In your opinion, does a woman who is being raped have the right to use deadly force on her rapist?

[sealybobo]

Good point. If its OK to kill someone trying to rape you why can't society kill them after the fact?

So, you want capital punishment for B&E?

Let's say someone breaks into your house in the middle of the night. Are you going to be comfortably sure that all they want is a few dollars in cash and your flat screen? Or do you think, "Hey! This is someone with obviously no regard for the law. He may just rape my daughter or shoot my son."
I believe once he's in your home, it's apparent that he is dangerous and prudent to end the threat.

If someone breaks into another person's home, they deserve whatever lead salad they are served. But you're missing my point. Sealy is arguing that if lethal force is appropriate for self defense, then capital punishment is an appropriate criminal punishment.

I know the right thing to do is shoot to kill but I honestly think I'd aim for their balls.

 

[sealybobo]

Good point. If its OK to kill someone trying to rape you why can't society kill them after the fact?

So, you want capital punishment for B&E?

I didn't say that someone else did

No, you said it.

I said rape not bne.

 

[SwimExpert]

Good point. If its OK to kill someone trying to rape you why can't society kill them after the fact?

So, you want capital punishment for B&E?

I didn't say that someone else did

No, you said it.

I said rape not bne.

You if it's okay to kill someone in self defense for an action, then it should be okay for society to kill that person as legal punishment. If someone breaks into my house, I have the right to use lethal force in self defense.

 

[sealybobo]

Good point. If its OK to kill someone trying to rape you why can't society kill them after the fact?

So, you want capital punishment for B&E?

I didn't say that someone else did

No, you said it.

I said rape not bne.

You if it's okay to kill someone in self defense for an action, then it should be okay for society to kill that person as legal punishment. If someone breaks into my house, I have the right to use lethal force in self defense.

I meant rape. If they just rob you and the cops catch them no death penalty. If they raped you harvest their organs.

My dad today said he'd rather die than have Jeffrey Dahmer heart. Not me. I'll take the heart.

 

[saintmichaeldefendthem]

You're going to stand before a holy God someday yourself. I think that will be a dreadful day for you.

There is no god. And you'll have to explain why you werent in church this morning.

Your disbelief in a holy God will not save you from eternal hell fire.

Anything that would burn someone for eternity is sick and evil. Has no compassion and talk about not forgiving. Not even after half eternity? You're just dumb. I laugh at you.

You think me taking Jeff Dahmer's liver is evil and your god burns people forever? Your god is the definition of evil. **** your god. **** him!

Nonetheless you will face him in judgment. We all will.

Not if he doesn't exist and he doesn't.

Your disbelief does not make God go away, or the judgment you'll face someday. The reason that death terrifies so many people is because they have a good idea what's on the other side.

 

[SwimExpert]

Your disbelief does not make God go away, or the judgment you'll face someday. The reason that death terrifies so many people is because they have a good idea what's on the other side.

Actually, that's just an evolutionary instinct that compels organisms to continually pursue survival. Organisms that fear death are more likely to avoid danger, and are more likely to put forth a more zealous effort to avoid death when faced with the imminent possibility. This makes those individuals more likely to survive long enough to reproduce and to reproduce more often, allowing the trait to be propagated through future generations. It is an example of a trait so substantially beneficial to organisms' survival that those who inherently lacked the trait became extinct long ago, possibly long before substantial differentiation in biodiversity, making fear of death a universal trait of a great many species.

 

[elektra]

If the penalty for rape is a couple years in jail, or simple probation, than no.

If the courts and government have decided Justice is a few years in jail, the rape does not warrant murder.

So, a person has no right to defend themselves against sexual assault?

You are changing the subject, this thread is not about the right to defend oneself, but if Deadly Force is justified in self-defense. Your post is # 105 in this thread, you have not figured out what is being discussed, deadly force?

I'm not changing the subject at all. You're trying to obfuscate the subject.

If someone tries to sexually assault me, I'm going to defend myself. I'm going to stop them any way I can. I'm not going to sit there and endure rape while using my smartphone to google search the legal penalty for a rape conviction and then calculate the appropriate amount of force that equals the legal penalty.

What you don't seem to understand is that the right to self defense is an inherent right that is not predicated upon the law criminalizing the act against which I am defending. Even if rape were entirely legal, the right to defend one's self against rape would still remain perfectly intact.

