Flashermac Posted June 27, 2008 Author Report Share Posted June 27, 2008 "Temp Thai GF" ... you called Rent-a-Babe? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Old Hippie Posted June 27, 2008 Report Share Posted June 27, 2008 P.S. might I suggest working for homeland security, they need folks like you to maintain the climate of fear...all those 'ifs' come in handy... Furthermore, if drug dealers operate out of a neighbours address, might I also suggest moving to a better area.. Lame (OH SHIT, I sound like Roggie! ) What about people who can't afford to move out of high crime areas? And yes, people have the right to defend/protect themselves! And to non Americans who often say America sticks it's nose into everyone else's business, let me say, Keep your nose out of our business on this one, only fair. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Julian2 Posted June 27, 2008 Report Share Posted June 27, 2008 Aw gee, OH... there would go half the fun on the board. Don't be so thin skinned, we'll let you pick on Australia anytime you want, Flash does it all the time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Old Hippie Posted June 27, 2008 Report Share Posted June 27, 2008 Let me pose a question to you. [color:red]"If four Thai men surrounded you' date=' drew out their machetes and demanded everything you have, what would you do? [/b'][/color] This happened to me. I know what I did, please answer my question, what would you do? Give it to them. It's why I leave my valuables in the safe just in case. Criminals know you will give in, which is why they pull this shit, if they thought there was a chance you'd fight back, or shoot them, they might not pull that shit. Society is NOT civilized, I have no idea why people think it is. * Bangkoktraveler Said: "...If a druggy tells somebody an address where drugs are, the druggy writing down the address maybe too stupid to write down the right address and might show up at your address. If you don't have a gun after they break your door down, you might be shit out of luck. How often does that happen? It's just as likely that you'll shoot a policeman at the wrong house..." Actually, this scenario does happen. More often, people are robbed in their homes or victimized on the streets, my argument is simple, as long as scum bags can rob me, beat me etc, I have a right to protect myself...true, I am big, and can fight, but what about someone who is old small, or can't defend themselves with their fists? don't they have a right to defend themselves? As some of you know, I live in a sort of shitty/transitional neighborhood in the San Francisco East Bay. Guns shots are frequently heard, and police helicopters searching the park down the road are very common. This area has one of the highest crime rates in the nation. A few months back I was going to the post office, in the shit part of the city called "the iron Triangle." So I'm on my way back, and some fucked up guy runs a stop sign at a high rate of speed, almost hits me, then turns around, speeds after me, and pulls up to me yelling and screaming all sorts of racial slurs and making threats. The one point he makes is "...you white mother fucker, you lucky I ain't got my gun, or you'd be DEAD!!!...maybe I got my shit..." and starts like he is looking for it, I had a .357mag in my hand which I held up and said "...I have one here if we need it..." he went white as a ghost, and took off. Now, what if this fuck with, who looked stoned or fucked up, had a gun? what am I supposed to do? die? just give up? fuck that, I'll die defending myself, but not cowering out of fear. Of course the real fear is getting caught by the cops should I have to defend myself. Criminals don't play by the law, why should I? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Old Hippie Posted June 27, 2008 Report Share Posted June 27, 2008 Mr Hoy- 2. Why rightists aren't screaming about federal rulings trampling the choices made by the people in local jurisdictions. The issue centered around the law deciding, NOT the people. As in the governing body of D.C. decided people couldn't own guns...had the people voted on this and decided they didn't want the right of gun ownership, that might have been different...can we vote to give away our constitutional rights? interesting question and debate... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Old Hippie Posted June 27, 2008 Report Share Posted June 27, 2008 For the question I posed' date=' generally most people, when confronted when 4 Thai men with machetes, would surrender their belongings. I didn't. I threw 1/2 cup of boiling hot coffee in one man's face and then threw the rest in another man's face. (The cup had a cover on it). Then I turned and ran as fast as I could. Either on my second or forth step, I fractured 3 metatarsal bones in my left foot. As I went down, I put my right arm out and seperated my right shoulder. As I was going down, I could feel the blade of the second man coming toward me. As I went down, his blade went over my body. By the way, his blade was brownish red.Before they tried robbing me, they robbed another farang. He gave them his money but I guess they thought