Is the use of Deadly Force to protect property the solution to riots?

[iceberg]

I watched the Laura show tonight. She was discussing the continuing riots and attacks on businesses in Minneapolis this weekend that no other MSM outlet covered. Interviewing business owners, they told their story how they ran to their business only to helplessly watch it be looted, destroyed, and in some cases, burnt to the ground.

Some had businesses handed down for generations. Others were foreigners who came here to realize the American dream. Their city and state leaders allowed their dreams to go up in smoke.

Lowlifes who do these things have no fear, because there is no real deterrent to stopping them. We've seen these so-called leaders tell their police to stand down; to not enforce laws; to not protect these businesses; to allow them "room" to vent.

IMO, a real deterrent works every time it's tried. What if we had a federal law that allowed property owners to use deadly force to protect their property with no ability for city or local governments to prosecute?

A group of thugs start busting into a business. The business owner and family or other employees open fire killing dozens or hundreds of lowlifes. Other businesses do the same. Who in their right mind (after witnessing this) would think of trying to break into, or destroying another business down the street weary if they are armed and willing to kill to protect their investment?

True, hundreds of funerals, but also hundreds of businesses saved, millions of dollars not lost, and thousands of jobs saved in just one city. We need a national law of using deadly force to protect our property.

Time to change the constitution---it is a right to shoot and kill rioters/looters/thugs attacking people. I can support that-------Texas used to have this as their castle doctrine.

Still do.
Remember Joe Horn!!!!!!

Joe Horn is my hero. I listened to that 911 call I don't know how many times. It was hilarious.

I'd love to have him for a neighbor!!

I think a lot of people would have loved to do what he did. Unfortunately, it's not legal. Even if it was, there would be some people who wouldn't have the guts to kill a person.

When I have people that I teach who express reservations about killing someone, or admit that they are unsure if they could, I tell them to go hunting. Book a deer or hog hunt and go kill something; see what it feels like. If you can't get past that, you probably shouldn't bother carrying a pistol.
As far as carrying knives, I tell them they can book a hog hunt with dogs where the dogs will run the hog down, hold it, and then you kill it with a knife.
If either of these things is too much for you, you should really re-consider carrying lethal defense tools.
But honestly, most people can handle it, they just aren't comfortable with how easy it really is.

Never understood how someone couldnt shoot another human when that human was going to kill you.
To be honest I'd feel worse shooting the deer....

Because humans are hard-wired to be uncomfortable with hurting other humans. Soldiers and police officers have to be trained specifically to bypass that reflexive reaction.

I'm not sure I believe that. I think it may be a cultural taboo rather than hard-wired into us, because frankly, it has never bothered me a bit.
And all our ancestors seemed pretty damn comfortable with stabbing each other in the face, and beating each brains in, and then chopping the heads off and taking them home as trophies.

So I'm pretty fucking sure none of us are hard-wired against this sort of thing, because if we were, none of that shit would have happened. But it did, everywhere in the world, all throughout history.

Yeah, but that was then and this is now. We humans (particularly Americans) have become more civilized with every generation. What people did to others 100 years ago, few would dream of doing now.

Look at the US today. According to the left, the most vile thing one can do to another is offend them. If a guy puts on a dress and high heels, we refer to him as a her. Today, you can get more time in jail for beating your dog than beating your wife. In many parts of the country, you can't smoke inside public places, and even outside in other places. You don't want to offend any non-smoker. If two guys or two gals want to get married, people don't beat them up, the marriage is conducted and sanctioned by the government.

That is just dumb. It isn’t about offending. You have every right to poison yourself, but you don’t have the right to poison others.

Second hand smoke has proven to be bullshit as far as a health concern.

No. It hasn’t. A lot of people with king issues can’t tolerate it, You have no right to force it on others.

kinda like opinions on peoples life choices, huh?

 

[Coyote]

I watched the Laura show tonight. She was discussing the continuing riots and attacks on businesses in Minneapolis this weekend that no other MSM outlet covered. Interviewing business owners, they told their story how they ran to their business only to helplessly watch it be looted, destroyed, and in some cases, burnt to the ground.

Some had businesses handed down for generations. Others were foreigners who came here to realize the American dream. Their city and state leaders allowed their dreams to go up in smoke.

Lowlifes who do these things have no fear, because there is no real deterrent to stopping them. We've seen these so-called leaders tell their police to stand down; to not enforce laws; to not protect these businesses; to allow them "room" to vent.

IMO, a real deterrent works every time it's tried. What if we had a federal law that allowed property owners to use deadly force to protect their property with no ability for city or local governments to prosecute?

A group of thugs start busting into a business. The business owner and family or other employees open fire killing dozens or hundreds of lowlifes. Other businesses do the same. Who in their right mind (after witnessing this) would think of trying to break into, or destroying another business down the street weary if they are armed and willing to kill to protect their investment?

True, hundreds of funerals, but also hundreds of businesses saved, millions of dollars not lost, and thousands of jobs saved in just one city. We need a national law of using deadly force to protect our property.

Time to change the constitution---it is a right to shoot and kill rioters/looters/thugs attacking people. I can support that-------Texas used to have this as their castle doctrine.

Still do.
Remember Joe Horn!!!!!!

Joe Horn is my hero. I listened to that 911 call I don't know how many times. It was hilarious.

I'd love to have him for a neighbor!!

I think a lot of people would have loved to do what he did. Unfortunately, it's not legal. Even if it was, there would be some people who wouldn't have the guts to kill a person.

When I have people that I teach who express reservations about killing someone, or admit that they are unsure if they could, I tell them to go hunting. Book a deer or hog hunt and go kill something; see what it feels like. If you can't get past that, you probably shouldn't bother carrying a pistol.
As far as carrying knives, I tell them they can book a hog hunt with dogs where the dogs will run the hog down, hold it, and then you kill it with a knife.
If either of these things is too much for you, you should really re-consider carrying lethal defense tools.
But honestly, most people can handle it, they just aren't comfortable with how easy it really is.

Never understood how someone couldnt shoot another human when that human was going to kill you.
To be honest I'd feel worse shooting the deer....

Because humans are hard-wired to be uncomfortable with hurting other humans. Soldiers and police officers have to be trained specifically to bypass that reflexive reaction.

I'm not sure I believe that. I think it may be a cultural taboo rather than hard-wired into us, because frankly, it has never bothered me a bit.
And all our ancestors seemed pretty damn comfortable with stabbing each other in the face, and beating each brains in, and then chopping the heads off and taking them home as trophies.

