sometimes you gotta kill em....that said, i don't like giving that kind of power to governments.
of course, before any of the self righteous want to argue about what i said, if human life was half as precious to us as is politically correct, then we would have no problems that stem from no love, you know, no hunger or want. i do believe in the sanctity of human life. that's why i don't want to give control of it to organizations and commitees. a mad dog must be shot, still. rabies is terminal and the bullet is best for the dog and, more importantly, the family exposed to the animal. if the disease was other than insane frothing viciousness, perhaps it's not rabies and quaratine is all that's required for a return to health. this has nothing to do with the government, however. this is not the government's job to administer. in the case of the dog, it's a matter for the family, and in the case of a man, it's the job of his community. of course, there are precious few communities left in the world....
I'm sorry...
That's a reason to keep everyone out of this business. No one is perfect.garyb wrote:that's one reason to keep the government out of that business.
The day that you admit there is a good reason to kill anybody, anyone could justify his own reason....
It's always a mistake. Even if the killed is guilty, there is someone that has to kill him, for money as it is a job, and that one is not a better man, but worst of all there will be those who will be happy of the execution but would never have the guts to perform it directly.....those are the worst of all, the lowest grade of humanity, scared, violent and hypocrite.
It's not a matter of mercy for the guilty, is a matter of mercy for ourselves.
no doubt. and yet, in this world, there is a time when killing is necessary. there's no judging in this. at that time, it's apparent what must be done. there's no justification involved either. it's no different than the rabid dog or ravenous lion. there's no evil done in the direct defense of your own and your community's life when directly threatened. this has nothing to do with laws, governments, what anyone thinks or whether it's happy or not(it won't be happy, we agree). this has nothing to do with official killing.alfonso wrote:That's a reason to keep everyone out of this business. No one is perfect.garyb wrote:that's one reason to keep the government out of that business.
The day that you admit there is a good reason to kill anybody, anyone could justify his own reason....
It's always a mistake. Even if the killed is guilty, there is someone that has to kill him, for money as it is a job, and that one is not a better man, but worst of all there will be those who will be happy of the execution but would never have the guts to perform it directly.....those are the worst of all, the lowest grade of humanity, scared, violent and hypocrite.
It's not a matter of mercy for the guilty, is a matter of mercy for ourselves.
you may not agree with me Alfonso, but you know that i'm a "straight-up" guy. you know that i'm not someone who just wants to do bad to others or thinks that killing is good, but i bet there are plenty of situations that would be horrible, but that you would commit violence, even to murder, and where you will be doing the right thing and not to act would be shameful. let's bring a child or your mother or someone who is helpless into the equation.....let's not get lost in rhetoric arguing about the reality of an artificial reality("civilization").
Deterence Might Have An Effect,
Especially if these murderous criminals thought that they would have a fellow death row inmate be their killer. Let the murderers kill each other instead of our children, or citizens. I say stick 'em all in the bowels of the Earth, w/ some survival facilities of course to relieve those of us w/ guilt, and let the survival of the fittest instincts be used. A continuous flow of fresh meat, a real hell, instead of this bull shit rehabilitation crap. That way, we ( normal hard working tax payers ) don't do anything, other than provide them with an enviroment they enjoy. Everybody's happy, except for the Jeffrey Dahmer types. Revenge is best served cold.
Especially if these murderous criminals thought that they would have a fellow death row inmate be their killer. Let the murderers kill each other instead of our children, or citizens. I say stick 'em all in the bowels of the Earth, w/ some survival facilities of course to relieve those of us w/ guilt, and let the survival of the fittest instincts be used. A continuous flow of fresh meat, a real hell, instead of this bull shit rehabilitation crap. That way, we ( normal hard working tax payers ) don't do anything, other than provide them with an enviroment they enjoy. Everybody's happy, except for the Jeffrey Dahmer types. Revenge is best served cold.
but there's progression already, he promised to vote on miss Clinton Agreed,
But once you have friends or a family member hurt by violent criminals that are beyond rehabilitation, how will you feel.
I only had a neighbor, who became a widow from such scum. And after this sick bastard was " rehabilitated ", he commited a similar crime to someone elses dhild. He is still alive, as we feed him, and rehabiltate him, unfortunately, the Show Me State has no death penalty.
