djAdvocate
Member Emeritus
only posting when the mood strikes me.
Joined: Jun 21, 2011 12:33:54 GMT -5
Posts: 75,142
Mini-Profile Background: {"image":"","color":"000307"}
|
Post by djAdvocate on Nov 21, 2014 21:57:57 GMT -5
having seen your question, the answer is no. dead people have no regrets. but i have to admit, that it is a shame to see good jerkey go to waste.
|
|
EVT1
Junior Associate
Joined: Dec 30, 2010 16:22:42 GMT -5
Posts: 8,596
|
Post by EVT1 on Nov 21, 2014 22:05:54 GMT -5
Would depend on circumstances- had this discussion before with the restaurant scenario.
Good chance taking action vs. being prepared to take action is the wrong choice. Good chance acting could escalate an armed robbery and get other people killed.
Not going to shed a tear for a dead armed robber- but it could have turned out a lot worse. I am of the opinion you let them have the cash and be a good witness.
|
|
djAdvocate
Member Emeritus
only posting when the mood strikes me.
Joined: Jun 21, 2011 12:33:54 GMT -5
Posts: 75,142
Mini-Profile Background: {"image":"","color":"000307"}
|
Post by djAdvocate on Nov 21, 2014 22:07:25 GMT -5
Would depend on circumstances- had this discussion before with the restaurant scenario.
Good chance taking action vs. being prepared to take action is the wrong choice. Good chance acting could escalate an armed robbery and get other people killed.
Not going to shed a tear for a dead armed robber- but it could have turned out a lot worse. I am of the opinion you let them have the cash and be a good witness. i am of the opinion that given a choice between any material thing and a human life, no matter how precious the trinket, the life wins.
|
|
Virgil Showlion
Distinguished Associate
Moderator
[b]leones potest resistere[/b]
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 15:19:33 GMT -5
Posts: 27,448
|
Post by Virgil Showlion on Nov 21, 2014 22:14:34 GMT -5
Would depend on circumstances- had this discussion before with the restaurant scenario.
Good chance taking action vs. being prepared to take action is the wrong choice. Good chance acting could escalate an armed robbery and get other people killed.
Not going to shed a tear for a dead armed robber- but it could have turned out a lot worse. I am of the opinion you let them have the cash and be a good witness. i am of the opinion that given a choice between any material thing and a human life, no matter how precious the trinket, the life wins. You have to admit that armed robbery is more than just stealing a trinket, though. Some robbers do execute people, especially if they're startled or cornered.
|
|
djAdvocate
Member Emeritus
only posting when the mood strikes me.
Joined: Jun 21, 2011 12:33:54 GMT -5
Posts: 75,142
Mini-Profile Background: {"image":"","color":"000307"}
|
Post by djAdvocate on Nov 21, 2014 22:25:19 GMT -5
i am of the opinion that given a choice between any material thing and a human life, no matter how precious the trinket, the life wins. You have to admit that armed robbery is more than just stealing a trinket, though. Some robbers do execute people, especially if they're startled or cornered. all the better reason to NOT pull a gun on them, right?
|
|
djAdvocate
Member Emeritus
only posting when the mood strikes me.
Joined: Jun 21, 2011 12:33:54 GMT -5
Posts: 75,142
Mini-Profile Background: {"image":"","color":"000307"}
|
Post by djAdvocate on Nov 21, 2014 22:28:00 GMT -5
Virgil- i thought you would at least give me a kudo for the jerkey response. that was one of my best ones all week.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: May 5, 2024 8:44:41 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 21, 2014 22:58:34 GMT -5
I didn't say this case was self defense... did I? you mentioned self defense, yes. TWICE. forgive me for thinking that it applied to your entire post.You keep missing the "defense of others in imminent danger" aspect. that sounds like he is playing cop, to me. that sounds like taking the law into one's own hands without legal authority to me. what does it sound like to you? Sounds like defense of others in imminent danger to me (which is one of the exceptions I have been saying... that you seem to love to ignore) As to your insertion (I wish you'd quit doing that, by the way... some people may think you are bolding something I said) You missed the point of what I said. I never denied saying it. I am denying saying ONLY it.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: May 5, 2024 8:44:41 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 21, 2014 23:09:41 GMT -5
Would depend on circumstances- had this discussion before with the restaurant scenario.
