[QUOTE][QUOTENAME]FreddiesGhettoTrench wrote: [/QUOTENAME][QUOTE][QUOTENAME]Sir GH<br><h6>ah yeah</h6> wrote: [/QUOTENAME][QUOTE][QUOTENAME]FreddiesGhettoTrench wrote: [/QUOTENAME][QUOTE][QUOTENAME]Sir GH<br><h6>ah yeah</h6> wrote: [/QUOTENAME][QUOTE][QUOTENAME]FreddiesGhettoTrench wrote: [/QUOTENAME]You can't force people not to be pricks, unless you execute them, but then we have a liberal backlash.[/QUOTE]
Wow, a human being in a first world country actually said and believes these words. There really is no reply. [/QUOTE]
What I'm saying is, if people hate gay people and want them dead, there's no way you can stop them from going out and attacking gay individuals. Hate crime laws, etc., only work AFTER THE CRIME HAS ALREADY BEEN COMMITTED. That's not helping the victim anyway. Therefore, the only way to stop these crimes from happening is to teach prospective victims not to be victims - to be able to defend themselves using, for example, firearms.
People just aren't safe any more. I mean, I live in a town where just recently THIS happened. -> http://www.nbc10.com/news/7127906/detail.html [/QUOTE]
This post and the one I quoted aren't even remotely synonymous.
And again, no, violence is not the only method of crime prevention. Maybe if you took your "Bush Blinders" off, you could entertain some other possibilities. Now, you can choose to attack me personally, or you can objectively entertain these statements as possibly being true.
[/QUOTE]
I'm not saying violence is the only way. What I'm saying is that in cases of people who are physically unable to defend themselves against larger and stronger persons, firearms work as a good equalizer. [/QUOTE]
Wow, you must be the same kind of person who supports affirmative action in American higher education. EQUALIZATION DOES NOT MEAN TURNING THE SITUATION AROUND TO THE COMPLETE OPPOSITE.
1 < 5, right? If you add twenty-four to the left side, you are quite mistaken if you think that's "equalization."
Thread
Posts in chronological order
[QUOTE][QUOTENAME].DeaconJohn. wrote: [/QUOTENAME]"What I'm saying is that in cases of people who are physically unable to defend themselves against larger and stronger persons, firearms work as a good equalizer."
- so are you suggesting we have a system where people who are old and/or disabled can apply for a firearm to protect themselves against attackers?[/QUOTE]
Yes, and free classes to train them to use them properly and safely.
- so are you suggesting we have a system where people who are old and/or disabled can apply for a firearm to protect themselves against attackers?[/QUOTE]
Yes, and free classes to train them to use them properly and safely.
[QUOTE][QUOTENAME]Music Man wrote: [/QUOTENAME][QUOTE][QUOTENAME]FreddiesGhettoTrench wrote: [/QUOTENAME][QUOTE][QUOTENAME]Sir GH<br><h6>ah yeah</h6> wrote: [/QUOTENAME][QUOTE][QUOTENAME]FreddiesGhettoTrench wrote: [/QUOTENAME][QUOTE][QUOTENAME]Sir GH<br><h6>ah yeah</h6> wrote: [/QUOTENAME][QUOTE][QUOTENAME]FreddiesGhettoTrench wrote: [/QUOTENAME]You can't force people not to be pricks, unless you execute them, but then we have a liberal backlash.[/QUOTE]
Wow, a human being in a first world country actually said and believes these words. There really is no reply. [/QUOTE]
What I'm saying is, if people hate gay people and want them dead, there's no way you can stop them from going out and attacking gay individuals. Hate crime laws, etc., only work AFTER THE CRIME HAS ALREADY BEEN COMMITTED. That's not helping the victim anyway. Therefore, the only way to stop these crimes from happening is to teach prospective victims not to be victims - to be able to defend themselves using, for example, firearms.
People just aren't safe any more. I mean, I live in a town where just recently THIS happened. -> http://www.nbc10.com/news/7127906/detail.html [/QUOTE]
This post and the one I quoted aren't even remotely synonymous.
And again, no, violence is not the only method of crime prevention. Maybe if you took your "Bush Blinders" off, you could entertain some other possibilities. Now, you can choose to attack me personally, or you can objectively entertain these statements as possibly being true.
[/QUOTE]
I'm not saying violence is the only way. What I'm saying is that in cases of people who are physically unable to defend themselves against larger and stronger persons, firearms work as a good equalizer. [/QUOTE]
Wow, you must be the same kind of person who supports affirmative action in American higher education. EQUALIZATION DOES NOT MEAN TURNING THE SITUATION AROUND TO THE COMPLETE OPPOSITE.
