempts to drive me to the point where I'm just tired of discussing the same crap with you, and you somehow chalk that up as a "win".
It has nothing to do with chalking up a "win", or a "loss"....it has to do with the truth:
The TRUTH is that since the US invasion of Afghanistan the drugs trade/exports there have multiplied!
The TRUTH is that 10s of thousands of innocent people have been killed in that war based on the official FANTASY version of what happened on 9-11!
The TRUTH is that hundreds of thousands of innocent people have died in the Iraqi invasion, which was based on a LIE - The Weapons of Mass Destruction!
You try to discredit facts such as the above by showing me a picture of some insignificant people - yes they are insignificant in the grand scale of things, just as Obama, or any US President, as they are dispensible and replacable by other servants or patsies!!!
Yes, all those who make the above points are "wack job conspiracy theorists"... the same goes for all those who warn about the New World Order...which its proponents are now openly admitting to. Of course, the fact that they are admitting to it now does not change the fact that their own followers are so indoctrinated by the system that they do not see that the cat is out of the bag.....
It is a very sad situation.....
You have ZERO evidence, only wild accusations with nothing to back it up except other accusations. You have committed virtually every logical fallacy known, and you seem happy as a clam to be doing so.
Look at my comments about Iraq and Afghanistan, as most of the evidence you are asking for, is common knowledge to most except for the brainwashed members of the US armed forces...
The same is true as regards the fact that the Federal Reserve is a PRIVATE BANK....something that your highness is refusing to admit to even now!!!!
Syn... he's all yours. I'm done with this circus.
I am afraid that as much as Syn7 dislikes me, he is not going to agree with most of the official fantasy version of the reasons for the wars and sufferings, that says that the US invaded Iraq and Afghanistan to liberate their populations and to look for invisible Al Quaeda terrorists and even more invisible Weapons of Mass Destruction....LOL,LOL,LOL!
Drake
03-12-2011, 10:36 PM
So in other words, you have no idea who the person is nor do you understand the significance of the photo. Gotcha.
Hardwork108
03-12-2011, 10:47 PM
So in other words, you have no idea who the person is nor do you understand the significance of the photo. Gotcha.
I have no idea who the person is!
What you don't understand is the fact that it does not matter who the US president is either, once you know the fact that whoever he is, he is just a puppet for the banking and corporate cartels who are running the US and most of the world.
By the way, I have a picture of my uncle.....and I bet you won't recognize him either....:rolleyes:
Hardwork108
03-12-2011, 10:52 PM
Wait a minute, could the guy in the picture be Bin Ladin's right hand man? Albeit, another one....LOL.
I mean, I have lost count of how many of his "right hand" men we have been shown on tv news programs, warning us of destruction and so on. That Bin Ladin fellow must be built like an octopus with so many right hands, and their corresponding "men"....:eek:
By the way Drake, don't you think that there is a very, very, and I mean very, good chance that Bin Ladin is dead, killed by an high level ISI commanding officer, on behalf of the US, to keep his mouth shut, as regards the real story of the 9'11 attacks?
for the record...
the pic is afghan insurgent jalaluddin haqqani & pakistani isi general hamid gul...
the haqqani network is highly sophisticated in its effectiveness and brutally simple in its approach... they are really good at what they do... these cats made suicide bombing a regular pastime in afghanistan... americans are well aware of his network cause they helped him build it... same old story.... fight russians... charlie wilson said he was a great guy... he's a bad ass type who leads his people by example, like he actually heads his soldiers and fights with them... when the americans invaded he was taliban commander... he could have had a seat in the current gov had he wanted it... instead he lost fam to an american bombing and decided to fight... and lead... fled into pakistan and voila, you have a highly effective insurgency... who has come pretty close to taking out karzai... i think his son is running things now tho...looks like he's even better at this than his pops... he's expanding...
it may seem like some of these figures randomly pop up when they are needed for some political talking point, and that may be the case sometimes... but the fact is that these people are out there and they are working hard for what the believe in... "right hand man" types dont just 'pop up', they are always accomplished people who have been around... it just seems like that when people dabble in this info... there are many networks like haqqanis, maybe not as big, but effective none the less... there are gonna be a ton of names that you dont know that pop up... although im sure everyone has heard of the haqqanis even if they dont know his face... alot of these guys look alike to the western eye...
the media always plays on these stories to sell sell sell... but the info is out there if you have an open mind about it...