Actually, my point went right overhead, the punishment is disproportionate to the crime.

If you do not support the death penalty, you can not support the use of deadly force to prevent rape.

I state my post, as written, so idiots who do not believe in the death penalty are forced to think about the contradiction.

You state something else which was a bit off, I let that go.

If you must defend yourself with deadly force, then the punishment for the criminal is death, if they happen to live and get convicted.

Sorry I did not make it clear, but I was making a point and challenging those who oppose the death penalty.

Idiots who do not believe in the death penalty? Are you even remotely objective on the topic or do you just want to kill people and hate having people get in the way of that?

Actually, my point went right overhead, the punishment is disproportionate to the crime.

If you do not support the death penalty, you can not support the use of deadly force to prevent rape.

I state my post, as written, so idiots who do not believe in the death penalty are forced to think about the contradiction.

You state something else which was a bit off, I let that go.

If you must defend yourself with deadly force, then the punishment for the criminal is death, if they happen to live and get convicted.

Sorry I did not make it clear, but I was making a point and challenging those who oppose the death penalty

 

[sealybobo]

There is no god. And you'll have to explain why you werent in church this morning.

Your disbelief in a holy God will not save you from eternal hell fire.

Anything that would burn someone for eternity is sick and evil. Has no compassion and talk about not forgiving. Not even after half eternity? You're just dumb. I laugh at you.

You think me taking Jeff Dahmer's liver is evil and your god burns people forever? Your god is the definition of evil. **** your god. **** him!

Nonetheless you will face him in judgment. We all will.

Not if he doesn't exist and he doesn't.

Your disbelief does not make God go away, or the judgment you'll face someday. The reason that death terrifies so many people is because they have a good idea what's on the other side.

I can explain that. That's guilt doubt and superstition. Many people die without a shred of guilt or fear. We appreciate the time we had. I don't fear being dead I fear dying. What it will do to my love ones. You wish to believe. No more than that. And fear of hell is for doubters who are smart enough to doubt but not smart enough to figure out its a racket.

My Muslim friend says the same thing. What should I do? Believe that fool or you? You're both morons.

 

[sealybobo]

There is no god. And you'll have to explain why you werent in church this morning.

Your disbelief in a holy God will not save you from eternal hell fire.

Anything that would burn someone for eternity is sick and evil. Has no compassion and talk about not forgiving. Not even after half eternity? You're just dumb. I laugh at you.

You think me taking Jeff Dahmer's liver is evil and your god burns people forever? Your god is the definition of evil. **** your god. **** him!

Nonetheless you will face him in judgment. We all will.

Not if he doesn't exist and he doesn't.

Your disbelief does not make God go away, or the judgment you'll face someday. The reason that death terrifies so many people is because they have a good idea what's on the other side.

If there is a creator he never visited or talked to moses or anyone else. We made god up long before that but Abraham monopolized and organized and lied about the visits because humans hate not knowing. Its the fear of death and the unknown. You want to think you'll see your loveones again and all become gods yourself when you live forever. And what happens to non believers who don't believe like you? They burn forever. U r dumb sick and evil. Sos ur god. I'm appauled. I had much more to say but I'm mortified right now. I'll explain more in a bit. You don't realize so much I don't know where to begin.

 

[saintmichaeldefendthem]

So, a person has no right to defend themselves against sexual assault?

You are changing the subject, this thread is not about the right to defend oneself, but if Deadly Force is justified in self-defense. Your post is # 105 in this thread, you have not figured out what is being discussed, deadly force?

I'm not changing the subject at all. You're trying to obfuscate the subject.

If someone tries to sexually assault me, I'm going to defend myself. I'm going to stop them any way I can. I'm not going to sit there and endure rape while using my smartphone to google search the legal penalty for a rape conviction and then calculate the appropriate amount of force that equals the legal penalty.

What you don't seem to understand is that the right to self defense is an inherent right that is not predicated upon the law criminalizing the act against which I am defending. Even if rape were entirely legal, the right to defend one's self against rape would still remain perfectly intact.

Actually, my point went right overhead, the punishment is disproportionate to the crime.

If you do not support the death penalty, you can not support the use of deadly force to prevent rape.

I state my post, as written, so idiots who do not believe in the death penalty are forced to think about the contradiction.