Three strikes and your out in the old ball game. But usually that results in innocent victims dying. It is an American tragedy.
Once you have children, and hear of these crimes, you change your stance on the issue.
Sorry to offend anyone, I will stay in Scope topics, where it's more fun, and exciting to post.
But once you have friends or a family member hurt by violent criminals that are beyond rehabilitation, how will you feel.
I only had a neighbor, who became a widow from such scum. And after this sick bastard was " rehabilitated ", he commited a similar crime to someone elses dhild. He is still alive, as we feed him, and rehabiltate him, unfortunately, the Show Me State has no death penalty.
Three strikes and your out in the old ball game. But usually that results in innocent victims dying. It is an American tragedy.
Once you have children, and hear of these crimes, you change your stance on the issue.
Sorry to offend anyone, I will stay in Scope topics, where it's more fun, and exciting to post.
If the only way to stop a threat is to kill I'm fine with that, you are about to kill me, if I can I shoot you first....I would feel alright. But in the moment that a criminal is convicted and under control I think that every society that takes care of the needs of its honest citizens has to pursue some better goals than revenge:garyb wrote:
you may not agree with me Alfonso, but you know that i'm a "straight-up" guy. you know that i'm not someone who just wants to do bad to others or thinks that killing is good, but i bet there are plenty of situations that would be horrible, but that you would commit violence, even to murder, and where you will be doing the right thing and not to act would be shameful. let's bring a child or your mother or someone who is helpless into the equation.....let's not get lost in rhetoric arguing about the reality of an artificial reality("civilization").
(@S4L)....first of all to protect every citizen, and this is perfectly done with prison or some other forms of strict control, but the most important thing is to understand things and to build a better place, with less violence and more respect for life. I think that how those goals are reached can be judged from the results. It doesn't seem that the U.S. have reached anything about if you compare the murder rates with any european country.
It's the same thing as with the "war against terrorism". Check the results of a certain policy made to appeal the scared illiterate part of the population....
Results.
what if i make a mistake?
i'm not going to kill someone cold-blooded and after the fact. if i kill someone, that will be absolutely horrible. do you really think that i'm in love with killing people? if i'm in that truly life threatening situation, all bets are off. there's no retribution involved. if there's a mistake, i never caused it. leave the rhetoric for someone else.....
i'm not going to kill someone cold-blooded and after the fact. if i kill someone, that will be absolutely horrible. do you really think that i'm in love with killing people? if i'm in that truly life threatening situation, all bets are off. there's no retribution involved. if there's a mistake, i never caused it. leave the rhetoric for someone else.....
To be sincere, for what I perceive of you, I think you feel in trouble also if you face a mosquito....garyb wrote:what if i make a mistake?
i'm not going to kill someone cold-blooded and after the fact. if i kill someone, that will be absolutely horrible. do you really think that i'm in love with killing people? if i'm in that truly life threatening situation, all bets are off. there's no retribution involved. if there's a mistake, i never caused it. leave the rhetoric for someone else.....
Gary is perfect everyone. He can't make a mistake.
What about the other people? The wife beaters, alcoholics and insane people? How do you prevent them from buying guns? They might be sober or sane at the time they buy the weapon and go off later. There is no way to read minds.
The Europeans are much wiser in this regard and about many other issues. I feel sad to be a member of such a backward thinking nation as The USA plus they are so stubborn. If I didn't have to take care of some family members I would strongly consider moving.
What about the other people? The wife beaters, alcoholics and insane people? How do you prevent them from buying guns? They might be sober or sane at the time they buy the weapon and go off later. There is no way to read minds.
The Europeans are much wiser in this regard and about many other issues. I feel sad to be a member of such a backward thinking nation as The USA plus they are so stubborn. If I didn't have to take care of some family members I would strongly consider moving.
-
hubird
it's all about trusting the authorities in having the monopoly of violence.
If you don't trust the authorities you (have to) believe in selfdefence.
If you don't trust the authorities there are two possibilities.
Either you are right because the authorities are bad, or you don't wanne believe in any authority.
In case of the latter you're back in stone age.
It's all about statistics:
if you have a society with good functioning authorities and justice with a gouvenmental monopoly on violence, you have the best chance to survive, statistically that is.