So I'm pretty fucking sure none of us are hard-wired against this sort of thing, because if we were, none of that shit would have happened. But it did, everywhere in the world, all throughout history.

Yeah, but that was then and this is now. We humans (particularly Americans) have become more civilized with every generation. What people did to others 100 years ago, few would dream of doing now.

Look at the US today. According to the left, the most vile thing one can do to another is offend them. If a guy puts on a dress and high heels, we refer to him as a her. Today, you can get more time in jail for beating your dog than beating your wife. In many parts of the country, you can't smoke inside public places, and even outside in other places. You don't want to offend any non-smoker. If two guys or two gals want to get married, people don't beat them up, the marriage is conducted and sanctioned by the government.

That is just dumb. It isn’t about offending. You have every right to poison yourself, but you don’t have the right to poison others.

Second hand smoke has proven to be bullshit as far as a health concern.

No. It hasn’t. A lot of people with king issues can’t tolerate it, You have no right to force it on others.

kinda like opinions on peoples life choices, huh?

Actually...no. At least I don’t think so. OPINIONS on people’s life choices, and I am guessing you mean homosexuality (if I am wrong, you should have been explicit)...don’t affect youR health.

 

[Coyote]

I watched the Laura show tonight. She was discussing the continuing riots and attacks on businesses in Minneapolis this weekend that no other MSM outlet covered. Interviewing business owners, they told their story how they ran to their business only to helplessly watch it be looted, destroyed, and in some cases, burnt to the ground.

Some had businesses handed down for generations. Others were foreigners who came here to realize the American dream. Their city and state leaders allowed their dreams to go up in smoke.

Lowlifes who do these things have no fear, because there is no real deterrent to stopping them. We've seen these so-called leaders tell their police to stand down; to not enforce laws; to not protect these businesses; to allow them "room" to vent.

IMO, a real deterrent works every time it's tried. What if we had a federal law that allowed property owners to use deadly force to protect their property with no ability for city or local governments to prosecute?

A group of thugs start busting into a business. The business owner and family or other employees open fire killing dozens or hundreds of lowlifes. Other businesses do the same. Who in their right mind (after witnessing this) would think of trying to break into, or destroying another business down the street weary if they are armed and willing to kill to protect their investment?

True, hundreds of funerals, but also hundreds of businesses saved, millions of dollars not lost, and thousands of jobs saved in just one city. We need a national law of using deadly force to protect our property.

Time to change the constitution---it is a right to shoot and kill rioters/looters/thugs attacking people. I can support that-------Texas used to have this as their castle doctrine.

Still do.
Remember Joe Horn!!!!!!

Joe Horn is my hero. I listened to that 911 call I don't know how many times. It was hilarious.

I'd love to have him for a neighbor!!

I think a lot of people would have loved to do what he did. Unfortunately, it's not legal. Even if it was, there would be some people who wouldn't have the guts to kill a person.

When I have people that I teach who express reservations about killing someone, or admit that they are unsure if they could, I tell them to go hunting. Book a deer or hog hunt and go kill something; see what it feels like. If you can't get past that, you probably shouldn't bother carrying a pistol.
As far as carrying knives, I tell them they can book a hog hunt with dogs where the dogs will run the hog down, hold it, and then you kill it with a knife.
If either of these things is too much for you, you should really re-consider carrying lethal defense tools.
But honestly, most people can handle it, they just aren't comfortable with how easy it really is.

Never understood how someone couldnt shoot another human when that human was going to kill you.
To be honest I'd feel worse shooting the deer....

Because humans are hard-wired to be uncomfortable with hurting other humans. Soldiers and police officers have to be trained specifically to bypass that reflexive reaction.

I'm not sure I believe that. I think it may be a cultural taboo rather than hard-wired into us, because frankly, it has never bothered me a bit.
And all our ancestors seemed pretty damn comfortable with stabbing each other in the face, and beating each brains in, and then chopping the heads off and taking them home as trophies.

So I'm pretty fucking sure none of us are hard-wired against this sort of thing, because if we were, none of that shit would have happened. But it did, everywhere in the world, all throughout history.

Yeah, but that was then and this is now. We humans (particularly Americans) have become more civilized with every generation. What people did to others 100 years ago, few would dream of doing now.

Look at the US today. According to the left, the most vile thing one can do to another is offend them. If a guy puts on a dress and high heels, we refer to him as a her. Today, you can get more time in jail for beating your dog than beating your wife. In many parts of the country, you can't smoke inside public places, and even outside in other places. You don't want to offend any non-smoker. If two guys or two gals want to get married, people don't beat them up, the marriage is conducted and sanctioned by the government.

That is just dumb. It isn’t about offending. You have every right to poison yourself, but you don’t have the right to poison others.

If second hand smoke were poisoning others, people who inhaled cigaret smoke directly would be dead before the cigarette was finished. I don't mind if people take a position on something, just as long as they are honest about it. I get it. Some people can't stand the smell of smoke. But their push to stop it is because they're uncomfortable with it, not health concerns.

My sister used to be the same way. She'd start coughing if you started to pull a cigarette out and didn't even light it yet. We grew up in a smoking household as my mother was a smoker since she became an adult. She probably smoked while she carried all of us in pregnancy.

That isnt they it works. The affect is cumulative. If a person has asthma or COPD, the amount they can tolerate is very low. I think it is incredibly selfish to force people to breath it in public spaces. It’s no different than urinating in public spaces.

 

[iceberg]

I watched the Laura show tonight. She was discussing the continuing riots and attacks on businesses in Minneapolis this weekend that no other MSM outlet covered. Interviewing business owners, they told their story how they ran to their business only to helplessly watch it be looted, destroyed, and in some cases, burnt to the ground.

Some had businesses handed down for generations. Others were foreigners who came here to realize the American dream. Their city and state leaders allowed their dreams to go up in smoke.

Lowlifes who do these things have no fear, because there is no real deterrent to stopping them. We've seen these so-called leaders tell their police to stand down; to not enforce laws; to not protect these businesses; to allow them "room" to vent.

IMO, a real deterrent works every time it's tried. What if we had a federal law that allowed property owners to use deadly force to protect their property with no ability for city or local governments to prosecute?

A group of thugs start busting into a business. The business owner and family or other employees open fire killing dozens or hundreds of lowlifes. Other businesses do the same. Who in their right mind (after witnessing this) would think of trying to break into, or destroying another business down the street weary if they are armed and willing to kill to protect their investment?

True, hundreds of funerals, but also hundreds of businesses saved, millions of dollars not lost, and thousands of jobs saved in just one city. We need a national law of using deadly force to protect our property.

