Conquer Club

http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/l ... er23m.html

That guy is a Hero. 3 guys broke into his car, he killed 1 of them. He is a Hero. Instead he is going to be on trial. The only bad thing is that he didn't manage to kill the other 2 also. I wish that it was common knowledge, and in the news every day, about how some guy/girl killed some criminal.... That if you are thinking of stealing, you'll get killed, raping a lady, you'll be killed, beating up some defenseless kid, killed.

I like how, in order to be a hero in America, you have to kill someone.

Neoteny wrote:I like how, in order to be a hero in America, you have to kill someone.

oh no, there are lots of other hero's who haven't killed anybody.

Missing the legs you say you were aiming for and hitting the head instead is quite an achievement, even at the gianormous distance of 21m.

Shot in the head over a fucking subwoofer, excessive use of force much?

Of course this guy goes on trial. he killled someone. The justice system is there to determine whether that killing is a justified or an illegal act.
If a cop kills someone, there's an investigation every time. because we don't want people getting away with murder (or even manslaughter).
Just because someone is called to account for their actions doesn't mean they are going to be punished.

Who needs a justice system anyhow?

MeDeFe wrote:Missing the legs you say you were aiming for and hitting the head instead is quite an achievement, even at the gianormous distance of 21m.

Actually, that's not that impossible. Very probable in fact if the guy was a bad shot. (Why on earth he carries a gun around if he's a bad shot is a different question though.) Though ofcourse in 90% of the cases he would've hit the ground or something.

Shot in the head over a fucking subwoofer, excessive use of force much?

Yup.

Seriously though, why is this guy a hero? Heroes are people who achieve something, who do something for the benefit of many selflesly and determined.

Killing someone over stealing some of your shit does not qualify one as a hero. In fact, it's an insult to the real heroes out there who risk their life and limb to help people.

Shooting an unarmed man in the back of the head, he is very fortunate to be not facing a murder charge I would say. One man dead and one man who will likely face a prison sentence and his future in tatters, it beggars belief that anybody finds this a heroic scenario

don't wanna get shot? don't steal the guys subwoofer. Now there is 1 less criminal in the world. Thats a good thing.

There's also one life taken unnecessarily. That's a bad thing.

Ridiculous right-wing testosteron injections aside, I can't say I think the guy is guilty. He did what he could afterwards and I doubt he was aiming for the head.

Neoteny wrote:There's also one life taken unnecessarily. That's a bad thing.

It's only because of the actions of the first, that the second acted. If the first guy hadn't violated the other guys property, this never would have happened. Don't blame the 2nd guy, blame the robber. The second he broke into the guys car, he lost all rights. It was his active CHOICE to do what he did. The other guy just defended himself from the criminal.

That's not really how the real world works...

Neoteny wrote:There's also one life taken unnecessarily. That's a bad thing.

Not as far as carbon footprints are concerned.

Snorri1234 wrote:Ridiculous right-wing testosteron injections aside, I can't say I think the guy is guilty. He did what he could afterwards and I doubt he was aiming for the head.

I wouldn't charge him for murder. He obviously shouldn't have been firing a gun, so there's going to be charges for that, and rightly so in my opinion. I don't know what he was thinking was going to happen when he started shooting...

By the way, it was definitely a rifle, and not a pistol. Way more accurate...

Neoteny wrote:By the way, it was definitely a rifle, and not a pistol. Way more accurate...

That is true. Still, a headshot from 70 feet is quite impressive if intentional.

On a moving target, no less.

if he was smart he was aiming for the body and missed....

Now there's an American Hero

So, if someone runs a red light, and makes me swerve to avoid him, can I shoot him? He did break the law first, and it was to my detriment. It was a choice he made. Let him suffer the consequences.

Timminz wrote:So, if someone runs a red light, and makes me swerve to avoid him, can I shoot him? He did break the law first, and it was to my detriment. It was a choice he made. Let him suffer the consequences.

Well, obviously. It falls to ordinary civilians to exact punishment for every civic violation. It would be a bit more sporting to pull him out of the car and beat the crap out of him in the street, but if you can't manage that, shoot the bastard. If you can't shoot him, radio in an airstrike. Deviants must be dealt with.

I love it when threads have trolling titles. It really sets the bar high for an honest discourse.

bedub1 wrote:

Neoteny wrote:There's also one life taken unnecessarily. That's a bad thing.

It's only because of the actions of the first, that the second acted. If the first guy hadn't violated the other guys property, this never would have happened. Don't blame the 2nd guy, blame the robber. The second he broke into the guys car, he lost all rights. It was his active CHOICE to do what he did. The other guy just defended himself from the criminal.

No, the other guy ALSO made an active choice. The choice to go get his weapon and then RE-ENGAGE the criminals.He didn't "just defend himself" because his life was not in danger until he acted on HIS choice.

What does bedub1 the last defender of the law have to say about this?