Good chance taking action vs. being prepared to take action is the wrong choice. Good chance acting could escalate an armed robbery and get other people killed.
Not going to shed a tear for a dead armed robber- but it could have turned out a lot worse. I am of the opinion you let them have the cash and be a good witness. i am of the opinion that given a choice between any material thing and a human life, no matter how precious the trinket, the life wins. So you have changed your stance then... you are now pro- self defense and pro- defense of others. Glad we could help you find your way!
|
|
Deleted
Joined: May 5, 2024 8:44:41 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 21, 2014 23:13:47 GMT -5
I like it its my favourite word for November
|
|
djAdvocate
Member Emeritus
only posting when the mood strikes me.
Joined: Jun 21, 2011 12:33:54 GMT -5
Posts: 75,142
Mini-Profile Background: {"image":"","color":"000307"}
|
Post by djAdvocate on Nov 21, 2014 23:26:14 GMT -5
i am of the opinion that given a choice between any material thing and a human life, no matter how precious the trinket, the life wins. So you have changed your stance then... you are now pro- self defense and pro- defense of others. Glad we could help you find your way! i have always been pro SELF defense, and i encourage everyone to defend themselves. but i sure as HELL don't want you defending me, unless you are authorized by me or the law to do so. hopefully, now we are indeed clear. just let me know if we are not.
|
|
djAdvocate
Member Emeritus
only posting when the mood strikes me.
Joined: Jun 21, 2011 12:33:54 GMT -5
Posts: 75,142
Mini-Profile Background: {"image":"","color":"000307"}
|
Post by djAdvocate on Nov 21, 2014 23:27:24 GMT -5
that sounds like he is playing cop, to me. that sounds like taking the law into one's own hands without legal authority to me. what does it sound like to you? Sounds like defense of others in imminent danger to me i am opposed to that, unless you are legally authorized to do so. thus, i am against vigilantism. see how that all ties together? note to anyone who rises to my defense: if i am too lame to defend myself, let me die.
|
|
djAdvocate
Member Emeritus
only posting when the mood strikes me.
Joined: Jun 21, 2011 12:33:54 GMT -5
Posts: 75,142
Mini-Profile Background: {"image":"","color":"000307"}
|
Post by djAdvocate on Nov 21, 2014 23:28:46 GMT -5
As to your insertion (I wish you'd quit doing that, by the way... some people may think you are bolding something I said) You missed the point of what I said. I never denied saying it. I am denying saying ONLY it. not following you. sorry. getting late. and candidly, i am starting not to care too much. edit: the fact that i reply both bold and lower case should make it distinctive enough to tell apart from anyone else's posts. if you want me to change color, as well, i will- but i would rather not go to that extreme.