Time to change the constitution---it is a right to shoot and kill rioters/looters/thugs attacking people. I can support that-------Texas used to have this as their castle doctrine.

Still do.
Remember Joe Horn!!!!!!

Joe Horn is my hero. I listened to that 911 call I don't know how many times. It was hilarious.

I'd love to have him for a neighbor!!

I think a lot of people would have loved to do what he did. Unfortunately, it's not legal. Even if it was, there would be some people who wouldn't have the guts to kill a person.

When I have people that I teach who express reservations about killing someone, or admit that they are unsure if they could, I tell them to go hunting. Book a deer or hog hunt and go kill something; see what it feels like. If you can't get past that, you probably shouldn't bother carrying a pistol.
As far as carrying knives, I tell them they can book a hog hunt with dogs where the dogs will run the hog down, hold it, and then you kill it with a knife.
If either of these things is too much for you, you should really re-consider carrying lethal defense tools.
But honestly, most people can handle it, they just aren't comfortable with how easy it really is.

Never understood how someone couldnt shoot another human when that human was going to kill you.
To be honest I'd feel worse shooting the deer....

Because humans are hard-wired to be uncomfortable with hurting other humans. Soldiers and police officers have to be trained specifically to bypass that reflexive reaction.

I'm not sure I believe that. I think it may be a cultural taboo rather than hard-wired into us, because frankly, it has never bothered me a bit.
And all our ancestors seemed pretty damn comfortable with stabbing each other in the face, and beating each brains in, and then chopping the heads off and taking them home as trophies.

So I'm pretty fucking sure none of us are hard-wired against this sort of thing, because if we were, none of that shit would have happened. But it did, everywhere in the world, all throughout history.

Yeah, but that was then and this is now. We humans (particularly Americans) have become more civilized with every generation. What people did to others 100 years ago, few would dream of doing now.

Look at the US today. According to the left, the most vile thing one can do to another is offend them. If a guy puts on a dress and high heels, we refer to him as a her. Today, you can get more time in jail for beating your dog than beating your wife. In many parts of the country, you can't smoke inside public places, and even outside in other places. You don't want to offend any non-smoker. If two guys or two gals want to get married, people don't beat them up, the marriage is conducted and sanctioned by the government.

That is just dumb. It isn’t about offending. You have every right to poison yourself, but you don’t have the right to poison others.

Second hand smoke has proven to be bullshit as far as a health concern.

No. It hasn’t. A lot of people with king issues can’t tolerate it, You have no right to force it on others.

kinda like opinions on peoples life choices, huh?

Actually...no. At least I don’t think so. OPINIONS on people’s life choices, and I am guessing you mean homosexuality (if I am wrong, you should have been explicit)...don’t affect youR health.

I mean in general. most fights seem to start when you start trying to force other peoples behavior.

 

[Bootney Lee Farnsworth]

Is the use of Deadly Force to protect property the solution to riots?

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

I watched the Laura show tonight. She was discussing the continuing riots and attacks on businesses in Minneapolis this weekend that no other MSM outlet covered. Interviewing business owners, they told their story how they ran to their business only to helplessly watch it be looted, destroyed, and in some cases, burnt to the ground.

Some had businesses handed down for generations. Others were foreigners who came here to realize the American dream. Their city and state leaders allowed their dreams to go up in smoke.

Lowlifes who do these things have no fear, because there is no real deterrent to stopping them. We've seen these so-called leaders tell their police to stand down; to not enforce laws; to not protect these businesses; to allow them "room" to vent.

IMO, a real deterrent works every time it's tried. What if we had a federal law that allowed property owners to use deadly force to protect their property with no ability for city or local governments to prosecute?

A group of thugs start busting into a business. The business owner and family or other employees open fire killing dozens or hundreds of lowlifes. Other businesses do the same. Who in their right mind (after witnessing this) would think of trying to break into, or destroying another business down the street weary if they are armed and willing to kill to protect their investment?

True, hundreds of funerals, but also hundreds of businesses saved, millions of dollars not lost, and thousands of jobs saved in just one city. We need a national law of using deadly force to protect our property.

Time to change the constitution---it is a right to shoot and kill rioters/looters/thugs attacking people. I can support that-------Texas used to have this as their castle doctrine.

Still do.
Remember Joe Horn!!!!!!

Joe Horn is my hero. I listened to that 911 call I don't know how many times. It was hilarious.

I'd love to have him for a neighbor!!

I think a lot of people would have loved to do what he did. Unfortunately, it's not legal. Even if it was, there would be some people who wouldn't have the guts to kill a person.

When I have people that I teach who express reservations about killing someone, or admit that they are unsure if they could, I tell them to go hunting. Book a deer or hog hunt and go kill something; see what it feels like. If you can't get past that, you probably shouldn't bother carrying a pistol.
As far as carrying knives, I tell them they can book a hog hunt with dogs where the dogs will run the hog down, hold it, and then you kill it with a knife.
If either of these things is too much for you, you should really re-consider carrying lethal defense tools.
But honestly, most people can handle it, they just aren't comfortable with how easy it really is.

Never understood how someone couldnt shoot another human when that human was going to kill you.
To be honest I'd feel worse shooting the deer....

Because humans are hard-wired to be uncomfortable with hurting other humans. Soldiers and police officers have to be trained specifically to bypass that reflexive reaction.

I'm not sure I believe that. I think it may be a cultural taboo rather than hard-wired into us, because frankly, it has never bothered me a bit.
And all our ancestors seemed pretty damn comfortable with stabbing each other in the face, and beating each brains in, and then chopping the heads off and taking them home as trophies.

So I'm pretty fucking sure none of us are hard-wired against this sort of thing, because if we were, none of that shit would have happened. But it did, everywhere in the world, all throughout history.

Yeah, but that was then and this is now. We humans (particularly Americans) have become more civilized with every generation. What people did to others 100 years ago, few would dream of doing now.

Look at the US today. According to the left, the most vile thing one can do to another is offend them. If a guy puts on a dress and high heels, we refer to him as a her. Today, you can get more time in jail for beating your dog than beating your wife. In many parts of the country, you can't smoke inside public places, and even outside in other places. You don't want to offend any non-smoker. If two guys or two gals want to get married, people don't beat them up, the marriage is conducted and sanctioned by the government.

That is just dumb. It isn’t about offending. You have every right to poison yourself, but you don’t have the right to poison others.

If second hand smoke were poisoning others, people who inhaled cigaret smoke directly would be dead before the cigarette was finished. I don't mind if people take a position on something, just as long as they are honest about it. I get it. Some people can't stand the smell of smoke. But their push to stop it is because they're uncomfortable with it, not health concerns.