You state something else which was a bit off, I let that go.

If you must defend yourself with deadly force, then the punishment for the criminal is death, if they happen to live and get convicted.

Sorry I did not make it clear, but I was making a point and challenging those who oppose the death penalty.

Idiots who do not believe in the death penalty? Are you even remotely objective on the topic or do you just want to kill people and hate having people get in the way of that?

Actually, my point went right overhead, the punishment is disproportionate to the crime.

If you do not support the death penalty, you can not support the use of deadly force to prevent rape.

I state my post, as written, so idiots who do not believe in the death penalty are forced to think about the contradiction.

You state something else which was a bit off, I let that go.

If you must defend yourself with deadly force, then the punishment for the criminal is death, if they happen to live and get convicted.

Sorry I did not make it clear, but I was making a point and challenging those who oppose the death penalty

Actually I can oppose the death penalty but not deadly force to prevent a rape. If you can't understand the difference between a crime in progress and justice applied when the criminal has already been caught and neutralized as a threat, then your basic intelligence is in serious question.

 

[elektra]

You are changing the subject, this thread is not about the right to defend oneself, but if Deadly Force is justified in self-defense. Your post is # 105 in this thread, you have not figured out what is being discussed, deadly force?

I'm not changing the subject at all. You're trying to obfuscate the subject.

If someone tries to sexually assault me, I'm going to defend myself. I'm going to stop them any way I can. I'm not going to sit there and endure rape while using my smartphone to google search the legal penalty for a rape conviction and then calculate the appropriate amount of force that equals the legal penalty.

What you don't seem to understand is that the right to self defense is an inherent right that is not predicated upon the law criminalizing the act against which I am defending. Even if rape were entirely legal, the right to defend one's self against rape would still remain perfectly intact.

Actually, my point went right overhead, the punishment is disproportionate to the crime.

If you do not support the death penalty, you can not support the use of deadly force to prevent rape.

I state my post, as written, so idiots who do not believe in the death penalty are forced to think about the contradiction.

You state something else which was a bit off, I let that go.

If you must defend yourself with deadly force, then the punishment for the criminal is death, if they happen to live and get convicted.

Sorry I did not make it clear, but I was making a point and challenging those who oppose the death penalty.

Idiots who do not believe in the death penalty? Are you even remotely objective on the topic or do you just want to kill people and hate having people get in the way of that?

Actually, my point went right overhead, the punishment is disproportionate to the crime.

If you do not support the death penalty, you can not support the use of deadly force to prevent rape.

I state my post, as written, so idiots who do not believe in the death penalty are forced to think about the contradiction.

You state something else which was a bit off, I let that go.

If you must defend yourself with deadly force, then the punishment for the criminal is death, if they happen to live and get convicted.

Sorry I did not make it clear, but I was making a point and challenging those who oppose the death penalty

Actually I can oppose the death penalty but not deadly force to prevent a rape. If you can't understand the difference between a crime in progress and justice applied when the criminal has already been caught and neutralized as a threat, then your basic intelligence is in serious question.

It is your intelligence that contradicts itself. There is no justice when anyone is raped. It is nothing less than a brutal crime. But hey, you think justice is served after 5 years, and then you are okay to let the pervert out to commit the crime again.

justice, even if we kill the rapist, there is no justice.

 

[ChrisL]

I'm not changing the subject at all. You're trying to obfuscate the subject.

If someone tries to sexually assault me, I'm going to defend myself. I'm going to stop them any way I can. I'm not going to sit there and endure rape while using my smartphone to google search the legal penalty for a rape conviction and then calculate the appropriate amount of force that equals the legal penalty.

What you don't seem to understand is that the right to self defense is an inherent right that is not predicated upon the law criminalizing the act against which I am defending. Even if rape were entirely legal, the right to defend one's self against rape would still remain perfectly intact.

Actually, my point went right overhead, the punishment is disproportionate to the crime.

If you do not support the death penalty, you can not support the use of deadly force to prevent rape.

I state my post, as written, so idiots who do not believe in the death penalty are forced to think about the contradiction.

You state something else which was a bit off, I let that go.

If you must defend yourself with deadly force, then the punishment for the criminal is death, if they happen to live and get convicted.

Sorry I did not make it clear, but I was making a point and challenging those who oppose the death penalty.