Proof: just check the crime rates of the US compared to European countries.
By your own words, your believe in selfdefence and the right to it is caused by a lack of trust in your own societal organisation and gouvernment (possibly combined with stubborn remains of southern Wild West romantic? (no offense)).
One could argue, if a gouvernment that promotes or activily supports gun possession and selfdefense to a high degree, your lack of trust is even right...
But what makes you a little suspect (
) are your theories about and believes of totalitair elite world domination and the principal impossibility to change that .
In the end (and unintended) it makes you also a non-democrat by yourself.
You'll act according your believes.
What's left for the neighbour is the question if you're good or bad.
Because that's the only relevant thing left.
(on a side note: the chinees elite is trying to buy huge American properties by stock aquiring etc., heavily feared by the US elite, so the theorie at least should include the possibility of more than one elite, with opposit interests; this undermines the theory in it's heart).
So, if you'd be right about the elite theory, and you thus have to rely on own gun protection, the safety of your neighbours will depend on your personal goodness.
They are lucky, as you're a good guy, but you could also be a bad guy.
The same is true in case of the mirrowed situation.
Hm, what am I trying to say?
If you think the elite theory (which excludes societal controll of violence) is true as a matter of nature, you will always (have to) deny the possibility of real democracy and societal safeness (sorry for bad and simple terms and so, it's hard to discuss this for me).
This attitude is cinical by premisse, as humanity is declared to be incapable by nature and forever.
Yet there's enough evidence we can do better, the statistics proove that.
Wouldn't it be easier and more human to say, I don't like my gouvernment and the way the trias politica is orginized in my country?
At least it'd demonstrate a positive believe in future and humanity.
It leaves room for improvement, in general (f.e. vote for citizen unarming).
The elite theory (fact if you like) is dead end street, it's deterministic, non-dynamic and therefor a-historical.
Can't be good, can't be true
If you don't trust the authorities you (have to) believe in selfdefence.
If you don't trust the authorities there are two possibilities.
Either you are right because the authorities are bad, or you don't wanne believe in any authority.
In case of the latter you're back in stone age.
It's all about statistics:
if you have a society with good functioning authorities and justice with a gouvenmental monopoly on violence, you have the best chance to survive, statistically that is.
Proof: just check the crime rates of the US compared to European countries.
By your own words, your believe in selfdefence and the right to it is caused by a lack of trust in your own societal organisation and gouvernment (possibly combined with stubborn remains of southern Wild West romantic? (no offense)).
One could argue, if a gouvernment that promotes or activily supports gun possession and selfdefense to a high degree, your lack of trust is even right...
But what makes you a little suspect (
) are your theories about and believes of totalitair elite world domination and the principal impossibility to change that .In the end (and unintended) it makes you also a non-democrat by yourself.
You'll act according your believes.
What's left for the neighbour is the question if you're good or bad.
Because that's the only relevant thing left.
(on a side note: the chinees elite is trying to buy huge American properties by stock aquiring etc., heavily feared by the US elite, so the theorie at least should include the possibility of more than one elite, with opposit interests; this undermines the theory in it's heart).
So, if you'd be right about the elite theory, and you thus have to rely on own gun protection, the safety of your neighbours will depend on your personal goodness.
They are lucky, as you're a good guy, but you could also be a bad guy.
The same is true in case of the mirrowed situation.
Hm, what am I trying to say?
If you think the elite theory (which excludes societal controll of violence) is true as a matter of nature, you will always (have to) deny the possibility of real democracy and societal safeness (sorry for bad and simple terms and so, it's hard to discuss this for me).
This attitude is cinical by premisse, as humanity is declared to be incapable by nature and forever.
Yet there's enough evidence we can do better, the statistics proove that.
Wouldn't it be easier and more human to say, I don't like my gouvernment and the way the trias politica is orginized in my country?
At least it'd demonstrate a positive believe in future and humanity.
It leaves room for improvement, in general (f.e. vote for citizen unarming).
The elite theory (fact if you like) is dead end street, it's deterministic, non-dynamic and therefor a-historical.
