Shoot Them On Sight?

I suppose that most of the "do gooders" here have never ever stolen anything, not even a candy as a child? :D

Stealing is NOT a death penalty offense.

that's much different than people who ignore a curfew and engage in looting and anarchy in an area of civil unrest
 
Shoot Them On Sight?


Very simply, it depends on what the law is for a given situation.

If police life is threatened, then it should be ok to shoot on sight, but only as a last resort when other methods have failed.
Absolutely agree. I'll also add that if any civilian life is threatened, weapon or no weapon, then officers should have a right to shoot when all else fails. For instance, if a dozen thugs are attacking an innocent bystander, and they won't stop despite officers orders, if there is only one or two officers, and backup may take awhile, officers need to do whatever it takes to stop the attack. In this case, deadly force may be the only option.


Absolutley right! :thup:
 
These are the same USMB members who compare President Obama to Hitler -- they are now in favor of Summery Executions for non-capital offense crimes.

Yeah, we have some real winners around here...

oooh, summery executions!! Will they be held on a beach, perhaps with a bonfire and pina coladas? Or poolside at some lovely, sunny location? If I had to go, I'd want a summery execution...
 
I suppose that most of the "do gooders" here have never ever stolen anything, not even a candy as a child? :D

Stealing is NOT a death penalty offense.

that's much different than people who ignore a curfew and engage in looting and anarchy in an area of civil unrest

Sure, the circumstances are different, but basically both are stealing. I don't know about you, but I don't want this to be a police state where the police use lethal force to force me to obey them. That sounds like China or something to me. Sounds very, very bad. We have other nonlethal means available. In a lot of other countries, they use water cannons which seem to be quite effective at dispersing large crowds.
 
Remember when you said that Mike Brown attack the clerk because the clerk probably owed Mike money for part time work?

That was funny:lol:

But that's not what I said, you racist little prick.

How do you know there weren't passed grievances between the cigar man and Michael Brown? Maybe Brown was owed back wages for part-time work? I don't know. Do you?
:lol:

Whew, you're right...that is a bit of a stretch, isn't it?
 
You librons ask a stupid question... get answers designed to cause you to wet yourself....and you entertain us by wetting yourself...I've had enough. Big day for the market tomorrow...nity nite.
 
You librons ask a stupid question... get answers designed to cause you to wet yourself....and you entertain us by wetting yourself...I've had enough. Big day for the market tomorrow...nity nite.

Why is it a stupid question? It seems like a valid question to me, and obviously some people do feel that it's okay to shoot and kill looters/vandals or those who are disobeying the authorities, or "the man" if you think that makes me sound more like a lib. :lol:
 
I suppose that most of the "do gooders" here have never ever stolen anything, not even a candy as a child? :D

Stealing is NOT a death penalty offense.

that's much different than people who ignore a curfew and engage in looting and anarchy in an area of civil unrest


Totally agree.Apples and oranges.

Okay. Explain to me how it's "apples and oranges." I'll be waiting. Make it coherent too please. :)
 
You librons ask a stupid question... get answers designed to cause you to wet yourself....and you entertain us by wetting yourself...I've had enough. Big day for the market tomorrow...nity nite.

Why is it a stupid question? It seems like a valid question to me, and obviously some people do feel that it's okay to shoot and kill looters/vandals or those who are disobeying the authorities, or "the man" if you think that makes me sound more like a lib. :lol:

so my lovely Chris-what would you do--there are 200 urban utes running wild in the streets smashing windows, taking what they want and firebombing other stores.

I would be sitting behind cover with as much ammo as I could pack stacking them up like cordwood as fast as I could and I sure would want the cops blasting a bunch of the scum as well
 
You librons ask a stupid question... get answers designed to cause you to wet yourself....and you entertain us by wetting yourself...I've had enough. Big day for the market tomorrow...nity nite.

Why is it a stupid question? It seems like a valid question to me, and obviously some people do feel that it's okay to shoot and kill looters/vandals or those who are disobeying the authorities, or "the man" if you think that makes me sound more like a lib. :lol:

so my lovely Chris-what would you do--there are 200 urban utes running wild in the streets smashing windows, taking what they want and firebombing other stores.

I would be sitting behind cover with as much ammo as I could pack stacking them up like cordwood as fast as I could and I sure would want the cops blasting a bunch of the scum as well

If I was in charge of the police department? I would do what the police do now and add some more nonlethal weapons to my arsenal. I mean, come on, we cannot give the authorities the power to shoot and kill citizens! That is . . . outrageous.

If I was a property owner, I would arm myself and my family and friends and protect my property with all the fire power I could muster. I think it is a citizen's right to protect his or her own property, but I never want to see the day when the police can shoot us for looting, and that would be okay. That is just frightening because we ALL know that the government loves to abuse it's power, cheat, lie, and steal as well.
 
Totally agree.Apples and oranges.

Okay. Explain to me how it's "apples and oranges." I'll be waiting. Make it coherent too please. :)


I have already explained,

Sorry you don't understand .... not explaining again. :)

Nope, you didn't explain anything. You just said you agreed and "apples and oranges." That is not an explanation. Try again. :lol:
 
Okay. Explain to me how it's "apples and oranges." I'll be waiting. Make it coherent too please. :)


I have already explained,

Sorry you don't understand .... not explaining again. :)

Nope, you didn't explain anything. You just said you agreed and "apples and oranges." That is not an explanation. Try again. :lol:

I have already told you.

I do not feel like trying again!

Get it? :D
 
I have already explained,

Sorry you don't understand .... not explaining again. :)

Nope, you didn't explain anything. You just said you agreed and "apples and oranges." That is not an explanation. Try again. :lol:

I have already told you.

I do not feel like trying again!

Get it? :D

You told me what? What did you tell me? What post number was that? :D
 

Forum List

Back
Top