Gothic.net News Horror Gothic Lifestyle Fiction Movies Books and Literature Dark TV VIP Horror Professionals Professional Writing Tips Links Gothic Forum




Go Back   Gothic.net Community > Boards > Politics

Politics "Under democracy, one party always devotes its chief energies to trying to prove that the other party is unfit to rule -and both commonly succeed, and are right." -H.L. Menken

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 03-25-2006, 03:37 PM   #26
edible_eye
 
edible_eye's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 3,793
when i worked in a prison, we were authorized to use deadly force if an inmate decided to get touchy-feely.

massachusetts on the whole, though - shudder - i can only hope this law goes into effect here.

someone can break into my house here with a gun in hand, fully intent on murder and if i turned the tide and managed to kill him instead - i would be charged. also, if i didn't kill him, let's say - and merely hurt him, he would have the right to sue me for hurting him.

that's the land of ted kennedy (untried murderer) and john kerry (tough guy).

just next door, in new hampshire, i would have the right to shoot anyone who trespassed on my property. the land of the free.

that's the way it is in ireland, i believe. the british are considered trespassers and as such, the sinn feinn organization regularly takes shots at them. isn't that right?

i find it oddly curious that sternn would take offense to this law, of all laws. the right to protect one's own? how is that offensive?
__________________
"How many times can I say I'm not sorry? And how many ways can I show I don't care?" - Type O Negative
edible_eye is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-25-2006, 04:06 PM   #27
Circle V
 
Circle V's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Northwestern Washington
Posts: 921
I've seen this sort of law before. I'm pretty certain there's been one in Texas, as Wolfmoon said, since the dawn of time.

The law I know of allows the use of lethal force if you are on your own property and feel that your life is threatened. It's informally known as the "Make My Day" law, I believe.

Edible, Sternn will automatically disagree with any and all laws that are passed or proposed in the US, especially during the current presidency. It's his nature.
__________________
It is time, it is high time... Yes, but to do what?
--Friedrich Nietzsche
Circle V is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-25-2006, 04:40 PM   #28
Empty_Purple_Stars
 
Empty_Purple_Stars's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Right Here
Posts: 3,442
Quote:
Originally Posted by edible_eye

i find it oddly curious that sternn would take offense to this law, of all laws. the right to protect one's own? how is that offensive?


Quote:
Originally Posted by Empty_Purple_Stars

I find it somewhat ironic that a confessed member of the IRA has taken umbrage with a Stateside law allowing lethal force.

You do see that is more than a bit hypocritical don't you Sternn?

Not to mention that you are a staunch member of a group that made its history, taking up arms against those they felt threatened their freedom, health, and well-being of themselves and their families.

See my point?

Funny, I said the same thing.

And even pointed out that he appeared to miss that observation from me in a later post.

I had been harboring some hope that he was trying to be less one sided in his debate tactics these days..

The new and improved Cpt. Sternn would never ignore us would he?

C'mon Sternn, at least admit we do have a point in this instance..

Empty_Purple_Stars is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-26-2006, 04:20 AM   #29
edible_eye
 
edible_eye's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 3,793
circle - sternn and i go way back on the political debate board. thank you for your 'word of warning', but i'm fairly well-versed on sternn's sternn-isms.

and e_p_s - yes, hypocrisy at its finest does tend to raise an eyebrow or two. as for sternn, sometimes i think he puts stuff out there JUST to get the blood flowing, whether or not he stands by it.
__________________
"How many times can I say I'm not sorry? And how many ways can I show I don't care?" - Type O Negative
edible_eye is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-26-2006, 12:11 PM   #30
Binkie
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: The Beautiful U.S. of A.
Posts: 1,241
Quote:
Originally Posted by Empty_Purple_Stars
C'mon Sternn, at least admit we do have a point in this instance..

LOL. He got called on his shit... AGAIN! But to admit defeat?!? NEVER!
__________________
"[Brian Blair] was a punk. I can break his fucking back - break his back and make him humble and then fuck his ass ... Suplex him, put him in a camel clutch, break his back, and fuck his ass - make him humble. Teach him to respect the Iron Sheik. And I didn't do it, because for the God and Jesus, and Mr. McMahon." -Khosrow Vaziri (The Iron Sheik)
Binkie is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-26-2006, 01:43 PM   #31
CptSternn
 
CptSternn's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Posts: 4,587
Your under the impression of a few things.

1. I never admited to being a member of anything. Such accusations will land your on loyalist hit lists along with a cadre of other lists. Just because I may be suspected of doing something doesn't mean I have done anything (innocent until proven guilty, right?). Also once again people trying to get me to deny or confirm personal details, something I won't do on a board where everything we type goes directly into google and can be retrieved just by searching for the word 'sternn' (try and it see).