|
|
billisonboard
Community Leader
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 22:45:44 GMT -5
Posts: 37,483
|
Post by billisonboard on Nov 21, 2014 23:29:36 GMT -5
DJ, consider the following hypothetical: You're shopping at the grocery store and a man comes in waving a gun. You're also armed with a gun, but you're worried that if you shoot, you'll miss and wind up killing a bystander or possibly wind up killing the robber, essentially executing him for the crime of armed robbery. In that moment of hesitation, the robber points his gun at you and blows your brains out over the beef jerky stand behind you. He then proceeds to systematically execute all 16 other people in the store. After doing this, he strips the wallet from your corpse, learns your work address, and drives to your workplace where he proceeds to systematically execute your entire workforce, leaving 28 men dead or mortally wounded in his wake. Finally, with the police hot in pursuit, he drives to your residence. Your entire extended family is there for a seasonal visit, and after riddling them (and your pets) with bullets and stacking their corpses into a human barricade, he exchanges fire with police for 6 more hours, killing 9 police officers and two FBI negotiators before finally being taken down in a hail of gunfire. During the final exchange, a spark from a stray bullet ignites a puddle of oil in your neighbour's garage, setting off a conflagration that consumes three city blocks and claims the lives of a dozen firefighters and more than a hundred seniors in an assisted living complex. You're telling us you're not the least bit sorry you hesitated? You're saying you'd prefer this outcome to the one where you simply shoot the man and end his bloody rampage before it even begins? Please. We really can't take you seriously, sir. I would pull out my magic wand and cast a brotherly love spell and then all would be well.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: May 5, 2024 8:44:41 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 21, 2014 23:52:03 GMT -5
So you have changed your stance then... you are now pro- self defense and pro- defense of others. Glad we could help you find your way! i have always been pro SELF defense, and i encourage everyone to defend themselves. but i sure as HELL don't want you defending me, unless you are authorized by me or the law to do so. hopefully, now we are indeed clear. just let me know if we are not. The law allows for "defense of others"... so yes, we are indeed clear. You support defense of others.
|
|
EVT1
Junior Associate
Joined: Dec 30, 2010 16:22:42 GMT -5
Posts: 8,596
|
Post by EVT1 on Nov 21, 2014 23:52:13 GMT -5
So you have changed your stance then... you are now pro- self defense and pro- defense of others. Glad we could help you find your way! i have always been pro SELF defense, and i encourage everyone to defend themselves. but i sure as HELL don't want you defending me, unless you are authorized by me or the law to do so. hopefully, now we are indeed clear. just let me know if we are not. I also do not want some asshat with a gun intervening in my defense or defense of my family. They will likely cause more death than wind up on the NRA hero list.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: May 5, 2024 8:44:41 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 21, 2014 23:53:10 GMT -5
Sounds like defense of others in imminent danger to me i am opposed to that, unless you are legally authorized to do so. thus, i am against vigilantism. see how that all ties together? note to anyone who rises to my defense: if i am too lame to defend myself, let me die. Defense of others in imminent danger is not vigilantism (because it IS authorized by law). I thought we already cleared that up.
|
|
EVT1
Junior Associate
Joined: Dec 30, 2010 16:22:42 GMT -5
Posts: 8,596
|
Post by EVT1 on Nov 21, 2014 23:58:24 GMT -5
i am opposed to that, unless you are legally authorized to do so. thus, i am against vigilantism. see how that all ties together? note to anyone who rises to my defense: if i am too lame to defend myself, let me die. Defense of others in imminent danger is not vigilantism (because it IS authorized by law). I thought we already cleared that up. And when it kills innocent people who is at fault then? Define imminent. I would argue an armed robbery by definition is not a crime where killing people is the objective.
|
|
djAdvocate
Member Emeritus
only posting when the mood strikes me.
Joined: Jun 21, 2011 12:33:54 GMT -5
Posts: 75,142
Mini-Profile Background: {"image":"","color":"000307"}
|
Post by djAdvocate on Nov 22, 2014 0:29:22 GMT -5
i am opposed to that, unless you are legally authorized to do so. thus, i am against vigilantism. see how that all ties together? note to anyone who rises to my defense: if i am too lame to defend myself, let me die. Defense of others in imminent danger is not vigilantism (because it IS authorized by law). I thought we already cleared that up. nope. we didn't. there is no legal basis for this in California, although it might be in Indiana, and there is no FEDERAL law which permits it. you have a duty to retreat here, and in any other state that does not have SYG. lethal force can ONLY be used in self defense when there is no ability to retreat. if you undertake any such activity in a state such as CA, you will be considered a vigilante, since you have no legal authority to act with deadly force on behalf of others. edit: it looks like you are indeed in one of those nutty SYG states. so what works for you won't work for me.
