[QUOTE=GunFox;18815772]You didn't listen to the tape.
You also haven't taken into consideration that the file picture they have of the man is a prison mugshot. This was not a nice fellow.[/QUOTE]
Fair enough.
[QUOTE=gnome;18813291]I don't understand, how is anyone in this thread defending the intruder's life? I was about ask if 75% of Facepunch is completely mentally inept, but I guess that question really doesn't even need to be asked.
It's ALREADY against the law to break and enter (fucking obviously), so when someone breaks into someone's house with force they immediately forfeit their right to safety until they've left the premisis. That's even beside the point, though. Not only did this man break the law by trespassing, but he had the VERY obvious intention of harm (you don't throw a table through someone's window and scream threats at them if you don't intend to harm them) and was further warned by the woman who had a SHOTGUN pointed at him. She was within the LAW, and within her human right to do anything humanly possible to protect herself from him.
It's reaching way, [b]way[/b] too far for some sort of skewed morality to try and say she could have "taken a less lethal shot". What are you defending? The living rights of someone who is smashing through people's back doors? Really? I mean, fucking seriously? Don't blame the [i]woman[/i] for this man's death, blame him for taking the risk by intentionally and dangerously breaking the law.
And yes, I know this has probably been stated over and over again for the past 17 pages, but obviously it hasn't silenced the idiocy here.[/QUOTE]
Watch as gnome determines who has the right to live. He's also a fucking barbarian who thinks an eye for an eye is kickinrad
I also didn't know throwing a table through a window is punishable by death.
[QUOTE=johanz;18813216]Then good luck injuring someone with a shotgun while they try to kill you.[/QUOTE]
You're over dramatizing it.
[QUOTE=Malumbre;18813207]I figured it out but it didn't quite make sense the way you had it there. Anyway, I guess you're right.[/QUOTE]
now, in terms of self preservation, it is justifiable. Albeit a last alternative
[QUOTE=Strongside;18813270]Jesus Christ really?
Might as well had the man rape her and kill her right? What sick person would want that guy to stay alive? 53 and he can't make the right choices and continues his criminal career. Sounds like someone who deserves to live.[/QUOTE]
Who the fuck are you to determine who lives and who dies?
[QUOTE=Strongside;18813303]And I rated you dumb for thinking killing is wrong in all scenarios.[/QUOTE]
For the most part, killing is wrong.
[QUOTE=gnome;18813348]Yeah, like in self-defense?
How is this even still be disputed.[/QUOTE]
If your life is in danger, and there is no other alternative, killing is justifiable.
[QUOTE=Caps lock;18813314]Have you tried aiming a gun while overcome by fear for your own life? No? I didn't think so.[/QUOTE]
have you? Because I don't think you have. you're a hypocrite.
[QUOTE=Strongside;18813315]The guy continued even with a gun pointed at him, I'm sure he would have kept crawling at her if he was just down.[/QUOTE]
That's retarded. Even for you.
[QUOTE=Madman_Andre;18813349]ITT Trotsky trolls Facepunch. [I][B]Hard.[/B][/I]
:munch:[/QUOTE]
[img]http://www.snarksmith.com/images/020207/Trotsky.jpg[/img]
Trollsky, yo
[QUOTE=gnome;18813372]Exactly, in a split-second scenario you're not going to think about it. Someone bursting through your door and charging at you warrents a shot, regardless of where it's going to hit. I'd argue that even if she HAD the chance to shoot him elsewhere, she still had the right to kill in this situation.[/QUOTE]
That's where you're dead fucking wrong. why would she have the right to murder him if she had the chance to shoot elsewhere?
god, what is wrong with you people. Hey, there are plenty of third world countries that allow you kill people freely, I'm sure you will get a nice hardon. You could even play vigilante.
[editline]07:05PM[/editline]
I fucking love how Facepunch, being a bunch of kiddies, gallantly defends guns and killing people because they think it's just SO COOL. This is why America is ethically bankrupt, the youth are so god damned desensitized.
[editline]07:08PM[/editline]
[QUOTE=Jenkem;18815792]And instead wait to possibly be disarmed or otherwise hurt (some people are too scared to pull the trigger).
Did you even think when you posted that?[/QUOTE]
Jenkem telling people to think before they post...
the same idiot who thinks coffee disproves evolution and Obama was born in Kenya.
[QUOTE=Boba_Fett;18804745]Guns allow an old lady to beat a bald psycho. If she had used a knife, he could have easily disarmed her.[/QUOTE]
You know nothing of knife violence. Even trained proffesionals admit it is incredibly hard to disarm someone with a knife without sustaining a wound.
[QUOTE=shakey42;18817649]You know nothing of knife violence. Even trained proffesionals admit it is incredibly hard to disarm someone with a knife without sustaining a wound.[/QUOTE]
A wound. But this is an elderly-ish woman we are talking about here. She is likely much less strong than your average knife wielding maniac the professionals are talking about, and would go down much easier. That wound would do a lot of good while he pummeled her face in or merely took the knife and used it on her.