he was holding back so they cut him on both sides of his neck. Then they brought a machete blade down on to the top of his head and left him on the sidewalk for dead. [b']Moral of the story:[/b] You were not there. How a person protects themselves is there choice. Governments should not outlaw the right to protect yourself. I'd have kicked their asses...4 HA! Takes more than that to stop me! Ok, I'd have surrendered my stuff. So what? Machetes aren't guns and you can defend yourself without them. Goal-posts being moved I'd suggest, by your good self. My point still stands, having guns allows people to kill people. Allowing them means more people will be shot. In your scenario, if you'd have had a gun, then you could have shot four people brandishing machetes....hardly a fair fight!! Hardly a fair outcome. Furthermore, you were unlucky, but you're not going to convince me your 'bad luck' equals a right to bear arms. 'What ifs' are a ridiculous way to go about business. Handing over your property is no guarantee they won't kill you anyway. What is wrong if four machete wielding bandits getting shot while committing a crime? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Old Hippie Posted June 27, 2008 Report Share Posted June 27, 2008 Rogueyam' date=' your thoughts?[/quote'] This is an excellent ruling and I am delighted. There was a rumor over the last few days that Justice Scalia was writing the majority opinion for this case so I was hoping for great things. So far I am not disappointed, to say the very least. Also, this is clearly NOT judicial activism. The text of the Second Amendment was ratified into the Constitution (back in 1791, I believe) for some specific purpose. Our Constitution does not contain window dressing. It creates the law of the land. It is the job of the US Supreme Court to understand the intent of the original ratifiers of Constitutional language and to determine whether current laws conform to that intent. This is what they must do and they should do no more. Judicial activism is when the Court concludes that the ratifiers of a section of the Constitution intended for that section to mean one thing but that now the very same words mean something else and that it is the exclusive purview of the Court to determine what that new meaning is. This is what the USSC did earlier this week regarding the Eighth Amendment and the Louisiana death penalty law. In the LA death penalty case the majority implicitly admitted that the Louisiana death penalty law would have been constitutional at the time the Eighth Amendment was ratified but that it is unconstitutional now even though the text of the Eighth Amendment has not changed. In today's case the majority ruled that the DC gun ban is unconstitutional now and would have been unconstitutional at any time since the ratification of the Second Amendment. This difference between the two cases is quite clear and easy to understand but I expect the leftists here to at least pretend not to be able to grasp this because that is what leftists do. Sort of funny how people will demand their constitutional freedoms for free speech (as long as it agrees with them) free thought (as long as it agrees with them) and freedom of religion (as long as it is their's) etc...yet when it comes to guns, the non gun owners want to shit all over over the constitution... Some bitch was on KGO tonight, she was on and on about guns are evil etc, we need to change the constitution etc...some caller asked her "...well, I disagree with you, I think we need to change the constitution to take away your free speech rights...now how do you feel about dumping the constitution...?" People died for these rights and freedoms, fuck if I am going to give them up so some shit wit can feel "safer" while I feel in more danger... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Old Hippie Posted June 27, 2008 Report Share Posted June 27, 2008 The issue here is the meaning of the Eighth Amendment' date=' not all of this nonsense. [/quote'] Substitute Second Who taught you guys how to speak out of both sides of your mouth? U.S. Constitution: Eight Amendment Eighth Amendment - Further Guarantees in Criminal Cases Amendment Text | Annotations Excessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted. Annotations * Excessive Bail * Excessive Fines * Cruel and Unusual Punishments * Style of Interpretation * ''Cruel and Unusual Punishments'' * Capital Punishment * Proportionality * Prisons and Punishment * Limitation of Clause to Criminal Punishment Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Barry Posted June 27, 2008 Report Share Posted June 27, 2008 For the question I posed, generally most people, when confronted when 4 Thai men with machetes, would surrender their belongings. Just out of interest, where did this happen? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Faustian Posted June 27, 2008 Report Share Posted June 27, 2008 Ok OH, far be it from me to voice an opinion on matters that don't concern me...I will instead resort to neo-con baiting and leave decisions on how you wish to exterminate each other to your good selves. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.