Killing IS justified

[oldbadger]

Ahh, I see... so victim blaming. Always a hit, am I right? Just like the tried and true "You women shouldn't be wearing those skimpy outfits because it makes men want to do things to you." Right? They were asking for unwanted attention right?

So, because I don't live in a titanium house with motion-sensing, automated tranquilizer turrets, surrounded by a 50 foot wide moat I am ASKING to be intruded upon, right? Right?

Ha ha...... You can't even just lock your door, so don't mention the heavy stuff!

By the way, how many guns have you got? You see, if you have no safe, and I doubt that you do now, those daytime intruders could be even more dangerous than in the previous post.

And then, after getting turned over, you expect the world to weep for you? It's not victim blaming, it's just about insurers refusing to pay out where neglect has been proved. Oh damn..... You ain't insured either. Double damn, I bet you have no third-party all risks gun insurance.

Am I right, that all you've got is guns?

 

[Audie]

Ha ha...... You can't even just lock your door, so don't mention the heavy stuff!

By the way, how many guns have you got? You see, if you have no safe, and I doubt that you do now, those daytime intruders could be even more dangerous than in the previous post.

And then, after getting turned over, you expect the world to weep for you? It's not victim blaming, it's just about insurers refusing to pay out where neglect has been proved. Oh damn..... You ain't insured either. Double damn, I bet you have no third-party all risks gun insurance.

Am I right, that all you've got is guns?

Ah now we are making up ways to blame the victim.

 

[oldbadger]

And this... your very last statement, only solidifies the point I made in post #69, so thank you for stating it. The person who purposefully puts themselves in the path of conflict (i.e. the intruder with less than noble intentions) has stated with their actions that they believe that conflict is acceptable. So, in my dealing with this person, I will act in kind. Conflict has been PROVEN to be acceptable in the subjective experience of life between this intruder and myself by the very actions they have taken. If they go running to anyone crying about how terrible it was that I didn't want them in my house, what does this make them? (this question is for you too @Gerry) An important life to be revered and preserved, even at the cost of my own life?

This is turning out to quite possibly be one of the dumbest threads I have ever taken part in on this site.

You said it.
Living in high risk neglect, cuddling guns, is dumb.

 

[oldbadger]

Ah now we are making up ways to blame the victim.

Insurers blame victims ruthlessly. If a householder is reckless about their security then they won't pay out a dime.

Get real.

 

[Audie]

Insurers blame victims ruthlessly. If a householder is reckless about their security then they won't pay out a dime.

Get real.

You specialize in blaming victims.

Your talk of insurance companies is what is
betimes known as a overripe herring.

 

[Audie]

You said it.
Living in high risk neglect, cuddling guns, is dumb.

Guns is cold and hard and oily, Even dumb
people dont find them cuddly.

There are those, of course, who for lack of something
more substantial. turn to misrepresentation.

 

[oldbadger]

You specialize in blaming victims.

Your talk of insurance companies is what is
betimes known as a overripe herring.

Nah.....
If you're frightened of burglars, buy a lock, fit decent windows, wake up to common sense

 

[Shad]

Wow! The above was your reply to my point:-
And then if you really do have to kill the person you can show a Court that you did everything possible BEFORE you killed.
........ to which you reply:- Not required.

Wrong again. You shifted the point to a court system to prove an action I took was justified to other people according to a legal system. The OP is about justification not a legal system. Try again

I'll leave that for any readers to chew on.

That you switch context when it suits you?

I'll leave any readers to decide whether youi are frightened of your shadow.

Hand-waving and pass any burden to prove your claims on to the "masses" try again son.

 

[oldbadger]

Guns is cold and hard and oily, Even dumb
people dont find them cuddly.

There are those, of course, who for lack of something
more substantial. turn to misrepresentation.

Like you?
Go on...... Just secure your home and self, then you will be a more sensible person. Yes?

 

[oldbadger]

Wrong again. You shifted the point to a court system to prove an action I took was justified to other people according to a legal system. The OP is about justification not a legal system. Try again



That you switch context when it suits you?




Hand-waving and pass any burden to prove your claims on to the "masses" try again son.

If you shoot somebody you will need to justify your actions, most probably to a court.
Don't duck it now, because you sure could not duck it later.

 

[oldbadger]

Hand-waving and pass any burden to prove your claims on to the "masses" try again son.

It would be a jury I expect but the masses would judge you for sure. Dad!

 

[Shad]

If you shoot somebody you will need to justify your actions, most probably to a court.

Yes. However the question in the OP is not about a court system. More so not every court system has the same idea about evidence and laws. For example in Florida I could action merely based on an B&E. In Canada I can't. So tossing out "court" means nothing unless one specifies the court system.

Don't duck it now, because you sure could not duck it later.

Name the nation then I will talk about "courts". Keeping in mind "courts" have nothing to do with the OP.

 

[A Vestigial Mote]

Ha ha...... You can't even just lock your door, so don't mention the heavy stuff!