1 < 5, right? If you add twenty-four to the left side, you are quite mistaken if you think that's "equalization."[/QUOTE]
But the fact is, when a 300 lb man is trying to rape a 100 lbs girl, he has the advantage. If the girl pulls a .22, now she has enough of an advantage to get away from him.
Wow, a human being in a first world country actually said and believes these words. There really is no reply. [/QUOTE]
What I'm saying is, if people hate gay people and want them dead, there's no way you can stop them from going out and attacking gay individuals. Hate crime laws, etc., only work AFTER THE CRIME HAS ALREADY BEEN COMMITTED. That's not helping the victim anyway. Therefore, the only way to stop these crimes from happening is to teach prospective victims not to be victims - to be able to defend themselves using, for example, firearms.
People just aren't safe any more. I mean, I live in a town where just recently THIS happened. -> http://www.nbc10.com/news/7127906/detail.html [/QUOTE]
This post and the one I quoted aren't even remotely synonymous.
And again, no, violence is not the only method of crime prevention. Maybe if you took your "Bush Blinders" off, you could entertain some other possibilities. Now, you can choose to attack me personally, or you can objectively entertain these statements as possibly being true.
[/QUOTE]
I'm not saying violence is the only way. What I'm saying is that in cases of people who are physically unable to defend themselves against larger and stronger persons, firearms work as a good equalizer. [/QUOTE]
Wow, you must be the same kind of person who supports affirmative action in American higher education. EQUALIZATION DOES NOT MEAN TURNING THE SITUATION AROUND TO THE COMPLETE OPPOSITE.
1 < 5, right? If you add twenty-four to the left side, you are quite mistaken if you think that's "equalization."[/QUOTE]
But the fact is, when a 300 lb man is trying to rape a 100 lbs girl, he has the advantage. If the girl pulls a .22, now she has enough of an advantage to get away from him.
I guess for once you don't realize that someone who doesn't have enough training to handle shooting a gun is very likely to miss the target, and that lost bullet could easily end up hitting someone else?
Ever heard of PEPPER SPRAY, Sarajane?
Ever heard of PEPPER SPRAY, Sarajane?
[QUOTE][QUOTENAME]FreddiesGhettoTrench wrote: [/QUOTENAME][QUOTE][QUOTENAME].DeaconJohn. wrote: [/QUOTENAME]"What I'm saying is that in cases of people who are physically unable to defend themselves against larger and stronger persons, firearms work as a good equalizer."
- so are you suggesting we have a system where people who are old and/or disabled can apply for a firearm to protect themselves against attackers?[/QUOTE]
Yes, and free classes to train them to use them properly and safely. [/QUOTE]
So if someone is trying to kill me, a blind woman in a wheelchair, it's okay for me to shoot him before he succeeds in murdering me?
Not to bring up another topic, but I believe you said in your "death penalty" thread that all people who kill another person should be given the death penalty, even if that person only killed in order to save their own lives.
So you're saying that it's okay for me to kill someone in self defense, but no matter what the reason, I'll be put to death for it.
How is that justice?
Sounds to me like you're talking out of both sides of your head...unless of course I didn't understand what you said; but I think I understand exactly what you're saying.
- so are you suggesting we have a system where people who are old and/or disabled can apply for a firearm to protect themselves against attackers?[/QUOTE]
Yes, and free classes to train them to use them properly and safely. [/QUOTE]
So if someone is trying to kill me, a blind woman in a wheelchair, it's okay for me to shoot him before he succeeds in murdering me?
Not to bring up another topic, but I believe you said in your "death penalty" thread that all people who kill another person should be given the death penalty, even if that person only killed in order to save their own lives.
So you're saying that it's okay for me to kill someone in self defense, but no matter what the reason, I'll be put to death for it.
How is that justice?
Sounds to me like you're talking out of both sides of your head...unless of course I didn't understand what you said; but I think I understand exactly what you're saying.
[QUOTE][QUOTENAME]FreeSpirit328 wrote: [/QUOTENAME]
So you're saying that it's okay for me to kill someone in self defense, but no matter what the reason, I'll be put to death for it.
How is that justice?[/QUOTE]
That's because Sarajane is quite possibly the most politically biased person on this message board.
So you're saying that it's okay for me to kill someone in self defense, but no matter what the reason, I'll be put to death for it.
How is that justice?[/QUOTE]
That's because Sarajane is quite possibly the most politically biased person on this message board.
[QUOTE][QUOTENAME]Mr.Jingles wrote: [/QUOTENAME][QUOTE][QUOTENAME]FreeSpirit328 wrote: [/QUOTENAME]
So you're saying that it's okay for me to kill someone in self defense, but no matter what the reason, I'll be put to death for it.
How is that justice?[/QUOTE]
That's because Sarajane is quite possibly the most politically biased person on this message board.[/QUOTE]
How about politicaly uneducated....or brainwashed.