My sister used to be the same way. She'd start coughing if you started to pull a cigarette out and didn't even light it yet. We grew up in a smoking household as my mother was a smoker since she became an adult. She probably smoked while she carried all of us in pregnancy.

That isnt they it works. The affect is cumulative. If a person has asthma or COPD, the amount they can tolerate is very low. I think it is incredibly selfish to force people to breath it in public spaces. It’s no different than urinating in public spaces.

Perhaps, but I quote a comedian who once said "Santa Monic beaches are now no smoking. I hate to inform them, but beaches are located outside."

Yes, there are places that ban smoking even outdoors. When the commies got their way here, businesses would allow their smoking employees to have a cigarette outside of the building. After they got their way, then they started to complain that smokers were getting out of work to have cigarettes. Well......you bitched because those employees were smoking and working at the same time. You stopped it. So now you're complaining that they are smoking outside like you wanted, and not working to catch their cigarettes.

In any case, this argument started to show another poster what snowflakes our US society has become.

 

[Coyote]

I watched the Laura show tonight. She was discussing the continuing riots and attacks on businesses in Minneapolis this weekend that no other MSM outlet covered. Interviewing business owners, they told their story how they ran to their business only to helplessly watch it be looted, destroyed, and in some cases, burnt to the ground.

Some had businesses handed down for generations. Others were foreigners who came here to realize the American dream. Their city and state leaders allowed their dreams to go up in smoke.

Lowlifes who do these things have no fear, because there is no real deterrent to stopping them. We've seen these so-called leaders tell their police to stand down; to not enforce laws; to not protect these businesses; to allow them "room" to vent.

IMO, a real deterrent works every time it's tried. What if we had a federal law that allowed property owners to use deadly force to protect their property with no ability for city or local governments to prosecute?

A group of thugs start busting into a business. The business owner and family or other employees open fire killing dozens or hundreds of lowlifes. Other businesses do the same. Who in their right mind (after witnessing this) would think of trying to break into, or destroying another business down the street weary if they are armed and willing to kill to protect their investment?

True, hundreds of funerals, but also hundreds of businesses saved, millions of dollars not lost, and thousands of jobs saved in just one city. We need a national law of using deadly force to protect our property.

Time to change the constitution---it is a right to shoot and kill rioters/looters/thugs attacking people. I can support that-------Texas used to have this as their castle doctrine.

Still do.
Remember Joe Horn!!!!!!

Joe Horn is my hero. I listened to that 911 call I don't know how many times. It was hilarious.

I'd love to have him for a neighbor!!

I think a lot of people would have loved to do what he did. Unfortunately, it's not legal. Even if it was, there would be some people who wouldn't have the guts to kill a person.

When I have people that I teach who express reservations about killing someone, or admit that they are unsure if they could, I tell them to go hunting. Book a deer or hog hunt and go kill something; see what it feels like. If you can't get past that, you probably shouldn't bother carrying a pistol.
As far as carrying knives, I tell them they can book a hog hunt with dogs where the dogs will run the hog down, hold it, and then you kill it with a knife.
If either of these things is too much for you, you should really re-consider carrying lethal defense tools.
But honestly, most people can handle it, they just aren't comfortable with how easy it really is.

Never understood how someone couldnt shoot another human when that human was going to kill you.
To be honest I'd feel worse shooting the deer....

Because humans are hard-wired to be uncomfortable with hurting other humans. Soldiers and police officers have to be trained specifically to bypass that reflexive reaction.

I'm not sure I believe that. I think it may be a cultural taboo rather than hard-wired into us, because frankly, it has never bothered me a bit.
And all our ancestors seemed pretty damn comfortable with stabbing each other in the face, and beating each brains in, and then chopping the heads off and taking them home as trophies.

So I'm pretty fucking sure none of us are hard-wired against this sort of thing, because if we were, none of that shit would have happened. But it did, everywhere in the world, all throughout history.

Yeah, but that was then and this is now. We humans (particularly Americans) have become more civilized with every generation. What people did to others 100 years ago, few would dream of doing now.

Look at the US today. According to the left, the most vile thing one can do to another is offend them. If a guy puts on a dress and high heels, we refer to him as a her. Today, you can get more time in jail for beating your dog than beating your wife. In many parts of the country, you can't smoke inside public places, and even outside in other places. You don't want to offend any non-smoker. If two guys or two gals want to get married, people don't beat them up, the marriage is conducted and sanctioned by the government.

That is just dumb. It isn’t about offending. You have every right to poison yourself, but you don’t have the right to poison others.

If second hand smoke were poisoning others, people who inhaled cigaret smoke directly would be dead before the cigarette was finished. I don't mind if people take a position on something, just as long as they are honest about it. I get it. Some people can't stand the smell of smoke. But their push to stop it is because they're uncomfortable with it, not health concerns.

My sister used to be the same way. She'd start coughing if you started to pull a cigarette out and didn't even light it yet. We grew up in a smoking household as my mother was a smoker since she became an adult. She probably smoked while she carried all of us in pregnancy.

That isnt they it works. The affect is cumulative. If a person has asthma or COPD, the amount they can tolerate is very low. I think it is incredibly selfish to force people to breath it in public spaces. It’s no different than urinating in public spaces.

Perhaps, but I quote a comedian who once said "Santa Monic beaches are now no smoking. I hate to inform them, but beaches are located outside."

Yes, there are places that ban smoking even outdoors. When the commies got their way here, businesses would allow their smoking employees to have a cigarette outside of the building. After they got their way, then they started to complain that smokers were getting out of work to have cigarettes. Well......you bitched because those employees were smoking and working at the same time. You stopped it. So now you're complaining that they are smoking outside like you wanted, and not working to catch their cigarettes.

In any case, this argument started to show another poster what snowflakes our US society has become.

True....but I just hate walking through a doorway and a cloud of smoke

 

[iceberg]

I watched the Laura show tonight. She was discussing the continuing riots and attacks on businesses in Minneapolis this weekend that no other MSM outlet covered. Interviewing business owners, they told their story how they ran to their business only to helplessly watch it be looted, destroyed, and in some cases, burnt to the ground.

Some had businesses handed down for generations. Others were foreigners who came here to realize the American dream. Their city and state leaders allowed their dreams to go up in smoke.

Lowlifes who do these things have no fear, because there is no real deterrent to stopping them. We've seen these so-called leaders tell their police to stand down; to not enforce laws; to not protect these businesses; to allow them "room" to vent.