2. The IRA is not some vigilantte group as many would have you think. Any actions taken come down through 3-4 levels of administration. Like modern US or british army, there is a chain of command, orders, and people with various ranks. Random people aren't just killed because of a quarrel. There are tribunals that are held, in private by ranking officials before any type of justice is given out. Comparing a guy with a gun in a parking lot shooting someone at random over a dispute to a military action by an well-organised military group is apples and oranges.

So back to the topic, lets look at this article I found on WP today...

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn...v=rss_metro/va

No Charges in Shooting of Unarmed Man
Mother of Optometrist Killed by Police Calls Prosecutor's Decision 'Pathetic'

By Tom Jackman
Washington Post Staff Writer
Friday, March 24, 2006; Page B05

The Fairfax County police officer who shot an unarmed man to death in January will not be charged with a crime, the county's chief prosecutor announced yesterday, and the man's family angrily responded by claiming that a civilian in the same situation would have been arrested.

From the start, Fairfax police declared that the killing of Salvatore J. Culosi, 37, was an accident and that the SWAT officer who fired had done so unintentionally. Fairfax Commonwealth's Attorney Robert F. Horan Jr. said that when a person fires a gun without malice and unintentionally kills someone, "they do not commit a crime."


There is more on this on the families website here:

http://www.justiceforsal.com/

For those who don't want to read the whole thing I'll give you the short and skinny here. Basically a doctor was being investedgated for illegal betting. Turns out, it was all a mistake. But when they went to arrest him to question him one of the officers shot and killed him. Friday, the judge says no crime was committed because the officers acted in 'good faith' and under the law.

Anyone else find this disturbing a citizen who has not broken any law is gunned down by police and the police do not even recieve a repromand because it was 'an accident'. I mean, the officer pointed a loaded gun at an innocent man and 'accidentally' shot him. Is he any less guilty than say a man who has a pint and then 'accidentally' wrecks into another car? I mean, the driver wasn't trying to crash, and the officers wasn't trying to kill the man. But it did happen. So like the topic says thanks to the law this is totally legal.
CptSternn is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-26-2006, 04:10 PM   #32
Binkie
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: The Beautiful U.S. of A.
Posts: 1,241
You won't confirm nor deny personal details? But, Sternn, EVERY counter-arguement you have is based on what YOU'VE experienced. Experiences you refuse to back up when you're called on it. I guess that's all bullshit that you're too scared to stand up for what you believe in. And here I thought you stood up for your beliefs without fear of what happens to you. At least that's what you said on the other thread about your time in prison. Ah ha! More bullshit, buddy!

Point EPS is making is that YOU came onto this board and defended the murder of cops, military, and unarmed civilians by the IRA as being completely justified... yet a civilian in the US defending themselves from death or great bodily harm by use of lethal force is ... oh my god! FUCKING IMMORAL! Satan himself must of written those laws!

Now do you see how much of a joke you come off as?
__________________
"[Brian Blair] was a punk. I can break his fucking back - break his back and make him humble and then fuck his ass ... Suplex him, put him in a camel clutch, break his back, and fuck his ass - make him humble. Teach him to respect the Iron Sheik. And I didn't do it, because for the God and Jesus, and Mr. McMahon." -Khosrow Vaziri (The Iron Sheik)
Binkie is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-26-2006, 06:26 PM   #33
CptSternn
 
CptSternn's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Posts: 4,587
Wow, yet another thread where you once again have said nothing about the topic but concentrate on me an my history. I do so appreciate the attention, hell, my head is swelling as we speak! I mean, to have you dedicate your life to me is well, humbling, but seriously, you really should form an opinion on a topic before replying. This is a discussion board, not a 'Binkie loves Sternn' board.

If we we on the playground you would be pulling my hair and telling me I'm a poopy face by now. I know you love me, but cum on', whats your view on, well, anything? How about using this self proclaimed vast knowledge of yers and actually form an opinion and debating on it?

As always, looking forward to your (personalised) response.

Toodles!
CptSternn is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-26-2006, 08:31 PM   #34
Binkie
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: The Beautiful U.S. of A.
Posts: 1,241
There's X, making a great point which you will inevitably dismiss instantly.

S'right, Sternn. Me, me, me, me, me... It's not like EPS originally brought up the point and called you on your bullshit. Nope. It's me, me, me, me, me.

S'actually quite funny to watch you react to being cornered. You're like a little puppy that's last resort is peeing all over the floor. LOL. Let 'er rip, little man!

Face it, my man, you got called on your hypocracy, this time by moderate posters. You're losing your PR campaign on this site, Sternn!
__________________
"[Brian Blair] was a punk. I can break his fucking back - break his back and make him humble and then fuck his ass ... Suplex him, put him in a camel clutch, break his back, and fuck his ass - make him humble. Teach him to respect the Iron Sheik. And I didn't do it, because for the God and Jesus, and Mr. McMahon." -Khosrow Vaziri (The Iron Sheik)
Binkie is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-26-2006, 09:08 PM   #35
4mytribe
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 204
Quote:
Originally Posted by Xnguela
Sternn, when you AVOID answering people's questions, therefore disallowing any form of debate whatsoever, how precisely should they respond? Yeah, that's about what I thought.
Damn its allways hard with X. She makes me think and question myself.