So you're saying that it's okay for me to kill someone in self defense, but no matter what the reason, I'll be put to death for it.
How is that justice?[/QUOTE]
That's because Sarajane is quite possibly the most politically biased person on this message board.[/QUOTE]
How about politicaly uneducated....or brainwashed.
[QUOTE][QUOTENAME]FreddiesGhettoTrench wrote: [/QUOTENAME][QUOTE][QUOTENAME]Music Man wrote: [/QUOTENAME][QUOTE][QUOTENAME]FreddiesGhettoTrench wrote: [/QUOTENAME][QUOTE][QUOTENAME]Sir GH<br><h6>ah yeah</h6> wrote: [/QUOTENAME][QUOTE][QUOTENAME]FreddiesGhettoTrench wrote: [/QUOTENAME][QUOTE][QUOTENAME]Sir GH<br><h6>ah yeah</h6> wrote: [/QUOTENAME][QUOTE][QUOTENAME]FreddiesGhettoTrench wrote: [/QUOTENAME]You can't force people not to be pricks, unless you execute them, but then we have a liberal backlash.[/QUOTE]
Wow, a human being in a first world country actually said and believes these words. There really is no reply. [/QUOTE]
What I'm saying is, if people hate gay people and want them dead, there's no way you can stop them from going out and attacking gay individuals. Hate crime laws, etc., only work AFTER THE CRIME HAS ALREADY BEEN COMMITTED. That's not helping the victim anyway. Therefore, the only way to stop these crimes from happening is to teach prospective victims not to be victims - to be able to defend themselves using, for example, firearms.
People just aren't safe any more. I mean, I live in a town where just recently THIS happened. -> http://www.nbc10.com/news/7127906/detail.html [/QUOTE]
This post and the one I quoted aren't even remotely synonymous.
And again, no, violence is not the only method of crime prevention. Maybe if you took your "Bush Blinders" off, you could entertain some other possibilities. Now, you can choose to attack me personally, or you can objectively entertain these statements as possibly being true.
[/QUOTE]
I'm not saying violence is the only way. What I'm saying is that in cases of people who are physically unable to defend themselves against larger and stronger persons, firearms work as a good equalizer. [/QUOTE]
Wow, you must be the same kind of person who supports affirmative action in American higher education. EQUALIZATION DOES NOT MEAN TURNING THE SITUATION AROUND TO THE COMPLETE OPPOSITE.
1 < 5, right? If you add twenty-four to the left side, you are quite mistaken if you think that's "equalization."[/QUOTE]
But the fact is, when a 300 lb man is trying to rape a 100 lbs girl, he has the advantage. If the girl pulls a .22, now she has enough of an advantage to get away from him. [/QUOTE]
Or to fatally wound him. Or to fatally wound herself. Or to fatally wound another bystander. Or to have him take the gun, and get an even larger advantage.
This situation honestly does not happen enough for your remedy to be practical.
Wow, a human being in a first world country actually said and believes these words. There really is no reply. [/QUOTE]
What I'm saying is, if people hate gay people and want them dead, there's no way you can stop them from going out and attacking gay individuals. Hate crime laws, etc., only work AFTER THE CRIME HAS ALREADY BEEN COMMITTED. That's not helping the victim anyway. Therefore, the only way to stop these crimes from happening is to teach prospective victims not to be victims - to be able to defend themselves using, for example, firearms.
People just aren't safe any more. I mean, I live in a town where just recently THIS happened. -> http://www.nbc10.com/news/7127906/detail.html [/QUOTE]
This post and the one I quoted aren't even remotely synonymous.
And again, no, violence is not the only method of crime prevention. Maybe if you took your "Bush Blinders" off, you could entertain some other possibilities. Now, you can choose to attack me personally, or you can objectively entertain these statements as possibly being true.
[/QUOTE]
I'm not saying violence is the only way. What I'm saying is that in cases of people who are physically unable to defend themselves against larger and stronger persons, firearms work as a good equalizer. [/QUOTE]
Wow, you must be the same kind of person who supports affirmative action in American higher education. EQUALIZATION DOES NOT MEAN TURNING THE SITUATION AROUND TO THE COMPLETE OPPOSITE.
1 < 5, right? If you add twenty-four to the left side, you are quite mistaken if you think that's "equalization."[/QUOTE]
But the fact is, when a 300 lb man is trying to rape a 100 lbs girl, he has the advantage. If the girl pulls a .22, now she has enough of an advantage to get away from him. [/QUOTE]
Or to fatally wound him. Or to fatally wound herself. Or to fatally wound another bystander. Or to have him take the gun, and get an even larger advantage.
This situation honestly does not happen enough for your remedy to be practical.