Idiots who do not believe in the death penalty? Are you even remotely objective on the topic or do you just want to kill people and hate having people get in the way of that?

Actually, my point went right overhead, the punishment is disproportionate to the crime.

If you do not support the death penalty, you can not support the use of deadly force to prevent rape.

I state my post, as written, so idiots who do not believe in the death penalty are forced to think about the contradiction.

You state something else which was a bit off, I let that go.

If you must defend yourself with deadly force, then the punishment for the criminal is death, if they happen to live and get convicted.

Sorry I did not make it clear, but I was making a point and challenging those who oppose the death penalty

Actually I can oppose the death penalty but not deadly force to prevent a rape. If you can't understand the difference between a crime in progress and justice applied when the criminal has already been caught and neutralized as a threat, then your basic intelligence is in serious question.

It is your intelligence that contradicts itself. There is no justice when anyone is raped. It is nothing less than a brutal crime. But hey, you think justice is served after 5 years, and then you are okay to let the pervert out to commit the crime again.

justice, even if we kill the rapist, there is no justice.

If you give a person the DP for rape, what do you think he will do to his victims? Let them live and testify against him? Think about it.

 

[ChrisL]

Now, I am all for a woman protecting herself against rapist, up to and including the use of deadly force. However, I am against the state applied death penalty. I could use the argument that it is just as much a motivation for murder as it is any kind of deterrent.

 

[Ernie S.]

Good point. If its OK to kill someone trying to rape you why can't society kill them after the fact?

So, you want capital punishment for B&E?

Let's say someone breaks into your house in the middle of the night. Are you going to be comfortably sure that all they want is a few dollars in cash and your flat screen? Or do you think, "Hey! This is someone with obviously no regard for the law. He may just rape my daughter or shoot my son."
I believe once he's in your home, it's apparent that he is dangerous and prudent to end the threat.

If someone breaks into another person's home, they deserve whatever lead salad they are served. But you're missing my point. Sealy is arguing that if lethal force is appropriate for self defense, then capital punishment is an appropriate criminal punishment.

It is.
My point is capital punishment is appropriate because one could reasonably assume that someone who enters your home uninvited could assault you.
All that is required is reasonable fear.

 

[Ernie S.]

Now, I am all for a woman protecting herself against rapist, up to and including the use of deadly force. However, I am against the state applied death penalty. I could use the argument that it is just as much a motivation for murder as it is any kind of deterrent.

It may or may not be a deterrent, Chris, but it sure as hell cuts down on repeat offenders.

 

[Ernie S.]

Good point. If its OK to kill someone trying to rape you why can't society kill them after the fact?

So, you want capital punishment for B&E?

Let's say someone breaks into your house in the middle of the night. Are you going to be comfortably sure that all they want is a few dollars in cash and your flat screen? Or do you think, "Hey! This is someone with obviously no regard for the law. He may just rape my daughter or shoot my son."
I believe once he's in your home, it's apparent that he is dangerous and prudent to end the threat.

If someone breaks into another person's home, they deserve whatever lead salad they are served. But you're missing my point. Sealy is arguing that if lethal force is appropriate for self defense, then capital punishment is an appropriate criminal punishment.

I know the right thing to do is shoot to kill but I honestly think I'd aim for their balls.

Might be my first target, but not my last.

 

[Ernie S.]

So, a person has no right to defend themselves against sexual assault?

You are changing the subject, this thread is not about the right to defend oneself, but if Deadly Force is justified in self-defense. Your post is # 105 in this thread, you have not figured out what is being discussed, deadly force?

I'm not changing the subject at all. You're trying to obfuscate the subject.

If someone tries to sexually assault me, I'm going to defend myself. I'm going to stop them any way I can. I'm not going to sit there and endure rape while using my smartphone to google search the legal penalty for a rape conviction and then calculate the appropriate amount of force that equals the legal penalty.

What you don't seem to understand is that the right to self defense is an inherent right that is not predicated upon the law criminalizing the act against which I am defending. Even if rape were entirely legal, the right to defend one's self against rape would still remain perfectly intact.

Actually, my point went right overhead, the punishment is disproportionate to the crime.

If you do not support the death penalty, you can not support the use of deadly force to prevent rape.

I state my post, as written, so idiots who do not believe in the death penalty are forced to think about the contradiction.