Can't be good, can't be true
no, that would be stupid.
power is always corrupting and the corrupt always gravitate to power. governments that ban weapons always kill their subjects. this is a factual statistic. it's also wrong to say i have "theories". i've only spoken of verifiable facts.
it's also stupid to rely on the government for protection. keeping the toilets running and making sure that the effluent doesn't cause problems? the government is good at that, picking up the garbage, administering roads and the like....anyone who has ever called "911" for help in an emergency can tell you, the best the government can do is clean up the mess later. if you're banning guns because people are too deadly to be trusted with them, that is the most cynical move. you'll be needing to ban knives, baseball bats, hockey sticks, golf clubs, stun guns, pens, pencils and every other club sized or sharp object. just put people in padded rooms...
hubird, as to the chinese thing, the elite are in NO WAY threatened by China. as David Rockefellor brags in his autobiography, his family has financed the Chinese revolution and funded the government(read the book before you doubt me, you with the lazy mind!). also, the Li family itself is among the top elite families on the globe, others include Astor, Bundy, Collins, Dupont, Freeman, Kennedy, Onassis, Reynolds, Rockefeller, Rothschild,Russell, Van Duyn and Merovingian (European Royalty). CHINA IS ONE OF THE COUNTRIES THAT THE ELITE ARE MOVING TO(along with Dubai and Emerites). RUPERT MURDOCH himself married an avowed chinese communist and moved to China recently. these people don't need to meet your version of logic. they have their own agenda. they only marry each other, keep power across generations and are real, whether you like it or not. these peopel control the flow and supply of money and resources. is there no hope? NO. not in centralization. LOCAL, COMMUNITY control is where hope is.
Alfonso, you're going to mock me? fine. i live with POOR people motherf....you'd piss your pants here, but before you say that this is why we need control, i'll remind you that the poverty and ignorance here is purely artificial and a result of control. these people are the sacraficial lambs for those who consider themselves "well to do". if you had no hope for the future or your children's future you'd grow up twisted and bitter yourself, just like in those ghettos some of the nicer european cities have created to maintain a servant class even while bragging about demonacracy(we've seen a few riots from those places in the last 30 years, huh?). even with that, i have no problems with my neighbors, and i garun-f*k*g-tee you, every single person on my street is armed. the only people that go out of their way to make trouble for others are the extremely hungry(and they usually just beg), the institutionally criminal(the 1 in 10,000 of bad people who is broken and gone crazy) and most of all, the police(crips and bloods are sweethearts compared to those who are supposed to protect us from bad teenagers). and you know what i've noticed about europe? whenever the people who live there disagree with the government and get together in mass to protest, the government dresses men in black uniforms of death with covered faces and beats the snot out of and even shoots that population exercising it's right to protest corruption or injustice, so it looks like the same old sh*t there to me.
Americans distrust their government for good reason. the writers of it's own constitution warned that corruption always follows power and that it's the citizens DUTY to oversee their government and give the civil servants who run it a reason to fear and give pause if they betray the public trust. this is called patriotism in my country. we are red blooded. we are not inferior to blue bloods. blue bloods need to watch their p's and q's. we know that they have hypnotized the masses of the world into thinking that their knowledge and ruthlessness makes them superior. we know that they are truly psychopaths and deviants, not superiors.
hitler banned guns.
stalin banned guns.
mao banned guns.
pol pot banned guns.
idi amin banned guns.
all gun banning governments murder their population either through direct or indirect action. those that don't ban guns, often give them to the ignorant to kill each other(congo and ruwanda). it is the sickness of total power over others, to enjoy the death and destruction of peoples. only power and governments ever are able to murder at this level. governments can't be trusted with the death penalty, nor can they be trusted with guns, nor can they be trusted to administer disarmament. this is common sense. are any of you people denying that your government is totally and thouroughly corrupt? is this really a theory?
you disagree with me? fine. no need to try and paint me as a coward or a wicked person or a wild nut. F-U! any of you who wish to come live with me for a month or two and see how i live are welcome to. then you can begin to say what kind of man i am, whether i am kind or a monster, or even crazy. as i said, i have done my research and i have documentation.......
funny, that i agree that the government shouldn't run executions and i'm treated as an idiot. what do you want? to give these guys the right to use lethal force(or even the thing they call "pain compliance") or not?