By the way, how many guns have you got? You see, if you have no safe, and I doubt that you do now, those daytime intruders could be even more dangerous than in the previous post.

And then, after getting turned over, you expect the world to weep for you? It's not victim blaming, it's just about insurers refusing to pay out where neglect has been proved. Oh damn..... You ain't insured either. Double damn, I bet you have no third-party all risks gun insurance.

Am I right, that all you've got is guns?

I don't even own a gun.

You see... for all this talk about how I may feel justified in killing a would-be killer, I am actually a very peaceful person - for the very reasons I have described. I am not willing to put out into the world that I think it is okay to steal, kill, rape, etc. and I find people who are willing to do so deplorable. I'm also a vegan, out of respect for the lives of the animals involved in the deplorable ways we farm them these days.

And in the end, I give my fellow man the benefit of the doubt that they will not do these sorts of things. But, reality being what it is, I've thought about it, and believe me, if they do, they'd better hope they brought some coward's way of dealing with me (like a gun). I've always had at the back of my mind the idea that if my life were truly on the line, I wouldn't have a single inhibition getting in my way. It's just something I know about myself. To the point that, the person I am battling might get quite a shock when I bite the digits of their fingers off, chew them up a bit and then spit them in their face. Or punch their throat repeatedly until they don't even have the musculature left in there to draw a breath. Or if I have them down, drop a knee onto their skull a few times as hard and heavy as I possibly can. Call me naive... but I don't feel I need your advice, your judgments, and I simply cannot bring myself to the thought of using something so cowardly as a gun. It is just an affront to my most core sensibilities. I don't balk at the violence of guns... violence is violence, and hand-to-hand is actually much more brutal, in my opinion. It's just the cowardly nature I feel a person armed with a gun has no choice but to admit about themselves. It has, quite frankly, always been quite disgusting to me.

 

[Audie]

Like you?
Go on...... Just secure your home and self, then you will be a more sensible person. Yes?

No.

I yam already more sensibler than you is
Even if that is damning with faint praise.

Securing my home is not always the same as
securing myself, of course. For that, well, I
do have a boyfriend for when I am out, besides
which as the PTSD fades a bit, I am still hypervigilant.
I dont think it sensible to be more so.

Anyhow, in NYC, guns are outlawed, so only
outlaws have guns.

And, in the event, my flat is extremely secure,
probably more so than yours.

Ya gorblimey victim-blamin' bloke! (did i say that right?)

 

[Audie]

I don't even own a gun.

You see... for all this talk about how I may feel justified in killing a would-be killer, I am actually a very peaceful person - for the very reasons I have described. I am not willing to put out into the world that I think it is okay to steal, kill, rape, etc. and I find people who are willing to do so deplorable. I'm also a vegan, out of respect for the lives of the animals involved in the deplorable ways we farm them these days.

And in the end, I give my fellow man the benefit of the doubt that they will not do these sorts of things. But, reality being what it is, I've thought about it, and believe me, if they do, they'd better hope they brought some coward's way of dealing with me (like a gun). I've always had at the back of my mind the idea that if my life were truly on the line, I wouldn't have a single inhibition getting in my way. It's just something I know about myself. To the point that, the person I am battling might get quite a shock when I bite the digits of their fingers off, chew them up a bit and then spit them in their face. Or punch their throat repeatedly until they don't even have the musculature left in there to draw a breath. Or if I have them down, drop a knee onto their skull a few times as hard and heavy as I possibly can. Call me naive... but I don't feel I need your advice, your judgments, and I simply cannot bring myself to the thought of using something so cowardly as a gun. It is just an affront to my most core sensibilities. I don't balk at the violence of guns... violence is violence, and hand-to-hand is actually much more brutal, in my opinion. It's just the cowardly nature I feel a person armed with a gun has no choice but to admit about themselves. It has, quite frankly, always been quite disgusting to me.

It is good for you that you are a powerful hand
to hand fighter.

I am not. At 97 American pounds, and under five
American feet tall, I am not going to be good at that.

Disgusting, guns may be to you, but that is of course
an emotional thing, not necessarily reasonable.

I no longer own a gun, but to call it cowardly to own
or use one is being overly harsh and judgmental,
dont you think?

 

[Audie]

Nah.....
If you're frightened of burglars, buy a lock, fit decent windows, wake up to common sense

Not a very artful or apt way to avoid accountability
for your blame-the-victim attitude.

 

[A Vestigial Mote]

It is good for you that you are a powerful hand
to hand fighter.

I am not. At 97 American pounds, and under five
American feet tall, I am not going to be good at that.

Disgusting, guns may be to you, but that is of course
an emotional thing, not necessarily reasonable.

I no longer own a gun, but to call it cowardly to own
or use one is being overly harsh and judgmental,
dont you think?