IMO, a real deterrent works every time it's tried. What if we had a federal law that allowed property owners to use deadly force to protect their property with no ability for city or local governments to prosecute?

A group of thugs start busting into a business. The business owner and family or other employees open fire killing dozens or hundreds of lowlifes. Other businesses do the same. Who in their right mind (after witnessing this) would think of trying to break into, or destroying another business down the street weary if they are armed and willing to kill to protect their investment?

True, hundreds of funerals, but also hundreds of businesses saved, millions of dollars not lost, and thousands of jobs saved in just one city. We need a national law of using deadly force to protect our property.

Time to change the constitution---it is a right to shoot and kill rioters/looters/thugs attacking people. I can support that-------Texas used to have this as their castle doctrine.

Still do.
Remember Joe Horn!!!!!!

Joe Horn is my hero. I listened to that 911 call I don't know how many times. It was hilarious.

I'd love to have him for a neighbor!!

I think a lot of people would have loved to do what he did. Unfortunately, it's not legal. Even if it was, there would be some people who wouldn't have the guts to kill a person.

When I have people that I teach who express reservations about killing someone, or admit that they are unsure if they could, I tell them to go hunting. Book a deer or hog hunt and go kill something; see what it feels like. If you can't get past that, you probably shouldn't bother carrying a pistol.
As far as carrying knives, I tell them they can book a hog hunt with dogs where the dogs will run the hog down, hold it, and then you kill it with a knife.
If either of these things is too much for you, you should really re-consider carrying lethal defense tools.
But honestly, most people can handle it, they just aren't comfortable with how easy it really is.

Never understood how someone couldnt shoot another human when that human was going to kill you.
To be honest I'd feel worse shooting the deer....

Because humans are hard-wired to be uncomfortable with hurting other humans. Soldiers and police officers have to be trained specifically to bypass that reflexive reaction.

I'm not sure I believe that. I think it may be a cultural taboo rather than hard-wired into us, because frankly, it has never bothered me a bit.
And all our ancestors seemed pretty damn comfortable with stabbing each other in the face, and beating each brains in, and then chopping the heads off and taking them home as trophies.

So I'm pretty fucking sure none of us are hard-wired against this sort of thing, because if we were, none of that shit would have happened. But it did, everywhere in the world, all throughout history.

Yeah, but that was then and this is now. We humans (particularly Americans) have become more civilized with every generation. What people did to others 100 years ago, few would dream of doing now.

Look at the US today. According to the left, the most vile thing one can do to another is offend them. If a guy puts on a dress and high heels, we refer to him as a her. Today, you can get more time in jail for beating your dog than beating your wife. In many parts of the country, you can't smoke inside public places, and even outside in other places. You don't want to offend any non-smoker. If two guys or two gals want to get married, people don't beat them up, the marriage is conducted and sanctioned by the government.

That is just dumb. It isn’t about offending. You have every right to poison yourself, but you don’t have the right to poison others.

If second hand smoke were poisoning others, people who inhaled cigaret smoke directly would be dead before the cigarette was finished. I don't mind if people take a position on something, just as long as they are honest about it. I get it. Some people can't stand the smell of smoke. But their push to stop it is because they're uncomfortable with it, not health concerns.

My sister used to be the same way. She'd start coughing if you started to pull a cigarette out and didn't even light it yet. We grew up in a smoking household as my mother was a smoker since she became an adult. She probably smoked while she carried all of us in pregnancy.

That isnt they it works. The affect is cumulative. If a person has asthma or COPD, the amount they can tolerate is very low. I think it is incredibly selfish to force people to breath it in public spaces. It’s no different than urinating in public spaces.

Perhaps, but I quote a comedian who once said "Santa Monic beaches are now no smoking. I hate to inform them, but beaches are located outside."

Yes, there are places that ban smoking even outdoors. When the commies got their way here, businesses would allow their smoking employees to have a cigarette outside of the building. After they got their way, then they started to complain that smokers were getting out of work to have cigarettes. Well......you bitched because those employees were smoking and working at the same time. You stopped it. So now you're complaining that they are smoking outside like you wanted, and not working to catch their cigarettes.

In any case, this argument started to show another poster what snowflakes our US society has become.

True....but I just hate walking through a doorway and a cloud of smoke

i flat can't do it. i went to go see a friends band that i don't get to see often and it was one of the few smoking bars in the dallas area. by the time the 1st band was over i had to leave and my head was killing me. but it's a smoking bar and next time i know to just not go.

 

[Coyote]

I watched the Laura show tonight. She was discussing the continuing riots and attacks on businesses in Minneapolis this weekend that no other MSM outlet covered. Interviewing business owners, they told their story how they ran to their business only to helplessly watch it be looted, destroyed, and in some cases, burnt to the ground.

Some had businesses handed down for generations. Others were foreigners who came here to realize the American dream. Their city and state leaders allowed their dreams to go up in smoke.

Lowlifes who do these things have no fear, because there is no real deterrent to stopping them. We've seen these so-called leaders tell their police to stand down; to not enforce laws; to not protect these businesses; to allow them "room" to vent.

IMO, a real deterrent works every time it's tried. What if we had a federal law that allowed property owners to use deadly force to protect their property with no ability for city or local governments to prosecute?

A group of thugs start busting into a business. The business owner and family or other employees open fire killing dozens or hundreds of lowlifes. Other businesses do the same. Who in their right mind (after witnessing this) would think of trying to break into, or destroying another business down the street weary if they are armed and willing to kill to protect their investment?

True, hundreds of funerals, but also hundreds of businesses saved, millions of dollars not lost, and thousands of jobs saved in just one city. We need a national law of using deadly force to protect our property.

Time to change the constitution---it is a right to shoot and kill rioters/looters/thugs attacking people. I can support that-------Texas used to have this as their castle doctrine.

Still do.
Remember Joe Horn!!!!!!

Joe Horn is my hero. I listened to that 911 call I don't know how many times. It was hilarious.

I'd love to have him for a neighbor!!

I think a lot of people would have loved to do what he did. Unfortunately, it's not legal. Even if it was, there would be some people who wouldn't have the guts to kill a person.

When I have people that I teach who express reservations about killing someone, or admit that they are unsure if they could, I tell them to go hunting. Book a deer or hog hunt and go kill something; see what it feels like. If you can't get past that, you probably shouldn't bother carrying a pistol.
As far as carrying knives, I tell them they can book a hog hunt with dogs where the dogs will run the hog down, hold it, and then you kill it with a knife.
If either of these things is too much for you, you should really re-consider carrying lethal defense tools.
But honestly, most people can handle it, they just aren't comfortable with how easy it really is.