You state something else which was a bit off, I let that go.

If you must defend yourself with deadly force, then the punishment for the criminal is death, if they happen to live and get convicted.

Sorry I did not make it clear, but I was making a point and challenging those who oppose the death penalty.

Idiots who do not believe in the death penalty? Are you even remotely objective on the topic or do you just want to kill people and hate having people get in the way of that?

Actually, my point went right overhead, the punishment is disproportionate to the crime.

If you do not support the death penalty, you can not support the use of deadly force to prevent rape.

I state my post, as written, so idiots who do not believe in the death penalty are forced to think about the contradiction.

You state something else which was a bit off, I let that go.

If you must defend yourself with deadly force, then the punishment for the criminal is death, if they happen to live and get convicted.

Sorry I did not make it clear, but I was making a point and challenging those who oppose the death penalty

Your darkened bedroom is not a court of law. While I see your point as a supporter of the death penalty, at a rape trial the victim no longer has reasonable fear for their life. The legal penalty is irrelevant to a self defense scenario.

 

[ChrisL]

Now, I am all for a woman protecting herself against rapist, up to and including the use of deadly force. However, I am against the state applied death penalty. I could use the argument that it is just as much a motivation for murder as it is any kind of deterrent.

It may or may not be a deterrent, Chris, but it sure as hell cuts down on repeat offenders.

And on rapes that end in death instead of just rape. If you think for a moment that a rapist would NOT kill his victim because he feels he might get the DP, then you are going to have a LOT of dead women.

 

[ChrisL]

Now, I am all for a woman protecting herself against rapist, up to and including the use of deadly force. However, I am against the state applied death penalty. I could use the argument that it is just as much a motivation for murder as it is any kind of deterrent.

It may or may not be a deterrent, Chris, but it sure as hell cuts down on repeat offenders.

Are all the dead women and girls worth the state-applied death penalty? NO!

 

[elektra]

You are changing the subject, this thread is not about the right to defend oneself, but if Deadly Force is justified in self-defense. Your post is # 105 in this thread, you have not figured out what is being discussed, deadly force?

I'm not changing the subject at all. You're trying to obfuscate the subject.

If someone tries to sexually assault me, I'm going to defend myself. I'm going to stop them any way I can. I'm not going to sit there and endure rape while using my smartphone to google search the legal penalty for a rape conviction and then calculate the appropriate amount of force that equals the legal penalty.

What you don't seem to understand is that the right to self defense is an inherent right that is not predicated upon the law criminalizing the act against which I am defending. Even if rape were entirely legal, the right to defend one's self against rape would still remain perfectly intact.

Actually, my point went right overhead, the punishment is disproportionate to the crime.

If you do not support the death penalty, you can not support the use of deadly force to prevent rape.

I state my post, as written, so idiots who do not believe in the death penalty are forced to think about the contradiction.

You state something else which was a bit off, I let that go.

If you must defend yourself with deadly force, then the punishment for the criminal is death, if they happen to live and get convicted.

Sorry I did not make it clear, but I was making a point and challenging those who oppose the death penalty.

Idiots who do not believe in the death penalty? Are you even remotely objective on the topic or do you just want to kill people and hate having people get in the way of that?

Actually, my point went right overhead, the punishment is disproportionate to the crime.

If you do not support the death penalty, you can not support the use of deadly force to prevent rape.

I state my post, as written, so idiots who do not believe in the death penalty are forced to think about the contradiction.

You state something else which was a bit off, I let that go.

If you must defend yourself with deadly force, then the punishment for the criminal is death, if they happen to live and get convicted.

Sorry I did not make it clear, but I was making a point and challenging those who oppose the death penalty

Your darkened bedroom is not a court of law. While I see your point as a supporter of the death penalty, at a rape trial the victim no longer has reasonable fear for their life. The legal penalty is irrelevant to a self defense scenario.

My darkened bedroom? Wow, nice bit of trolling there, what is the purpose of stating such a thing? I bet you simply can not wrap your head around your opinion when faced with reality.

Reality being, you think its fine to let a rapist/murderer out of jail, after they have served what in your opinion is the appropriate penalty.

If its okay to kill a person in self defense the best defense is a death penalty to begin with, kind of like the thorn on a rose, which protects the bud.