I can admit to it being an emotional response, for the most part - though my sincerest wish is that guns didn't exist at all so that no one could bring them into any scenario. And it isn't the guns themselves that disgust me - knowledge of the physics behind them is useful, and interesting. Its the mindset of anyone whose first instinct is to "grab their gun" as a first line of defense/offense. I feel like if a person like that had a Panzer tank, they'd jump in that instead because "why not?"

Also, I will be the first to tell you that you shouldn't care what I think.

Anyway, rationally, I can see it as practical to "level the playing field" if you are going to be up against people who you have a strong feeling will already have a gun of their own. But the problem there is one akin to the old question "what came first, the chicken or the egg?" Which person in the scenario is bringing the gun because he thinks the other guy might have one? Is the intruder bringing the gun in order to make sure he doesn't have to encounter a person one-on-one? Do you have the gun in order to avoid the same? Or do you both bring the gun "just in case" the other one has one? It's a form of paranoia.

All I know is, if I walked into a boxing ring, and the guy in the other corner had gloves on that could fly across the ring and punch me without him even being near me, I'd call foul. And if we both had gloves like that, I'd feel like a coward, feel I was fighting a coward, and wouldn't begrudge anyone calling me such.

 

[Audie]

I can admit to it being an emotional response, for the most part - though my sincerest wish is that guns didn't exist at all so that no one could bring them into any scenario. And it isn't the guns themselves that disgust me - knowledge of the physics behind them is useful, and interesting. Its the mindset of anyone whose first instinct is to "grab their gun" as a first line of defense/offense. I feel like if a person like that had a Panzer tank, they'd jump in that instead because "why not?"

Also, I will be the first to tell you that you shouldn't care what I think.

Anyway, rationally, I can see it as practical to "level the playing field" if you are going to be up against people who you have a strong feeling will already have a gun of their own. But the problem there is one akin to the old question "what came first, the chicken or the egg?" Which person in the scenario is bringing the gun because he thinks the other guy might have one? Is the intruder bringing the gun in order to make sure he doesn't have to encounter a person one-on-one? Do you have the gun in order to avoid the same? Or do you both bring the gun "just in case" the other one has one? It's a form of paranoia.

All I know is, if I walked into a boxing ring, and the guy in the other corner had gloves on that could fly across the ring and punch me without him even being near me, I'd call foul. And if we both had gloves like that, I'd feel like a coward, feel I was fighting a coward, and wouldn't begrudge anyone calling me such.

If every gun in the world were dumped in the
ocean, and no more could be made, it is fine with me.

Still, things being as they are, I think there are people /
situations that gun ownership is very appropriate.

anyone whose first instinct is to "grab their gun" as a first line of defense/offense.

Of course. Anyone whose first instinct is to drive cars to
the hazard of the public is likewise not cool.

Either case, it is a small minority. I'd guess the great
majority of your grab-gun-first probably live in East LA
or south Chicago, and there is not much you can do
about them.

As for not bringing a gun into any scenario, IF I
were armed AND someone came in my house
with the intent of harming me, I would shoot
them full of holes.

Once of being a victim was way more than
enough, to give me that attitude and motivation.

"level the playing field" if you are going to be up against people who you have a strong feeling will already have a gun of their own

Possibly, somewhere, some time. OK Corral maybe.

In my case, he had no gun, did not need one.
And I had my fists of fury?
Level the playing field?? No way.

I'd want any advantage I could possibly have.

 

[Jeremiah Ames]

Cockroach

Probably the best answer I’ve seen so far.

At least it attempts to answer the question.

 

[Jeremiah Ames]

IOW, you just make up meanings for what you read,
until it fits your ideas. It is ok; it is what all of you
bible-people do.

Actually, no. I don’t make up meanings.

Give me a verse you are troubled with, and I will do my best to explain it as I see it.

My wife has been into the Bible for 40 years or so. I’d watch her read some every day. It did not bother me. But I had no interest.
I surely never wanted to go to church. Ick. Fortunately, she never did either. She did buy me my very own Bible a few decades back. Well, I read a few pages here and there. To me, it was all mumbo jumbo. No interest.

Then when I retired 5 years ago, I came up with this idea we should try a church. I just went to church assuming everyone in those buildings were connected to God. And things seemed a bit off from the beginning. Well, after 4 years, and probably 12 different churches, and listening to online sermons, it finally dawned on me: most of these people don’t have a clue. And to make it worse, they’re just like people outside the churches except many have a self righteousness about them.

Once I gave up on seeking God inside a church, I actually found him. It’s true. And He is NOT like you could imagine. He’s definitely not like the God taught in churches. You don’t have to believe me. It’s ok. For most of my 67 years I wouldn’t believe it either. But life is incredible now. Way incredible. Way beyond my ability to explain in a place like this. But my type A personality has been replaced with a peace I’ve never known before. So, even if it’s my imagination, as you may think to say, does it matter? It’s a win win for me.

I enjoy your comments. Strangely, I find it easier talking with people who are not tied up with religious falsities. Toss me a comment anytime. I’m glad to hear from you.