FallingOsh 0 #26 March 22, 2010 QuoteQuotePerhaps we should go to the methods of some arab countries. You touch someone elses shit you lose a finger or a hand. It's pretty cut and dry. My stuff is my stuff and your is yours. Don't touch my stuff. I work hard to earn my stuff and NOBODY has a right to touch it. I catch you touching my stuff and you are going to wish the cops caught you. I have absolutely no patience for lazy pukes that don't know the meaning of respecting other peoples things and earning things in life. The damn government gives enough shit away to the "poor and underprivelaged" funded by my tax dollars already. I wasn't expecting such a cogent (look it up) response to the reality of deterrence theory. Too bad you weren't born 200 years ago, but by today's standards and laws, you cannot kill or harm someone in most states to defend property. Now if you try to stop them from taking it and they assault you, then you can defend yourself, but shooting someone in teh back, other than hillbilly states, constitutes assault/murder, etc. What a fine world we live in where the burglars are protected from violence. I'm not in the NRA or a crazy gun nut, but if someone breaks into my house, for whatever reason, there will be no hesitation to shoot. If you want to sit there and let some thug take all your stuff (and hope that's all he's there for) then be my guest. If a criminal has the choice between a house he knows shoots back or a house where the pussy screams and runs for the closet, I'm fairly certain which house he'll return to (and he will be returning since jail time might hurt his feelings so we're not going to do that). -------------------------------------------------- Stay positive and love your life. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Lucky... 0 #27 March 22, 2010 Quote What a fine world we live in where the burglars are protected from violence. Show me where I advocated that. All I'm saying is that deterence is a joke, incapacitation works for the time being. Quote I'm not in the NRA or a crazy gun nut, but if someone breaks into my house, for whatever reason, there will be no hesitation to shoot. If you want to sit there and let some thug take all your stuff (and hope that's all he's there for) then be my guest. I am a gun nut, haven't been shooting for years, but I embrace gun ownership. As for your house, most states have laws that don't require retreat, which doesn't mean you can shoot them in the back as they exit a door. Wanna do it, go ahead and good luck. Hopefully you live in a "neck" state - you s/b alright. Quote If a criminal has the choice between a house he knows shoots back or a house where the pussy screams and runs for the closet, I'm fairly certain which house he'll return to (and he will be returning since jail time might hurt his feelings so we're not going to do that). There ya go, you accidentally used the right word, "CHOICE." Deterrence must have the element of choice. If they're locked up, they have no choice, just incapacitation; don't confuse the two. If you were inferring I would run to the closet, well, you just don't know me. I don;t think you actually read the thread and just assumed what I was saying, so quit embarrassing yourself and go read my position and quote me. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
FallingOsh 0 #28 March 22, 2010 Quotequote]What a fine world we live in where the burglars are protected from violence. Show me where I advocated that. All I'm saying is that deterence is a joke, incapacitation works for the time being. I never said you advocated that. Deterrence is not a joke. That's why cop cars are painted the way they are. It's why nuclear war never happened. QuoteI am a gun nut, haven't been shooting for years, but I embrace gun ownership. As for your house, most states have laws that don't require retreat, which doesn't mean you can shoot them in the back as they exit a door. Maybe, but that's not what you said. "but by today's standards and laws, you cannot kill or harm someone in most states to defend property." QuoteWanna do it, go ahead and good luck. Hopefully you live in a "neck" state - you s/b alright. Yep. Hopefully you don't live in a state that won't let you cause harm to defend your own property. I guess you're supposed to just ask them to leave. QuoteThere ya go, you accidentally used the right word, "CHOICE." Deterrence must have the element of choice. If they're locked up, they have no choice, just incapacitation; don't confuse the two. So what do you advocate; locking them up forever? Since they are "wired" to commit burglary and deterrence doesn't work, I guess that would be the only answer... QuoteI don;t think you actually read the thread and just assumed what I was saying, so quit embarrassing yourself and go read my position and quote me. "In order to encourage it a person must "be wired" in such a way to embrace the idea of entering another person's house for the purpose of taking their stuff." "to deter them you have to change their mind, not merely their address." "too much jail time as with drug crimes does nothing to help the matter either." "you cannot kill or harm someone in most states to defend property." So a person can be wired to enter a house, but we could change a wired person's mind by not putting them in jail. If we do put them in jail, which apparently can't change their mind about future offenses, it can't be too long cause that's bad. Deterrence doesn't work, but jail time won't work either, and we can't shoot them when they break in... What exactly is your stance on this again? -------------------------------------------------- Stay positive and love your life. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
