Amnesty International: Israeli authorities must stop demolitions of Palestinian homes - Polidicks

[QUOTE=kevn150;22699376]I'd still shoot him regardless. I wish the US had some of the policies of other countries like Singapore in which criminals loose constitutional rights.[/QUOTE] unacceptable

[QUOTE=Chippay;22699230]honestly this is a lot more than i expected from the post i made. you seem to be much more level-headed than the posts i've previously seem from you indicate. i had you pegged for a republican, when you actually seem like a decent person. sorry for the misunderstanding[/QUOTE] Nah, I understand why you'd think that. I'm notorious for playing the devil's advocate in just about any situation. I can totally agree with someone and still take the opposite side of most debates. It makes me annoying as hell, for which I apologize, but it also lets me see both sides of an argument, which is important even if I don't agree with one. Like with the whole Israel thing, I don't actually agree with about half the shit they do at all, this house bulldozing mess is totally fucked up on their part, but I understand that they are the biggest gun in the region and that complaining about it doesn't accomplish anything. Understanding their motivations and working within them is the only way you are going to gain any sort of ground.

[QUOTE=Lambeth;22699364]you aren't very good at this posting thing[/QUOTE] You apparently are very good at it. I wish I could piss away 16 posts a day. And to everyone who is opposed to this, could I ask for what reason is Israel doing this?

[QUOTE=Perfumly;22699397]Seriously when did he say anything about a fucking television? You're making up something aside from the argument to make it seem like I'm 'wrong'. The scenario is a guy breaks into your house. All you can see is him, he's not holding a god damned TV.[/QUOTE] he said he would shoot an intruder on sight, REGARDLESS of the circumstances shooting someone just because they broke into your house is being trigger happy. if they have a gun or make any threatening moves then that's a different story.

[QUOTE=kevn150;22699376]I'd still shoot him regardless. I wish the US had some of the policies of other countries like Singapore in which criminals loose constitutional rights.[/QUOTE] Don't even bother arguing with him anymore guys unless he has anything productive. He already destroyed all of his credibility, so did the other two who admitted they don't give a shit about what international law dictates. My god, I can't believe I'm saying this but BurnEmDown is seriously a 1000x better debater than the likes of kevn.

[QUOTE=JDK721;22699387]you are a terrible person[/QUOTE] Why am I terrible? He chooses to be a criminal. He is not contributing to society, rather detracting from it.

[QUOTE=JDK721;22699423]he said he would shoot an intruder on sight, REGARDLESS of the circumstances shooting someone just because they broke into your house is being trigger happy. if they have a gun or make any threatening moves then that's a different story.[/QUOTE] So why did you even bring up a retarded TV argument? You could have just said that. I think the post was a little too brief for that assumption to be made, however I would not shoot an intruder under the following circumstances 1- Has his/her back turned 2- Is clearly not a threat other than that I'm not risking it for the sake of someone who broke into my home.

[QUOTE=kevn150;22699416]You apparently are very good at it. I wish I could piss away 16 posts a day. And to everyone who is opposed to this, could I ask for what reason is Israel doing this?[/QUOTE] Can you please tell us why South Africa made such laws? It was to protect the white people right?

[QUOTE=Perfumly;22699451]So why did you even bring up a retarded TV argument? [/QUOTE] because he implied that it's perfectly fine to shoot someone if they steal his TV

[QUOTE=starpluck;22699467]Can you please tell us why South Africa made such laws? It was to protect the white people right?[/QUOTE] What South Africa did was very wrong. Don't detract from the topic. Why is Israel doing this?

[QUOTE=kevn150;22699450]Why am I terrible? He chooses to be a criminal. He is not contributing to society, rather detracting from it.[/QUOTE] because you want to be an executioner and decide who gets to live/die and you also want to strip people of their rights

[QUOTE=JDK721;22699487]because you want to be an executioner and decide who gets to live/die and you also want to strip people of their rights[/QUOTE] People who don't deserve rights.

jdk isn't exactly the most unbiased fellow here is he

[QUOTE=kevn150;22699492]People who don't deserve rights.[/QUOTE] uh, and who are you to say that

[QUOTE=kevn150;22699492]People who don't deserve rights.[/QUOTE] I hate to deviate from the argument, but thats a very dangerous direction you're treading on. Do you know how often that was abused in history?

[QUOTE=wonkadonk;22699502]jdk isn't exactly the most unbiased fellow here is he[/QUOTE] what

[QUOTE=kevn150;22699492]People who don't deserve rights.[/QUOTE] um everyone has rights, even maniac murderer rapists

[QUOTE=GunFox;22699414]Nah, I understand why you'd think that. I'm notorious for playing the devil's advocate in just about any situation. I can totally agree with someone and still take the opposite side of most debates. It makes me annoying as hell, for which I apologize, but it also lets me see both sides of an argument, which is important even if I don't agree with one. Like with the whole Israel thing, I don't actually agree with about half the shit they do at all, this house bulldozing mess is totally fucked up on their part, but I understand that they are the biggest gun in the region and that complaining about it doesn't accomplish anything. Understanding their motivations and working within them is the only way you are going to gain any sort of ground.[/QUOTE] i used to do that. lately i've fallen out of the internet as a whole so i haven't really had the effort for that kind of thing. so now whenever i do get into an argument it's about something i support and believe the opposing party should as well no sense in changing minds to the wrong way of thinking, is there?