Drake
03-13-2011, 09:30 PM
Wait a minute, could the guy in the picture be Bin Ladin's right hand man? Albeit, another one....LOL.
I mean, I have lost count of how many of his "right hand" men we have been shown on tv news programs, warning us of destruction and so on. That Bin Ladin fellow must be built like an octopus with so many right hands, and their corresponding "men"....:eek:
By the way Drake, don't you think that there is a very, very, and I mean very, good chance that Bin Ladin is dead, killed by an high level ISI commanding officer, on behalf of the US, to keep his mouth shut, as regards the real story of the 9'11 attacks?
http://hehefunny.com/wp-content/themes/funny/thumb.php?src=http://hehefunny.com/wp-content/uploads/381/Darth_Vader.jpg&w=600&h=&zc=1
Drake
03-13-2011, 09:32 PM
I don't know who told you the ISI works for us... but whoever did is one stupid mother(shutyomouth!)...
Let's just say the ISI takes care of what the ISI thinks is important. And it ain't us... and it DEFINITELY isn't the UK.
he doesnt even know the players. what makes you think he would know who they work for?
bawang
03-14-2011, 02:04 AM
I'll shoot anyone who tries to steal or vandalize the stuff I work hard for.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RXieyaQNkSg
never die
just multiply
Hardwork108
03-14-2011, 02:11 AM
for the record...
the pic is afghan insurgent jalaluddin haqqani & pakistani isi general hamid gul...
the haqqani network is highly sophisticated in its effectiveness and brutally simple in its approach... they are really good at what they do... these cats made suicide bombing a regular pastime in afghanistan... americans are well aware of his network cause they helped him build it... same old story.... fight russians... charlie wilson said he was a great guy... he's a bad ass type who leads his people by example, like he actually heads his soldiers and fights with them... when the americans invaded he was taliban commander... he could have had a seat in the current gov had he wanted it... instead he lost fam to an american bombing and decided to fight... and lead... fled into pakistan and voila, you have a highly effective insurgency... who has come pretty close to taking out karzai... i think his son is running things now tho...looks like he's even better at this than his pops... he's expanding...
IMHO, your "understanding" of the details prevents you from UNDERSTANDING the big picture. The fact is that the US and British Intelligence agencies have been running that region for around a century, and you don't run regions like that one overtly, you do so covertly through controlling their finances and their intelligence/military apparatus.
it may seem like some of these figures randomly pop up when they are needed for some political talking point, and that may be the case sometimes... but the fact is that these people are out there and they are working hard for what the believe in... "right hand man" types dont just 'pop up', they are always accomplished people who have been around... it just seems like that when people dabble in this info... there are many networks like haqqanis, maybe not as big, but effective none the less... there are gonna be a ton of names that you dont know that pop up... although im sure everyone has heard of the haqqanis even if they dont know his face... alot of these guys look alike to the western eye...
the media always plays on these stories to sell sell sell... but the info is out there if you have an open mind about it...
Again, these are the dispensible soldiers on the chess board of world politics, they come and they go. Memorizing all their names will only take valuable brain space and prevent you from seeing that all of these people are created and controlled by the same elements that are a lot closer to your home terroritory than the Afghan mountains....;)
__________________
Hardwork108
03-14-2011, 02:14 AM
http://hehefunny.com/wp-content/themes/funny/thumb.php?src=http://hehefunny.com/wp-content/uploads/381/Darth_Vader.jpg&w=600&h=&zc=1
Yep...keep trying to discredit the truth....
what makes you think i dont know things about my own back yard too...??? we barely even scratch the surface of what our minds can do... its not like it gets full and info gets bumped... thats for cartoons man...
can you name one chess player?
bawang
03-14-2011, 02:19 AM
i for one welcome our illuminati overlords.