Honestly, I do not see how there is even argument in whether or not she was justified.
[QUOTE=Trotsky;18811342]Thank you for contributing, Kyle. You and your white name.[/QUOTE]
I'm Japanese American.
:colbert:
I'm sure you are
[QUOTE=Trotsky;18823640]I'm sure you are[/QUOTE]
My last name is Kawaguchi. It's in my email for christsake.
yes, because I have your email.
What the fuck does his name have to do with anything? Way to run the topic off course.
Good for her.
This thread is full of Naive retreads.
If he broke into her house with the intent of rape and murder, he deserves to die. She protected herself against a piece of shit who probably would have committed suicide eventually anyway. Quit defending this man.
I don't understand why anyone [i]would[/i] defend a guy like this.
[QUOTE=The_Behemoth;18826260]If he broke into her house with the intent of rape and murder, he deserves to die. She protected herself against a piece of shit who probably would have committed suicide eventually anyway. Quit defending this man.[/QUOTE]
I didn't know Behemoth was actually there and was inside the brain of this man.
I am not worthy of your magic
[QUOTE=Kronos Zul;18826168]This thread is full of Naive retreads.[/QUOTE]
good thing I'm not a tire
[editline]03:44AM[/editline]
[QUOTE=Kronos Zul;18826573]I don't understand why anyone [i]would[/i] defend a guy like this.[/QUOTE]
because he's a human being?
That's some old style Western Justice right there.
[QUOTE=Trotsky;18826755]because he's a human being?[/QUOTE]
Why not defend the woman?
[QUOTE=Trotsky;18826755]because he's a human being?[/QUOTE]
I don't see why the fact that he belongs to the species Homo sapiens really affects the situation. Your actions define who you are, not your biological classification. The guy was a criminal. He threatened an old lady and broke her window; all while ignoring the fact that she had a gun. Herself and her property were in danger. It's as dumb as reaching into your pocket very fast when the police have a gun on you. If he was stupid enough to continue to provoke here after he saw a gun, he should get a Darwin Award.
[QUOTE=RBM11;18826896]I don't see why the fact that he belongs to the species Homo sapiens really affects the situation. Your actions define who you are, not your biological classification. The guy was a criminal. He threatened an old lady and broke her window; all while ignoring the fact that she had a gun. Herself and her property were in danger. It's as dumb as reaching into your pocket very fast when the police have a gun on you. If he was stupid enough to continue to provoke here after he saw a gun, he should get a Darwin Award.[/QUOTE]
I like how you oversimplify what I said, then acknowledged the complexity of a human to fit your point
GJ
IT matters. Being a human means you have a complex mind and free will. NO one, has the right to dictate who lives and who dies. Self preservation is not dictation, before you mouth off.
[QUOTE=DamagePoint;18826838]Why not defend the woman?[/QUOTE]
who said I wasn't?
[QUOTE=Trotsky;18827026]I like how you oversimplify what I said, then acknowledged the complexity of a human to fit your point
GJ
IT matters. Being a human means you have a complex mind and free will. NO one, has the right to dictate who lives and who dies. Self preservation is not dictation, before you mouth off.
who said I wasn't?[/QUOTE]
Shit happens though, HUMANS die all the time. Stop crying about it and be glad it's not you. Won't be in the thread anymore, it makes me rage. Too many retards with ZERO common sense. Can't believe there's people like you. It makes me sick.
What a heart-warming thread.
Could someone explain what they disagree with in my interpretation of the events?
[url]http://www.facepunch.com/showpost.php?p=18813586&postcount=698[/url]
[QUOTE=DrMonumbo;18827423]Could someone explain what they disagree with in my interpretation of the events?
[url]http://www.facepunch.com/showpost.php?p=18813586&postcount=698[/url][/QUOTE]
Because people like you are FAR lower then people like this
[QUOTE=Sharp;18827176]Shit happens though, HUMANS die all the time. Stop crying about it and be glad it's not you. Won't be in the thread anymore, it makes me rage. Too many retards with ZERO common sense. Can't believe there's people like you. It makes me sick.[/QUOTE]
how dare you look into something
[QUOTE=Trotsky;18827026]I like how you oversimplify what I said, then acknowledged the complexity of a human to fit your point
GJ
IT matters. Being a human means you have a complex mind and free will. NO one, has the right to dictate who lives and who dies. Self preservation is not dictation, before you mouth off.
[/QUOTE]
In extreme circumstances there should be a point where you have the right to take anothers life.
When someone breaks into your house violently, you have no possible way of knowing what kind of
a threat he is to your life and others. Therefore, you should neutralize the threat before you find
out how dangerous he is. Safety first.
[QUOTE=Trotsky;18827026]I like how you oversimplify what I said, then acknowledged the complexity of a human to fit your point
GJ
IT matters. Being a human means you have a complex mind and free will. NO one, has the right to dictate who lives and who dies. Self preservation is not dictation, before you mouth off. [/QUOTE]
True, humans do have complex minds and free will. He used his free will and complex mind to throw a chair through and old lady's door, threaten her, and step into her house after being warned several times that she had a gun and she was going to shoot. I know the clip isn't the full one, but if she hadn't verbally warned him, he could still see that she had a gun as it was a glass door. He is an idiot, he caused his own death, why should he get sympathy? It was either him, a violent criminal, or an innocent old lady who would have been harmed.