Never understood how someone couldnt shoot another human when that human was going to kill you.
To be honest I'd feel worse shooting the deer....

Because humans are hard-wired to be uncomfortable with hurting other humans. Soldiers and police officers have to be trained specifically to bypass that reflexive reaction.

I'm not sure I believe that. I think it may be a cultural taboo rather than hard-wired into us, because frankly, it has never bothered me a bit.
And all our ancestors seemed pretty damn comfortable with stabbing each other in the face, and beating each brains in, and then chopping the heads off and taking them home as trophies.

So I'm pretty fucking sure none of us are hard-wired against this sort of thing, because if we were, none of that shit would have happened. But it did, everywhere in the world, all throughout history.

Yeah, but that was then and this is now. We humans (particularly Americans) have become more civilized with every generation. What people did to others 100 years ago, few would dream of doing now.

Look at the US today. According to the left, the most vile thing one can do to another is offend them. If a guy puts on a dress and high heels, we refer to him as a her. Today, you can get more time in jail for beating your dog than beating your wife. In many parts of the country, you can't smoke inside public places, and even outside in other places. You don't want to offend any non-smoker. If two guys or two gals want to get married, people don't beat them up, the marriage is conducted and sanctioned by the government.

That is just dumb. It isn’t about offending. You have every right to poison yourself, but you don’t have the right to poison others.

If second hand smoke were poisoning others, people who inhaled cigaret smoke directly would be dead before the cigarette was finished. I don't mind if people take a position on something, just as long as they are honest about it. I get it. Some people can't stand the smell of smoke. But their push to stop it is because they're uncomfortable with it, not health concerns.

My sister used to be the same way. She'd start coughing if you started to pull a cigarette out and didn't even light it yet. We grew up in a smoking household as my mother was a smoker since she became an adult. She probably smoked while she carried all of us in pregnancy.

That isnt they it works. The affect is cumulative. If a person has asthma or COPD, the amount they can tolerate is very low. I think it is incredibly selfish to force people to breath it in public spaces. It’s no different than urinating in public spaces.

Perhaps, but I quote a comedian who once said "Santa Monic beaches are now no smoking. I hate to inform them, but beaches are located outside."

Yes, there are places that ban smoking even outdoors. When the commies got their way here, businesses would allow their smoking employees to have a cigarette outside of the building. After they got their way, then they started to complain that smokers were getting out of work to have cigarettes. Well......you bitched because those employees were smoking and working at the same time. You stopped it. So now you're complaining that they are smoking outside like you wanted, and not working to catch their cigarettes.

In any case, this argument started to show another poster what snowflakes our US society has become.

True....but I just hate walking through a doorway and a cloud of smoke

i flat can't do it. i went to go see a friends band that i don't get to see often and it was one of the few smoking bars in the dallas area. by the time the 1st band was over i had to leave and my head was killing me. but it's a smoking bar and next time i know to just not go.

I have no problem with designated smoking bars...that gives everyone a choice

 

[BigDave]

Things are getting interesting armed Militias are starting to rise up to give it back to Antifa and BLM

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

I watched the Laura show tonight. She was discussing the continuing riots and attacks on businesses in Minneapolis this weekend that no other MSM outlet covered. Interviewing business owners, they told their story how they ran to their business only to helplessly watch it be looted, destroyed, and in some cases, burnt to the ground.

Some had businesses handed down for generations. Others were foreigners who came here to realize the American dream. Their city and state leaders allowed their dreams to go up in smoke.

Lowlifes who do these things have no fear, because there is no real deterrent to stopping them. We've seen these so-called leaders tell their police to stand down; to not enforce laws; to not protect these businesses; to allow them "room" to vent.

IMO, a real deterrent works every time it's tried. What if we had a federal law that allowed property owners to use deadly force to protect their property with no ability for city or local governments to prosecute?

A group of thugs start busting into a business. The business owner and family or other employees open fire killing dozens or hundreds of lowlifes. Other businesses do the same. Who in their right mind (after witnessing this) would think of trying to break into, or destroying another business down the street weary if they are armed and willing to kill to protect their investment?

True, hundreds of funerals, but also hundreds of businesses saved, millions of dollars not lost, and thousands of jobs saved in just one city. We need a national law of using deadly force to protect our property.

Time to change the constitution---it is a right to shoot and kill rioters/looters/thugs attacking people. I can support that-------Texas used to have this as their castle doctrine.

Still do.
Remember Joe Horn!!!!!!

Joe Horn is my hero. I listened to that 911 call I don't know how many times. It was hilarious.

I'd love to have him for a neighbor!!

I think a lot of people would have loved to do what he did. Unfortunately, it's not legal. Even if it was, there would be some people who wouldn't have the guts to kill a person.

When I have people that I teach who express reservations about killing someone, or admit that they are unsure if they could, I tell them to go hunting. Book a deer or hog hunt and go kill something; see what it feels like. If you can't get past that, you probably shouldn't bother carrying a pistol.
As far as carrying knives, I tell them they can book a hog hunt with dogs where the dogs will run the hog down, hold it, and then you kill it with a knife.
If either of these things is too much for you, you should really re-consider carrying lethal defense tools.
But honestly, most people can handle it, they just aren't comfortable with how easy it really is.

Never understood how someone couldnt shoot another human when that human was going to kill you.
To be honest I'd feel worse shooting the deer....

Because humans are hard-wired to be uncomfortable with hurting other humans. Soldiers and police officers have to be trained specifically to bypass that reflexive reaction.

I'm not sure I believe that. I think it may be a cultural taboo rather than hard-wired into us, because frankly, it has never bothered me a bit.
And all our ancestors seemed pretty damn comfortable with stabbing each other in the face, and beating each brains in, and then chopping the heads off and taking them home as trophies.

So I'm pretty fucking sure none of us are hard-wired against this sort of thing, because if we were, none of that shit would have happened. But it did, everywhere in the world, all throughout history.

Yeah, but that was then and this is now. We humans (particularly Americans) have become more civilized with every generation. What people did to others 100 years ago, few would dream of doing now.

Look at the US today. According to the left, the most vile thing one can do to another is offend them. If a guy puts on a dress and high heels, we refer to him as a her. Today, you can get more time in jail for beating your dog than beating your wife. In many parts of the country, you can't smoke inside public places, and even outside in other places. You don't want to offend any non-smoker. If two guys or two gals want to get married, people don't beat them up, the marriage is conducted and sanctioned by the government.

That is just dumb. It isn’t about offending. You have every right to poison yourself, but you don’t have the right to poison others.