|
|
zibazinski
Community Leader
Joined: Dec 24, 2010 16:12:50 GMT -5
Posts: 47,866
|
Post by zibazinski on Nov 22, 2014 8:24:28 GMT -5
Hooray for one less thug on the streets!
|
|
EVT1
Junior Associate
Joined: Dec 30, 2010 16:22:42 GMT -5
Posts: 8,596
|
Post by EVT1 on Nov 22, 2014 13:15:39 GMT -5
The vast majority of armed robberies do not turn into a shooting- so just based on that the smarter move is not escalate.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: May 5, 2024 8:44:41 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 22, 2014 18:29:29 GMT -5
The vast majority of armed robberies do not turn into a shooting- so just based on that the smarter move is not escalate. Just out of a sense of morbid curiosity... how do you know, for a fact, that it's one of the Majority ones (I'm taking your word for that) that doesn't end up with dead/wounded people... while it's happening?
|
|
Deleted
Joined: May 5, 2024 8:44:41 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 22, 2014 18:40:18 GMT -5
Defense of others in imminent danger is not vigilantism (because it IS authorized by law). I thought we already cleared that up. nope. we didn't. there is no legal basis for this in California, although it might be in Indiana, and there is no FEDERAL law which permits it. you have a duty to retreat here, and in any other state that does not have SYG. lethal force can ONLY be used in self defense when there is no ability to retreat. if you undertake any such activity in a state such as CA, you will be considered a vigilante, since you have no legal authority to act with deadly force on behalf of others. edit: it looks like you are indeed in one of those nutty SYG states. so what works for you won't work for me. Are you sure about that?
|
|
Deleted
Joined: May 5, 2024 8:44:41 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 22, 2014 18:53:09 GMT -5
The vast majority of armed robberies do not turn into a shooting- so just based on that the smarter move is not escalate. Just out of a sense of morbid curiosity... how do you know, for a fact, that it's one of the Majority ones (I'm taking your word for that) that doesn't end up with dead/wounded people... while it's happening? If you resist it probably you will die If you do not resist it probably you will not die How dumb somebody gotta be to pick probably you will die. Its not hard to figure out. Its dumb as people who say Oh if I wear a seat belt maybe I'm gonna get trapped and burn!
|
|
Deleted
Joined: May 5, 2024 8:44:41 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 22, 2014 19:14:30 GMT -5
Just out of a sense of morbid curiosity... how do you know, for a fact, that it's one of the Majority ones (I'm taking your word for that) that doesn't end up with dead/wounded people... while it's happening? If you resist it probably you will die If you do not resist it probably you will not die How dumb somebody gotta be to pick probably you will die. Its not hard to figure out. Its dumb as people who say Oh if I wear a seat belt maybe I'm gonna get trapped and burn! If it's one of those minority ones where the robber is going to kill the witnesses anyway... you are certainly going to die. My question still stands (rephrased, to make it simpler): How do you know, while the robbery is happening, that it's NOT one of those minority ones, in which the robber WILL kill people?
|
|
Deleted
Joined: May 5, 2024 8:44:41 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 22, 2014 19:19:31 GMT -5
If you resist it probably you will die If you do not resist it probably you will not die How dumb somebody gotta be to pick probably you will die. Its not hard to figure out. Its dumb as people who say Oh if I wear a seat belt maybe I'm gonna get trapped and burn! If it's one of those minority ones where the robber is going to kill the witnesses anyway... you are certainly going to die. My question still stands (rephrased, to make it simpler): How do you know, while the robbery is happening, that it's NOT one of those minority ones, in which the robber WILL kill people? Ya already you said it you will like to take the way that will PROBABLY kill you and not the way that probably will NOT kill you. I donno why is it but maybe you got bad marks in mathematics. Or else you got testosterone poisoned.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: May 5, 2024 8:44:41 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 22, 2014 19:25:37 GMT -5
@richardintn you use a seat belt or no? Because there is 1:10000 chance it will trap you and you will burn. Probably it won't happen and probably you will die because you don't use it but how do you no while driving is happening if its gonna be one time of 10k that it will trap you??
