Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I'll just kill them.
Saves time , energy, and gives a direct message.
The legal system is just like the rest of the system, mismanaged and inefficient. Cannot trust them.
Why not? Worked for Stalin and Hitler. It'll work when they come for you.
I am going to try my best to end the life of anyone who messes with me, the people I care about or our property.
Just my way.
What if I'm a better shot than you are, and if I have the same respect for human life that you have, the same enthusiastic zeal for ending people's lives for "messing with your property". How will that turn out? By the way, are you the guy who shot those kids for peeing on the road near his house?
So you knew a few bad dudes in your life, and that puts you in some special class of societal understanding. Why didn't you just kill them all then, and you wouldn't have to worry about them cutting across your lawn on the way home from school now.
Here is why I am opposed to Castle Doctrine defense. If Wisconsin had been a castle doctrine state, Jeffrey Dahmer would be a free man. He could have said all his victims were burglars, and there would be no witnesses to contradict his testimony. If you are the only surviving witness, you can invite people into your home and have perfect freedom to kill them, just by using the castle doctrine defense and testifying that they were intruders, and you had a perfect right to kill them in defense of your life, your family, and your property.
Remember G. Gordon Liddy's famous "head shots" remark on his radio show? Go for the fatal shot, so yours is the only version of what happened.
It strikes me that that there is at least one person in this thread who has everything it takes to be another Jeffrey Dahmer, although the motive, instead of sex, is just the pure delight of murdering another human being. You know who you are.
Unless you have known these types of people personally, and actually grew up with some of them like I have, you would not get it.
The only thing those types fear is death if that.
But as I said, to each their own.
What people? Burglars? Rapists or general thugs?
Quote:
Originally Posted by nichirenx
I'll just kill them.
Saves time , energy, and gives a direct message.
The legal system is just like the rest of the system, mismanaged and inefficient. Cannot trust them.
Ok, that's your opinion, who other should we kill, to save time, energy, and give a direct message? Personally I think political extremists, I mean, they're potentially dangerous and they question the dynamics of things, countries would be much more stable without them, I say we kill them, it saves energy and sends a message.
Or what about traffic violators? I mean, here they are, driving in a big, dangerous, heavy hunk of metal, showing a complete disrespect for other peoples lives! And traffic violators kill many more than home invaders do! Lets kill anyone who runs a red light or speeds, cause chances are, they could end up in an accident one day and kill someone, so lets shoot them, saves time and energy.
And bankers, destroying our economy! Shoot them, not to mention Mexicans! Well... any darker toned person. Chances are he's an illegal, and they take our jobs, can't trust the government to do the job, so let's just shoot him, saves time and energy!
Here is why I am opposed to Castle Doctrine defense. If Wisconsin had been a castle doctrine state, Jeffrey Dahmer would be a free man. He could have said all his victims were burglars, and there would be no witnesses to contradict his testimony. If you are the only surviving witness, you can invite people into your home and have perfect freedom to kill them, just by using the castle doctrine defense and testifying that they were intruders, and you had a perfect right to kill them in defense of your life, your family, and your property.
Remember G. Gordon Liddy's famous "head shots" remark on his radio show? Go for the fatal shot, so yours is the only version of what happened.
It strikes me that that there is at least one person in this thread who has everything it takes to be another Jeffrey Dahmer, although the motive, instead of sex, is just the pure delight of murdering another human being. You know who you are.
It aint that easy! Doyou really believe Dahmer would have gotten off, after all he was boiling human heads in a pot on the stove.
It aint that easy! Doyou really believe Dahmer would have gotten off, after all he was boiling human heads in a pot on the stove.
No, because he kept evidence in the fridge. But if he killed only one person, and said he had compelling reason to believe it was a burglar, the castle doctrine would give him a very strong defense. Do you disagree that the castle doctrine is open to such abuse?
What if I'm a better shot than you are, and if I have the same respect for human life that you have, the same enthusiastic zeal for ending people's lives for "messing with your property". How will that turn out? By the way, are you the guy who shot those kids for peeing on the road near his house?
So you knew a few bad dudes in your life, and that puts you in some special class of societal understanding. Why didn't you just kill them all then, and you wouldn't have to worry about them cutting across your lawn on the way home from school now.
If your skills are better then you win.
Never mentioned how many I knew.
Even people who have not seen what I have know that the average robber, rapist, and murderer only fears death.
It would also be way cheaper to execute them than to waste money keeping them in prison.
Stronger punishment for a lower price.
Quite practical.
And most of the guys I knew are dead.
Had no reason to attack them then as they were personal friends
and pretty much insured nobody else messed with me or mine.
Ok, that's your opinion, who other should we kill, to save time, energy, and give a direct message? Personally I think political extremists, I mean, they're potentially dangerous and they question the dynamics of things, countries would be much more stable without them, I say we kill them, it saves energy and sends a message.
Or what about traffic violators? I mean, here they are, driving in a big, dangerous, heavy hunk of metal, showing a complete disrespect for other peoples lives! And traffic violators kill many more than home invaders do! Lets kill anyone who runs a red light or speeds, cause chances are, they could end up in an accident one day and kill someone, so lets shoot them, saves time and energy.
And bankers, destroying our economy! Shoot them, not to mention Mexicans! Well... any darker toned person. Chances are he's an illegal, and they take our jobs, can't trust the government to do the job, so let's just shoot him, saves time and energy!
Now... Who else can we kill?
Whoever you want to.
Personally I think shooting robbers, murderers, rapists, and child molesters will do the job quite nicely.
No, because he kept evidence in the fridge. But if he killed only one person, and said he had compelling reason to believe it was a burglar, the castle doctrine would give him a very strong defense. Do you disagree that the castle doctrine is open to such abuse?
I guess it would depend on the evidence,it wouldn't be that cut and dry. There would have to be proof of a break in. I suppose it is possible it could be abused, but sometimes the guilty have to go free to protect the innocent.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