If second hand smoke were poisoning others, people who inhaled cigaret smoke directly would be dead before the cigarette was finished. I don't mind if people take a position on something, just as long as they are honest about it. I get it. Some people can't stand the smell of smoke. But their push to stop it is because they're uncomfortable with it, not health concerns.

My sister used to be the same way. She'd start coughing if you started to pull a cigarette out and didn't even light it yet. We grew up in a smoking household as my mother was a smoker since she became an adult. She probably smoked while she carried all of us in pregnancy.

That isnt they it works. The affect is cumulative. If a person has asthma or COPD, the amount they can tolerate is very low. I think it is incredibly selfish to force people to breath it in public spaces. It’s no different than urinating in public spaces.

Perhaps, but I quote a comedian who once said "Santa Monic beaches are now no smoking. I hate to inform them, but beaches are located outside."

Yes, there are places that ban smoking even outdoors. When the commies got their way here, businesses would allow their smoking employees to have a cigarette outside of the building. After they got their way, then they started to complain that smokers were getting out of work to have cigarettes. Well......you bitched because those employees were smoking and working at the same time. You stopped it. So now you're complaining that they are smoking outside like you wanted, and not working to catch their cigarettes.

In any case, this argument started to show another poster what snowflakes our US society has become.

True....but I just hate walking through a doorway and a cloud of smoke

At least you are getting a little more honest here and I'll give you credit for that. You are not concerned about your health, you simply don't like it.

But the question here is, do we forbid the rest of society from participating in things we don't like? I hate these morons that are gunning their motorcycles waking me up at night. Should I push to have motorcycles banned? Now they have radios on these things, and nobody turns them down at the stoplight where Ilive and they are blaring so loud my windows shake. Should we make sound systems illegal on motorcycles because they disturb my peace? Better yet, a law that restricts music from being able to be louder than the individuals in the vehicle can hear them?

When you create laws because of your lack of tolerance, all you really do is create a more intolerant society. We all hate something another person does in public. However history shows that the most intolerant people in our society are Democrats. They are upset because I have the right to carry a firearm. It's not affecting their life any, it's just they don't like it.

Snowflakes.

 

[Coyote]

At least you are getting a little more honest here and I'll give you credit for that. You are not concerned about your health, you simply don't like it.

Not entirely.

I don’t like it. But I am also very aware that long term exposure such as in a workplace or home WILL affect my health.

But the question here is, do we forbid the rest of society from participating in things we don't like? I hate these morons that are gunning their motorcycles waking me up at night. Should I push to have motorcycles banned? Now they have radios on these things, and nobody turns them down at the stoplight where Ilive and they are blaring so loud my windows shake. Should we make sound systems illegal on motorcycles because they disturb my peace? Better yet, a law that restricts music from being able to be louder than the individuals in the vehicle can hear them?

First...none of those have the known health affect of cigarette smoke. I’m not for banning it on one’s private property and home.

For the rest....yes, sometimes they ARE restricted in local jurisdictions with noise ordinances.

When you create laws because of your lack of tolerance, all you really do is create a more intolerant society. We all hate something another person does in public. However history shows that the most intolerant people in our society are Democrats. They are upset because I have the right to carry a firearm. It's not affecting their life any, it's just they don't like it.

Snowflakes.

As far as the most intoletsnt people....bullshit. Intolerance wears both red and blue. Hell...you all are even intolerant
tof what people do in the privacy of their own home.

Laws that are created, as you put it, due to lack of tolerance are often also created due to a lack of consideration for other people. If you didn’t keep your dog outside on a chain all night barking, then maybe your town would not have imposed a noise ordinance. It works both ways you know.

 

[Thinker101]

I watched the Laura show tonight. She was discussing the continuing riots and attacks on businesses in Minneapolis this weekend that no other MSM outlet covered. Interviewing business owners, they told their story how they ran to their business only to helplessly watch it be looted, destroyed, and in some cases, burnt to the ground.

Some had businesses handed down for generations. Others were foreigners who came here to realize the American dream. Their city and state leaders allowed their dreams to go up in smoke.

Lowlifes who do these things have no fear, because there is no real deterrent to stopping them. We've seen these so-called leaders tell their police to stand down; to not enforce laws; to not protect these businesses; to allow them "room" to vent.

IMO, a real deterrent works every time it's tried. What if we had a federal law that allowed property owners to use deadly force to protect their property with no ability for city or local governments to prosecute?

A group of thugs start busting into a business. The business owner and family or other employees open fire killing dozens or hundreds of lowlifes. Other businesses do the same. Who in their right mind (after witnessing this) would think of trying to break into, or destroying another business down the street weary if they are armed and willing to kill to protect their investment?

True, hundreds of funerals, but also hundreds of businesses saved, millions of dollars not lost, and thousands of jobs saved in just one city. We need a national law of using deadly force to protect our property.

I whole heartedly agree. Unfortunately, like it or not, our gun rights are being taken away. We've seen what they're attempting to do with that St. Louis couple that were defending their property.

 

[iceberg]

I watched the Laura show tonight. She was discussing the continuing riots and attacks on businesses in Minneapolis this weekend that no other MSM outlet covered. Interviewing business owners, they told their story how they ran to their business only to helplessly watch it be looted, destroyed, and in some cases, burnt to the ground.

Some had businesses handed down for generations. Others were foreigners who came here to realize the American dream. Their city and state leaders allowed their dreams to go up in smoke.

Lowlifes who do these things have no fear, because there is no real deterrent to stopping them. We've seen these so-called leaders tell their police to stand down; to not enforce laws; to not protect these businesses; to allow them "room" to vent.

IMO, a real deterrent works every time it's tried. What if we had a federal law that allowed property owners to use deadly force to protect their property with no ability for city or local governments to prosecute?

A group of thugs start busting into a business. The business owner and family or other employees open fire killing dozens or hundreds of lowlifes. Other businesses do the same. Who in their right mind (after witnessing this) would think of trying to break into, or destroying another business down the street weary if they are armed and willing to kill to protect their investment?

True, hundreds of funerals, but also hundreds of businesses saved, millions of dollars not lost, and thousands of jobs saved in just one city. We need a national law of using deadly force to protect our property.

Time to change the constitution---it is a right to shoot and kill rioters/looters/thugs attacking people. I can support that-------Texas used to have this as their castle doctrine.

Still do.
Remember Joe Horn!!!!!!

Joe Horn is my hero. I listened to that 911 call I don't know how many times. It was hilarious.

I'd love to have him for a neighbor!!

I think a lot of people would have loved to do what he did. Unfortunately, it's not legal. Even if it was, there would be some people who wouldn't have the guts to kill a person.