[QUOTE=JDK721;22699475]because he implied that it's perfectly fine to shoot someone if they steal his TV[/QUOTE] [QUOTE]1) I think shooting someone for breaking into my home is acceptable. If you have broken in, then I see no reason why I should be forced to risk my life to figure out if you are a legitimate threat or just some prick who wants my electronics.[/QUOTE] No, he's saying the person breaking in is not worth the risk he takes to find out if he is a "legitimate threat or just some prick who wants my electronics" not "people who steal electronics deserve death"

[QUOTE=kevn150;22699450]Why am I terrible? He chooses to be a criminal. He is not contributing to society, rather detracting from it.[/QUOTE] In plenty of cases it's not a choice, Manslaughter isn't really the kind of thing someone chooses to do. Most thefts are also done just to survive and the larger ones are just done from greed, not any criminal instinct. Rape in implulsive in most cases and not evil, it is part of a mental issue but it is not something worth losing their rights over.

[QUOTE=kevn150;22699485]What South Africa did was very wrong. Don't detract from the topic. Why is Israel doing this?[/QUOTE] No no no. I'm not detracting shit. I didn't ask if it what South Africa did was good or bad. I'm asking why did South Africa do this.

[QUOTE=Perfumly;22699516]No, he's saying the person breaking in is not worth the risk he takes to find out if he is a "legitimate threat or just some prick who wants my electronics" not "people who steal electronics deserve death"[/QUOTE] which means he would shoot under ANY CIRCUMSTANCES if they broke into his house and one of those circumstances is that the person could be stealing some property my point stands

[QUOTE=kevn150;22699492]People who don't deserve rights.[/QUOTE] fascist

[QUOTE=JDK721;22699504]uh, and who are you to say that[/QUOTE] A logical citizen. A person who decides to illegally enter someone's property, steal valuables, and gain profit, do they contribute to the United State's success? I'll help you out: They don't. We don't need those people in the USA. Criminals, murders, convicts, sex offenders, and other repeat offenders don't deserve to have rights.

[QUOTE=JDK721;22699367]because they're holding your fucking TV in two hands not everyone who breaks into your house is Ted Bundy - most of them are there just to steal shit and leave[/QUOTE] If he is actually holding your TV with both hands, then yes, he is likely not a threat and shooting him is probably not the best option. While I understand shooting without warning, provided the person has been clearly identified as an intruder, I generally would provide a warning first. I am not, however, in favor of laws REQUIRING warnings be given. They are in your home, you are within your right to defend yourself and your property while pursuing a path which places yourself at the absolute minimum risk of bodily harm. Again, within your rights, and actually exercising those rights being the morally correct thing to do, are two different baskets.

[QUOTE=JDK721;22699527]which means he would shoot under ANY CIRCUMSTANCES if they broke into his house and one of those circumstances is that the person could be stealing some property my point stands[/QUOTE] Would it not be apparent that he is some prick who wants his electronics if he had two handfuls of television? Of course I don't know why I'm here arguing for Gunfox or anything, so he'll need to clarify this. Gunfox- would you shoot someone if they had your TV in their hands Nevermind above post clarified, your argument no longer stands.

[QUOTE=kevn150;22699548] We don't need those people in the USA. "undesirables"[/QUOTE] here i fixed your post, you god damned fascist

kevn150 how old are you?

[QUOTE=kevn150;22699548]A logical citizen. A person who decides to illegally enter someone's property, steal valuables, and gain profit, do they contribute to the United State's success? I'll help you out: They don't. We don't need those people in the USA. Criminals, murders, convicts, sex offenders, and other repeat offenders don't deserve to have rights.[/QUOTE] Everyone deserves to have rights. If the government can say who does and does not have rights, then the entire point of the system is gone.

[QUOTE=GunFox;22699550]If he is actually holding your TV with both hands, then yes, he is likely not a threat and shooting him is probably not the best option. While I understand shooting without warning, provided the person has been clearly identified as an intruder, I generally would provide a warning first. I am not, however, in favor of laws REQUIRING warnings be given. They are in your home, you are within your right to defend yourself and your property while pursuing a path which places yourself at the absolute minimum risk of bodily harm. Again, within your rights, and actually exercising those rights being the morally correct thing to do, are two different baskets.[/QUOTE] your post seemed to imply that you would just gun down any intruder [editline]02:50AM[/editline] [QUOTE=Perfumly;22699551]Nevermind above post clarified, your argument no longer stands.[/QUOTE] not my fault that his original post made it seem as if he was just gonna shoot anyone breaking into his house no matter what