Hardwork108
03-14-2011, 02:21 AM
I don't know who told you the ISI works for us... but whoever did is one stupid mother(shutyomouth!)...
ISI is a fully owned subsidiary of the CIA. One day you will know the truth and you will remember me with admiration. :D
Let's just say the ISI takes care of what the ISI thinks is important. And it ain't us... and it DEFINITELY isn't the UK.
What is important for the US, is also important for the UK. The same elements are running your countries. As far as ISI is concerned, what is important for their masters is important for them.....
Boy, I never thought compartementalization of information within the US Intelligence community was so effective. I mean you are really clueless aren't you?
I understand Syn7's "lost in the woods" view, even if he understands more than many posters here, but then, he is not involved in this whole dirty game, but YOU??
Hardwork108
03-14-2011, 02:25 AM
what makes you think i dont know things about my own back yard too...??? we barely even scratch the surface of what our minds can do... its not like it gets full and info gets bumped... thats for cartoons man...
can you name one chess player?
Now you are talking. The question is not the chess pieces, but he chess PLAYERS. OK, you have the Rothschild family and the Rockefellors. Those are chess PLAYERS. People like Presidents and Prime Ministers, as well as "Terrorist" leaders, or Dictators are chess pieces......
MasterKiller
03-14-2011, 05:58 AM
I think this thread has run it's course...
Drake
03-14-2011, 06:09 AM
ISI is a fully owned subsidiary of the CIA. One day you will know the truth and you will remember me with admiration. :D
What is important for the US, is also important for the UK. The same elements are running your countries. As far as ISI is concerned, what is important for their masters is important for them.....
Boy, I never thought compartementalization of information within the US Intelligence community was so effective. I mean you are really clueless aren't you?
I understand Syn7's "lost in the woods" view, even if he understands more than many posters here, but then, he is not involved in this whole dirty game, but YOU??
We own the ISI? Someone might want to tell them that.
BJJ-Blue
03-14-2011, 07:21 AM
Wayne LaPierre (NRA) said that violent crime in jurisdictions that recognize the 'right to carry' is lower than in areas that prevent it.
From your source:
"The District of Columbia, which has strict gun control laws, ranked highest for violent crime."
Sounds like Mr LaPierre was right. You can't get higher than #1.
That study was also done by STATE. I've said before those stats are misleading, you must go by cities, not States. Reason being, some cities (namely Chicago) will have stricter gun laws than the State they are in. You have to compare apples to apples, city to city. Also bear in mind, Chicago recently had a part of their guns laws overturned in the Supreme Court, I believe it was a complete ban on handguns, but I may be wrong on the specifics of the part that was overturned.
Hardwork108
03-14-2011, 08:00 AM
From your source:
"The District of Columbia, which has strict gun control laws, ranked highest for violent crime."
Sounds like Mr LaPierre was right. You can't get higher than #1.
That study was also done by STATE. I've said before those stats are misleading, you must go by cities, not States. Reason being, some cities (namely Chicago) will have stricter gun laws than the State they are in. You have to compare apples to apples, city to city. Also bear in mind, Chicago recently had a part of their guns laws overturned in the Supreme Court, I believe it was a complete ban on handguns, but I may be wrong on the specifics of the part that was overturned.
I believe that there are still countries in Eastern Europe where most of the population have arms or access to arms, yet their crime rates are no where as high as one would expect.
Cultural factora come into this question. The strength of the family unit, which has literally been under attack for many decades, is a fundamental factor in reduced crime rates, not availability or banning of firearms.
Hardwork108
03-14-2011, 08:09 AM
We own the ISI? Someone might want to tell them that.
I am sure that the highest levels of ISI are very well aware of who owns their butts. It is the lower levels that as usual don't know the whole story.
It is the same case with you. You think that you are working for the US government, when the US government itself is owned lock, stock and barrel, by international banking interests, and functions as a subsidiary of their business interests. Of course people on t he higher levels of the US intelligence pyramid are very well aware of this fact. It is the lower levels as usual who are uninformed and kept busy with details (exact names of insurgents and bearded Mullahs, who are also owned and operated by other, higher departments in those very or sister intelligence agencies...lol), that at the end of the day are irrelevant to the real truth.