power is always corrupting and the corrupt always gravitate to power. governments that ban weapons always kill their subjects. this is a factual statistic. it's also wrong to say i have "theories". i've only spoken of verifiable facts.
it's also stupid to rely on the government for protection. keeping the toilets running and making sure that the effluent doesn't cause problems? the government is good at that, picking up the garbage, administering roads and the like....anyone who has ever called "911" for help in an emergency can tell you, the best the government can do is clean up the mess later. if you're banning guns because people are too deadly to be trusted with them, that is the most cynical move. you'll be needing to ban knives, baseball bats, hockey sticks, golf clubs, stun guns, pens, pencils and every other club sized or sharp object. just put people in padded rooms...
hubird, as to the chinese thing, the elite are in NO WAY threatened by China. as David Rockefellor brags in his autobiography, his family has financed the Chinese revolution and funded the government(read the book before you doubt me, you with the lazy mind!). also, the Li family itself is among the top elite families on the globe, others include Astor, Bundy, Collins, Dupont, Freeman, Kennedy, Onassis, Reynolds, Rockefeller, Rothschild,Russell, Van Duyn and Merovingian (European Royalty). CHINA IS ONE OF THE COUNTRIES THAT THE ELITE ARE MOVING TO(along with Dubai and Emerites). RUPERT MURDOCH himself married an avowed chinese communist and moved to China recently. these people don't need to meet your version of logic. they have their own agenda. they only marry each other, keep power across generations and are real, whether you like it or not. these peopel control the flow and supply of money and resources. is there no hope? NO. not in centralization. LOCAL, COMMUNITY control is where hope is.
Alfonso, you're going to mock me? fine. i live with POOR people motherf....you'd piss your pants here, but before you say that this is why we need control, i'll remind you that the poverty and ignorance here is purely artificial and a result of control. these people are the sacraficial lambs for those who consider themselves "well to do". if you had no hope for the future or your children's future you'd grow up twisted and bitter yourself, just like in those ghettos some of the nicer european cities have created to maintain a servant class even while bragging about demonacracy(we've seen a few riots from those places in the last 30 years, huh?). even with that, i have no problems with my neighbors, and i garun-f*k*g-tee you, every single person on my street is armed. the only people that go out of their way to make trouble for others are the extremely hungry(and they usually just beg), the institutionally criminal(the 1 in 10,000 of bad people who is broken and gone crazy) and most of all, the police(crips and bloods are sweethearts compared to those who are supposed to protect us from bad teenagers). and you know what i've noticed about europe? whenever the people who live there disagree with the government and get together in mass to protest, the government dresses men in black uniforms of death with covered faces and beats the snot out of and even shoots that population exercising it's right to protest corruption or injustice, so it looks like the same old sh*t there to me.
Americans distrust their government for good reason. the writers of it's own constitution warned that corruption always follows power and that it's the citizens DUTY to oversee their government and give the civil servants who run it a reason to fear and give pause if they betray the public trust. this is called patriotism in my country. we are red blooded. we are not inferior to blue bloods. blue bloods need to watch their p's and q's. we know that they have hypnotized the masses of the world into thinking that their knowledge and ruthlessness makes them superior. we know that they are truly psychopaths and deviants, not superiors.
hitler banned guns.
stalin banned guns.
mao banned guns.
pol pot banned guns.
idi amin banned guns.
all gun banning governments murder their population either through direct or indirect action. those that don't ban guns, often give them to the ignorant to kill each other(congo and ruwanda). it is the sickness of total power over others, to enjoy the death and destruction of peoples. only power and governments ever are able to murder at this level. governments can't be trusted with the death penalty, nor can they be trusted with guns, nor can they be trusted to administer disarmament. this is common sense. are any of you people denying that your government is totally and thouroughly corrupt? is this really a theory?
you disagree with me? fine. no need to try and paint me as a coward or a wicked person or a wild nut. F-U! any of you who wish to come live with me for a month or two and see how i live are welcome to. then you can begin to say what kind of man i am, whether i am kind or a monster, or even crazy. as i said, i have done my research and i have documentation.......
funny, that i agree that the government shouldn't run executions and i'm treated as an idiot. what do you want? to give these guys the right to use lethal force(or even the thing they call "pain compliance") or not?
