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.
Some of us of a certain age are able to recall Tales of the Texas Rangers,a radio drama, later enhanced to a television production, which ran, (not continuously) between 1950 and 1958, and featured stories set I both the Old West and the contemporary era of the day.
One episode I distinctly remember involved a natural disaster in an urban area, and featured the killing of a looter on the spot; can't recall whether or not the perp drew a weapon, but were the scenario repeated today, I'm sure that Hollywood's self[-appointed moral elitists would raise a much stronger stink; but the point I seek to make here is that looting drew a much stronger pubic censure in those less-affluent times.
Andi I can also recall a time when even major-city newspapers would publish the photos of street thugs accused in prominent cases, or merely possessed of a particularly strong "rap sheet"; charges of "racism" be damned!
My sensitivities are strong enough to inveigh against a policy of "shoot on sight", but personal suggestion would be that local authorities should be able to summon a force sufficient to surround and detain a group of the most blatant offenders, and confine them to Joe Arpaio-inspired conditions in a bare-bones stockade for at least a week, and with minimal rations and access to legal vultures; If a few fall by the wayside, let it serve as a reminder of the usual protections, but at a high cost, of civilization.
The mob acts as a collective, and it is as a collective that they should face a swift and severe and severe settling of accounts. Life is. unfortunately, on occasion a blood sport, and if civility continues to decline as a result of our present polarization, perhaps a few harsh measures on a limited basis at present can prevent a major bloodbath later on.
No, it's really not that simple. What if this crisis goes on for weeks, and people start looting grocery stores? Do we shoot them for trying to feed their kids?
No problem.
It should be ok to shoot them as long as they are not stealing food.
It should be ok to shoot them as long as they are not stealing food.
can't eat tvs, after all.
You are from NY. Same as me. Should'nt we be able to shoot all those polluters like Cieba Giegy and Celanese that destroyed our water system? Or is that a misdemeanor in your view. Just look at the Passaic river. A republican disaster zone.
You are from NY. Same as me. Should'nt we be able to shoot all those polluters like Cieba Giegy and Celanese that destroyed our water system? Or is that a misdemeanor in your view. Just look at the Passaic river. A republican disaster zone.
You don't know the difference between private property and a natural resource.
You are from NY. Same as me. Should'nt we be able to shoot all those polluters like Cieba Giegy and Celanese that destroyed our water system? Or is that a misdemeanor in your view. Just look at the Passaic river. A republican disaster zone.
No. Just looters during a natural disaster of epic proportions where many fight for their lives.
I can't belive the morons that can justify shooting someone in the back for theft...
Why stop there? Surely someone who steals your beer deserves to be tortured don't they?
It's all internet anonymous hyperbole, just like the posters saying they'd be fine with it but they've never owned a business and aren't facing eviction or forclosure in the next few months because of the storm.
I think that there are learning opportunities here for people that have no appreciation for the plight of those caught in a desperate situation as well as those whose businesses put them in a similar boat especially when their stores aren't being looted for survival but for 5-finger discount.
You are from NY. Same as me. Should'nt we be able to shoot all those polluters like Cieba Giegy and Celanese that destroyed our water system? Or is that a misdemeanor in your view. Just look at the Passaic river. A republican disaster zone.
Newark, the main polluter has been democratically run since almost WW2.
I'm open minded, explain how it's a republican disaster zone?
Industry ran amok throughout the 1940's and forward, I've never heard someone so desperate to blame a lone political party though. You ok?
So if someone polutes the water that I drink and kills my family I can not shoot them. But they take my TV I can. Gotcha.
You need to mix your labor with a resource for it to become private property.
Assuming you acquired the TV by purchase, trade, or other consensual means with the producer it is your private property.
You don't own air, water, soil until you mix your labor with it.
My best advice would be to advocate for a free society where those that pollute natural resources can be shunned/shamed from the rest of us in a peaceful manner.
Having the government pick polluters and those that have to live with it is our current system and clearly it has failed in the case you provided.
How does it feel to have no recourse? Unless you think voting means something.
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.