So, on the ground level, the soldiers, if you like, things don't change, "yes be a patriot and go and die for your country my boy"; "truth, justice, Democracy and the American way of life, my boy"; and other cr@p are fed to the lower level cannon fodder, AS ALWAYS!
Drake
03-14-2011, 10:03 AM
Uh huh... what else does "TEH INTERNETZ" tell you?
Hardwork108
03-14-2011, 12:44 PM
http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3466/3825407990_bac93f06ee_o.jpg
While you are at it, why don't you bring up purple colored aliens, to discredit valid and serious political points being made here.:rolleyes:
If you come down from your high horse of intellectual comfort, you might actually learn something from what is beind discussed in this thread. How else are you going to increase your knowledge and evolve?;)
Hardwork108
03-14-2011, 12:46 PM
Uh huh... what else does "TEH INTERNETZ" tell you?
YOu tell me, as you seem to spend as much time there as, I do.
sanjuro_ronin
03-14-2011, 12:49 PM
This is hippy mumbo jumbo.
God got ****ed because Adam became self-aware. No more. No less. And he rained hell down on humans because of it.
The whole story is ridiculous, anyway. But to worship a diety that still punishes people for the acts of a man and woman 1,000 generations before is asinine.
Call me a hippy again and I'll smack you ***** !!
:D
sanjuro_ronin
03-14-2011, 12:52 PM
His only begotten son that was also himself? Incest is best, I suppose.
How did God (who is also Jesus) "give" his son (who is also God), if Jesus (who is also God) sacrificed himself to show God (who is also Jesus) that people were worth better treatment from God (who is also Jesus)?
Dude, everytime I read or hear someone state this, showing their total lack of understanding of the trinity doctrine, it makes me laugh my ass off.
LOL !
While I am not a trinitarian ( I don't think that trinity doctrine is needed), that is NOT what it is, nor is that what Christ sacrifice was about, at all.
You know, Sunday school while half asleep doesn't actually equate to knowledge much less understanding of the bible, much less Christian doctrines.
everyone just stop responding to him at all... eventually he'll just go away... he'll back off and let us stew in our own small minded feeble ignorance without his gracing us with the real truth... :rolleyes: the thing is, even if i agreed with everything this guy says, i'd still think he was a d1ck and want him to just go away... it reminds me of how in elementary school there was always that weird kid that got insulted all the time and was consistently told to go away, yet still followed us around... just ignore him... IMHO :rolleyes: this is the only way to make him go away...
Hardwork108
03-14-2011, 02:05 PM
everyone just stop responding to him at all... eventually he'll just go away... he'll back off and let us stew in our own small minded feeble ignorance without his gracing us with the real truth... :rolleyes:
That is the thanks I get for trying to educate you about the real world you live in. Nevermind, small minds will be small minds. :D
Why don't you forget discussing world politics and stick to discussing the benefits of kickboxing for the brain damaged?:rolleyes:
the thing is, even if i agreed with everything this guy says, i'd still think he was a d1ck and want him to just go away...
You are just jeaulous because I am infinitely more intelligent than you are. :D
it reminds me of how in elementary school there was always that weird kid that got insulted all the time and was consistently told to go away, yet still followed us around... just ignore him... IMHO :rolleyes: this is the only way to make him go away...
You mean you are not in elementary school now? Boy, education standards are not what they used to be, in Canada.:eek:
Hardwork108
03-14-2011, 02:09 PM
http://icanhascheezburger.files.wordpress.com/2010/04/funny-pictures-cat-has-list.jpg
That is because you are, as your photo shows, a mindless pu$$y...:D
Hardwork108
03-14-2011, 02:42 PM
http://imgs.xkcd.com/comics/conspiracy_theories.png
One day you will see the truth, I just want to be there and see the look on your face. :cool:
Hardwork108
03-14-2011, 03:12 PM
UPDATE:
The official version of the 9-11 events has been down graded from "full of holes" status to a "Big Joke" one.