|
|
Deleted
Joined: May 5, 2024 8:44:41 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 22, 2014 20:57:07 GMT -5
@richardintn you use a seat belt or no? Because there is 1:10000 chance it will trap you and you will burn. Probably it won't happen and probably you will die because you don't use it but how do you no while driving is happening if its gonna be one time of 10k that it will trap you?? You might not want to use made up statistics with someone that worked accident scenes on a Rescue Squad... Also worthy of note, "trapped and burned" isn't the only way a seat belt kills. As to your question... No, I actually don't wear a seat belt. Seat belts only save lives in specific types of accidents. In other types of accidents they either cause more harm or they cause death where the person would have survived (or had less injuries) without one. The true difference, in my personal experience (4 years as an Ambulance driver, on-scene, at accident sites), is closer to 20/20/60 (20% where no seat belt is better, 20% where it wouldn't make a difference one way or the other, 60% where wearing a seat belt is safer).
|
|
Deleted
Joined: May 5, 2024 8:44:41 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 22, 2014 21:00:00 GMT -5
@richardintn you use a seat belt or no? Because there is 1:10000 chance it will trap you and you will burn. Probably it won't happen and probably you will die because you don't use it but how do you no while driving is happening if its gonna be one time of 10k that it will trap you?? You might not want to use made up statistics with someone that worked accident scenes on a Rescue Squad... Also worthy of note, "trapped and burned" isn't the only way a seat belt kills. As to your question... No, I actually don't wear a seat belt. Seat belts only save lives in specific types of accidents. In other types of accidents they either cause more harm or they cause death where the person would have survived (or had less injuries) without one. The true difference, in my personal experience (4 years as an Ambulance driver, on-scene, at accident sites), is closer to 20/20/60 (20% where no seat belt is better, 20% where it wouldn't make a difference one way or the other, 60% where wearing a seat belt is safer). It didn't shock me you don't use a seat belt.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: May 5, 2024 8:44:41 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 22, 2014 21:04:22 GMT -5
If it's one of those minority ones where the robber is going to kill the witnesses anyway... you are certainly going to die. My question still stands (rephrased, to make it simpler): How do you know, while the robbery is happening, that it's NOT one of those minority ones, in which the robber WILL kill people? Ya already you said it you will like to take the way that will PROBABLY kill you and not the way that probably will NOT kill you. I donno why is it but maybe you got bad marks in mathematics. Or else you got testosterone poisoned. I actually did pretty good in Math (even got to skip all my classes except test days for my "Algebra 1" year). It's a simple question... How do you know, while the robbery is happening, whether it will be the one that ends with the robber shooting someone or not? Short answer... that no one wants to admit to is: You don't. In that case you HAVE to assume that it's the one that will end in the robber shooting people. To act any other was is gambling with people's lives.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: May 5, 2024 8:44:41 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 22, 2014 21:09:47 GMT -5
Ya already you said it you will like to take the way that will PROBABLY kill you and not the way that probably will NOT kill you. I donno why is it but maybe you got bad marks in mathematics. Or else you got testosterone poisoned. I actually did pretty good in Math (even got to skip all my classes except test days for my "Algebra 1" year). It's a simple question... How do you know, while the robbery is happening, whether it will be the one that ends with the robber shooting someone or not? Short answer... that no one wants to admit to is: You don't. In that case you HAVE to assume that it's the one that will end in the robber shooting people. To act any other was is gambling with people's lives. If your a fool you will assume it because the chance you will die is >>>>>> if you assume it.
|
|