When I have people that I teach who express reservations about killing someone, or admit that they are unsure if they could, I tell them to go hunting. Book a deer or hog hunt and go kill something; see what it feels like. If you can't get past that, you probably shouldn't bother carrying a pistol.
As far as carrying knives, I tell them they can book a hog hunt with dogs where the dogs will run the hog down, hold it, and then you kill it with a knife.
If either of these things is too much for you, you should really re-consider carrying lethal defense tools.
But honestly, most people can handle it, they just aren't comfortable with how easy it really is.

Never understood how someone couldnt shoot another human when that human was going to kill you.
To be honest I'd feel worse shooting the deer....

Because humans are hard-wired to be uncomfortable with hurting other humans. Soldiers and police officers have to be trained specifically to bypass that reflexive reaction.

I'm not sure I believe that. I think it may be a cultural taboo rather than hard-wired into us, because frankly, it has never bothered me a bit.
And all our ancestors seemed pretty damn comfortable with stabbing each other in the face, and beating each brains in, and then chopping the heads off and taking them home as trophies.

So I'm pretty fucking sure none of us are hard-wired against this sort of thing, because if we were, none of that shit would have happened. But it did, everywhere in the world, all throughout history.

Yeah, but that was then and this is now. We humans (particularly Americans) have become more civilized with every generation. What people did to others 100 years ago, few would dream of doing now.

Look at the US today. According to the left, the most vile thing one can do to another is offend them. If a guy puts on a dress and high heels, we refer to him as a her. Today, you can get more time in jail for beating your dog than beating your wife. In many parts of the country, you can't smoke inside public places, and even outside in other places. You don't want to offend any non-smoker. If two guys or two gals want to get married, people don't beat them up, the marriage is conducted and sanctioned by the government.

That is just dumb. It isn’t about offending. You have every right to poison yourself, but you don’t have the right to poison others.

If second hand smoke were poisoning others, people who inhaled cigaret smoke directly would be dead before the cigarette was finished. I don't mind if people take a position on something, just as long as they are honest about it. I get it. Some people can't stand the smell of smoke. But their push to stop it is because they're uncomfortable with it, not health concerns.

My sister used to be the same way. She'd start coughing if you started to pull a cigarette out and didn't even light it yet. We grew up in a smoking household as my mother was a smoker since she became an adult. She probably smoked while she carried all of us in pregnancy.

That isnt they it works. The affect is cumulative. If a person has asthma or COPD, the amount they can tolerate is very low. I think it is incredibly selfish to force people to breath it in public spaces. It’s no different than urinating in public spaces.

Perhaps, but I quote a comedian who once said "Santa Monic beaches are now no smoking. I hate to inform them, but beaches are located outside."

Yes, there are places that ban smoking even outdoors. When the commies got their way here, businesses would allow their smoking employees to have a cigarette outside of the building. After they got their way, then they started to complain that smokers were getting out of work to have cigarettes. Well......you bitched because those employees were smoking and working at the same time. You stopped it. So now you're complaining that they are smoking outside like you wanted, and not working to catch their cigarettes.

In any case, this argument started to show another poster what snowflakes our US society has become.

True....but I just hate walking through a doorway and a cloud of smoke

i flat can't do it. i went to go see a friends band that i don't get to see often and it was one of the few smoking bars in the dallas area. by the time the 1st band was over i had to leave and my head was killing me. but it's a smoking bar and next time i know to just not go.

I have no problem with designated smoking bars...that gives everyone a choice

Yep. Not my thing but so few for smokers how do you get mad?

 

[freyasman]

We don't really need a new law, you know....

What we need to do is quit ducking jury duty and "not guilty" every case where someone got charged for shooting some asshole who really needed shooting.
Doesn't matter what the law says if everyone demands a jury trial and none of the juries are willing to convict. Jury nullification is a tried and true method.

 

[JoeB131]

A group of thugs start busting into a business. The business owner and family or other employees open fire killing dozens or hundreds of lowlifes. Other businesses do the same. Who in their right mind (after witnessing this) would think of trying to break into, or destroying another business down the street weary if they are armed and willing to kill to protect their investment?

Wow, Ray, your wank fantasies are amusing to watch.

Businesses have insurance. Stuff can be replaced. Lives cannot.

 

[JoeB131]

When the commies got their way here, businesses would allow their smoking employees to have a cigarette outside of the building. After they got their way, then they started to complain that smokers were getting out of work to have cigarettes. Well......you bitched because those employees were smoking and working at the same time. You stopped it. So now you're complaining that they are smoking outside like you wanted, and not working to catch their cigarettes.

In any case, this argument started to show another poster what snowflakes our US society has become.

Frankly, have you ever seen the smoking area of a workplace? It's usually four or five malingerers getting together for far too long to bitch about the people who are doing the work.

I could see a good argument for not hiring smokers to start with. They are less productive, they smell bad and they are more likely to have health problems.

 

[freyasman]

A group of thugs start busting into a business. The business owner and family or other employees open fire killing dozens or hundreds of lowlifes. Other businesses do the same. Who in their right mind (after witnessing this) would think of trying to break into, or destroying another business down the street weary if they are armed and willing to kill to protect their investment?

Wow, Ray, your wank fantasies are amusing to watch.

Businesses have insurance. Stuff can be replaced. Lives cannot.

The life of a thief doesn't have much value. Why pretend it's any kind of a loss if they get killed?

 

[beautress]

The solution to fixing the problem is putting the thug rioters in a federal facility, make them see face masks to sell and pay for the businesses they burned down.

That makes them stay off the streets, gives them a job, and sends the message that if you do a crime, you do the time it takes you to pay for the million dollars of losses you inflicted on somebody else's investment and the jobs of their employees. That way you can stop being a parasite and a blight on the face of humanity. Ain't reality sweet when criminals have to make right on the wrongs they caused.

 

[beautress]

When the commies got their way here, businesses would allow their smoking employees to have a cigarette outside of the building. After they got their way, then they started to complain that smokers were getting out of work to have cigarettes. Well......you bitched because those employees were smoking and working at the same time. You stopped it. So now you're complaining that they are smoking outside like you wanted, and not working to catch their cigarettes.

In any case, this argument started to show another poster what snowflakes our US society has become.

Frankly, have you ever seen the smoking area of a workplace? It's usually four or five malingerers getting together for far too long to bitch about the people who are doing the work.

I could see a good argument for not hiring smokers to start with. They are less productive, they smell bad and they are more likely to have health problems.

They have health problems?

What about their second hand smoke giving their kids health problems in later life? *