Yes, the same version that says Middle Class, well educated, alcohol drinking (in one case, drug taking), strip club frequenting, Arab kids hijacked aircraft over the most protected airspace in the world and then proceeded to crash them (after up to 45 MINUTES OF UNDISTURBED FLIGHT) in various places including the two World Trade Centre buildings, bringing down THREE buildings:eek:....Yes, Allah does work in mysterious ways...:rolleyes:
When then US President, George W "I am a village idiot" Bush was informed of the attacks, while in a school visit, he kept his stone face and continued reading a childrens book to a class. Why doesn't that make people ask questions? I mean his country was apparently under attack, yet he sits there and reads a book to like minded children...
The FBI managed to find one of the terrorist passports on ground zero. A passport that somehow survived the fireballs....LOL! "Yes, it was Abdul the Bulbull, I tell you, and to prove it we found his passport"...LOL!
Bin Ladin was blamed immediately, but that did not stop the US government from flying his family out of the country, immediately after the attacks.
Bin Ladin the fearless, suicidal assassin took his time to "confess", albeit on a dodgy video. Why would a fanatic hesitate to confess to such a "victorious" blow against the "Great Satan"?
There are many other unanswered questions and anomalities......
You can close your eyes and just repeat the official version or you can think a little bit......the choice, as always, is yours.....
Drake
03-14-2011, 04:31 PM
Cocaine is one hell of a drug...
Lucas
03-14-2011, 04:34 PM
Darknesss!!!!
Hardwork108
03-14-2011, 04:55 PM
Cocaine is one hell of a drug...
You should know, as the US Intelligence services have been dealing drugs for decades.....
Drake
03-14-2011, 05:24 PM
You should know, as the US Intelligence services have been dealing drugs for decades.....
We also sell pandas on the black market, work out of a secret volcano base, and have robotic cyborgs serving us.
Care to back up your hootananny, or are you talking out of your poopie again?
Lucas
03-14-2011, 05:54 PM
We also sell pandas on the black market, work out of a secret volcano base, and have robotic cyborgs serving us.
Care to back up your hootananny, or are you talking out of your poopie again?
is there anyway I can borrow your robotic cyborg, just for a few days?
Lucas
03-14-2011, 05:55 PM
You should know, as the US Intelligence services have been dealing drugs for decades.....
I'm Rick James B!tch!!!
Mr Punch
03-15-2011, 07:19 PM
I've only read the first page (sorry!).
I would do the same if I was this boy's father.
I don't agree with the death penalty. I do agree with blood feud. I also don't agree with segregating these kind of killers in jail.
Making a public pronouncement about it was only stupid because it means it might get him nicked before he can do it, not because if he does it he'll then get nicked. It's an important distinction. In early societies the aggrieved would make a declaration that they or their representative would take the blood and why, and that became a legal bond.
BTW, I'm saying these things purely in principle. I would love to be able to say we should try and incorporate the blood feud into modern law, but I'd have no idea how you could do it and keep it from being completely misused and out-of-control.
bawang
03-16-2011, 01:18 AM
but I'd have no idea how you could do it and keep it from being completely misused and out-of-control.
maybe a duel. the father prolly wants to shoot the guy from behind. he wouldnt be as brave if they have a 1 on 1 knife fight.
Hardwork108
03-16-2011, 11:23 PM
I'm Rick James B!tch!!!
:confused:
Hardwork108
03-16-2011, 11:47 PM
We also sell pandas on the black market, work out of a secret volcano base, and have robotic cyborgs serving us.
There you go again, mixing wack job theories with valid issues, such as US Intelligence drugs running.:rolleyes:
Care to back up your hootananny, or are you talking out of your poopie again?
Here is that famous Conspiracy Theorist Congressman Ron Paul, which he ISN'T - talking about the CIA and the Federal Reserve. Educate yourself:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vv1vvRv1EW0
Here is Ron Paul in a 1988 interview. I know you will like this one:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SBh_hzU-jdI&feature=related
.
bawang
03-17-2011, 12:38 AM
i think illuminati is pretty cool guy. they oppress people of the world and not afraid anything.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.2 Copyright © 2024 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.