I wonder what questions your asking youself right now. hahahahah
4mytribe is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-27-2006, 09:06 AM   #36
CptSternn
 
CptSternn's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Posts: 4,587
Quote:
Originally Posted by Xnguela
Sternn, when you AVOID answering people's questions, therefore disallowing any form of debate whatsoever, how precisely should they respond? Yeah, that's about what I thought.
I do avoid answering childish taunts and flame wars. I am happy to debate the merits of the topic - in this case shoot first laws.

And as posted, the case of a Doctor who was shot, 'by accident' and under the law, the police who shot him not even getting a slap on the wrist.

Sounds like injustice to me, but maybe thats just me. Too bad other people would like to de-rail the topic on to my personal experiences and not debate the finer points of why shoot first is a good idea or bad idea and if so, why or why not.

My feelings are as follows: its a shite law. And the aforementioned case of the dead doctor is a prmie example. In Richmond, Virginia between 2000-2004 4 unarmed people were shot and killed by 'accident' and in each case due to the same laws the police were found not to be at fault. In one case, a man answered the door in his underwear, brushing his teeth, with a toothbrush in hand. SWAT team thought it was a gun and shot him 6 times. In another case plain clothed police with guns in hand chased an armed suspect around a carpark and through a crowd waiting in queue to enter a club. When the people standing waiting to go in saw 2 men with guns running towards them the line dispersed, everyone ran in all directions. The officer chased down a patron who was wearing similar clothing and shot him 11 times in the back. Turns out it was the wrong guy - just a guy who was waiting in line that had a similar colored jacket on as the suspect. The 11 shots in the back were ruled self-defence in a percieved threat.

And I'm the only one who thinks thats a bad thing? I don't think I have seen a storey where a criminal broke into a house and a guy with a gun was able to protect his family. In fact, other than those hollywood action movies, I think the chances of that happening is slim to nil where as you have a much higher chance of getting blown away by accident.
CptSternn is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-27-2006, 11:59 AM   #37
Binkie
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: The Beautiful U.S. of A.
Posts: 1,241
Yes, your story is nice... and completely irrelevant, which is why there's zero interest in it. It has nothing to do with the laws you're citing. Especially, and I'm sure you know this because you actually READ into this case (right? I'm sure...) the officer's gun unintentionally discharged.

Not that it matters anyways, because law enforcement officers are allowed to use deadly force under separate statutes, hence why they're allowed to open fire on anyone in ANY state if they feel it's warranted. And everytime a law enforcement officer fires his weapon in public, he has to stand before a 'Shooting Board' to determine whether or not it was justified. Much like IA, they don't fuck around with this stuff.

And yes, you do avoid childish flame wars. You're so above calling people "cunts" and threatening to "slit [their] fat fucking throat(s) open" on these boards, right, Sternn? That doesn't sound like the you that we know. The you that got his ass BANNED from this forum for going psycho.
__________________
"[Brian Blair] was a punk. I can break his fucking back - break his back and make him humble and then fuck his ass ... Suplex him, put him in a camel clutch, break his back, and fuck his ass - make him humble. Teach him to respect the Iron Sheik. And I didn't do it, because for the God and Jesus, and Mr. McMahon." -Khosrow Vaziri (The Iron Sheik)
Binkie is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-05-2006, 02:40 AM   #38
CptSternn
 
CptSternn's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Posts: 4,587
Intentions is what makes the case now? Doesn't manslaughter handle that? Cops are exempt because of their job? Doesn't this make cops above the law? Well, look at the LAPD. We already see this. And the RPD are the same. Both communities are comprised largely of minorities and have a primarily white police force who is always on the news for either beating or killing minories, and the all white juries they bring in let them walk. I'm just pointing out it's pretty one sided.

And yes, now, I avoid flame wars. And another thing, why is the word 'r' ape banned from being typed, but yet CUNT comes right through clear as day?
CptSternn is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Israeli defense minister says occupation must end CptSternn Politics 36 05-23-2010 05:26 AM
Joe Stack’s Intriguing Connections With Defense Contractors, Intelligence Agencies Deadmanwalking_05 Spooky News 0 02-23-2010 02:45 PM
U.S. to end war on medical marijuana in legal states CptSternn Spooky News 7 01-12-2010 02:40 PM
Mothers Scrimp as States Take Child Support CptSternn Politics 1 12-04-2007 03:59 AM
Goddess Vs. Deus Ex-Machina Asurai Politics 153 09-13-2005 10:57 AM


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 04:00 AM.