If anything the old lady should get sympathy for having to deal such a psychological ordeal as being forced to take a life. But of course the first thing you and Urkel do is support the criminal in the situation. Why?
My argument has nothing to do with anyone dictating the loss of ANOTHER person's life, it has to do with this criminal in this situation and how he essentially dictated the loss of his own life. Why would any rational human being speak up in his defense?
[QUOTE=m0nkey98;18804607]He should have stopped what he was doing and surrendered when he saw that shotgun. Why would you continue attempting to break in when you know you're gonna die?[/QUOTE]
Lots of people think when they see people with guns that they'll be like Zeke and fear firing the gun. It's a gamble, but so is breaking into the house in the first place.
[QUOTE=DrMonumbo;18827423]Could someone explain what they disagree with in my interpretation of the events?
[url]http://www.facepunch.com/showpost.php?p=18813586&postcount=698[/url][/QUOTE]
Because your argument rests on the fact that he was intoxicated. The exact same argument could be used to defend drunk drivers. Should the man who got high off PCP, killed a girl, and ate her heart not be punished because he was in an "intoxicated and dazed state?" And it is a well known fact that drunks tend to be violent. See the drunk abusive husband stereotype. PCP guy: [url]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Big_Lurch[/url]
[editline]10:36PM[/editline]
[QUOTE=power-mad;18827592]Lots of people think when they see people with guns that they'll be like Zeke and fear firing the gun. It's a gamble, but so is breaking into the house in the first place.[/QUOTE]
I don't care if the lady was blind, I still wouldn't take the gamble. Any rational human being wouldn't, but as we all know, the guy was clearly was a drunk, irrational criminal.
[QUOTE=:smug:;18816429]You have 270 disagrees.
You lose.[/QUOTE]
This is Facepunch. Everyone here thinks their PC is worth more than a human life.
A life for a break-in is not fair, but it fits right in line with the rest of Facepunch's ideologies, such as [i]killing an animal being worse than killing a human[/i].
The number of ratings is due to the position of the post, just so you know. Use the 14:1 ratio if you want to insult me and still look smart.
My position comes from the fact that a friend of mine once got drunk and stumbled into someone else's house. If the homeowner was allowed to shoot him in this country I would have lost a friend because of a stupid mistake. I understand that this situation is different, but the "shoot first, ask questions later" mentality that some places in the US encourage is dangerous.
[QUOTE=RBM11;18827624]Because your argument rests on the fact that he was intoxicated. The exact same argument could be used to defend drunk drivers. Should the man who got high off PCP, killed a girl, and ate her heart not be punished because he was in an "intoxicated and dazed state?" And it is a well known fact that drunks tend to be violent. See the drunk abusive husband stereotype. PCP guy: .[/QUOTE]
By no means did I say his intoxication is justification for anything, it explains his behavior. Meanwhile you still insist he's a raping murdering psycho path when there is in fact no evidence what so ever to suggest this.
[QUOTE=Zeke129;18827646]This is Facepunch. Everyone here thinks their PC is worth more than a human life.
A life for a break-in is not fair, but it fits right in line with the rest of Facepunch's ideologies, such as [i]killing an animal being worse than killing a human[/i].
The number of ratings is due to the position of the post, just so you know. Use the 14:1 ratio if you want to insult me and still look smart.
My position comes from the fact that a friend of mine once got drunk and stumbled into someone else's house. If the homeowner was allowed to shoot him in this country I would have lost a friend because of a stupid mistake. I understand that this situation is different, but the "shoot first, ask questions later" mentality that some places in the US encourage is dangerous.[/QUOTE]
You probably wouldn't have lost your friend because he wasn't acting violent. The "shoot first, ask questions later" is actually illegal because if the person wasn't threatening anyone or their property, it is illegal to harm them. Chances are, if they forced their way into your house they probably aren't a harmless drunk. Burglaries are much, much more common than some guy getting drunk and wandering into a house and it is kind of his fault that he got that drunk to begin with. By the way, did your friend force entry or just stumble into an unlocked home?
[QUOTE=Zeke129;18827646]This is Facepunch. Everyone here thinks their PC is worth more than a human life.
A life for a break-in is not fair, but it fits right in line with the rest of Facepunch's ideologies, such as [i]killing an animal being worse than killing a human[/i].
The number of ratings is due to the position of the post, just so you know. Use the 14:1 ratio if you want to insult me and still look smart.
My position comes from the fact that a friend of mine once got drunk and stumbled into someone else's house. If the homeowner was allowed to shoot him in this country I would have lost a friend because of a stupid mistake. I understand that this situation is different, but the "shoot first, ask questions later" mentality that some places in the US encourage is dangerous.[/QUOTE]
Of course, I'm sure your drunk friend would 'stumble' into a house with a patio table going through
the glass door.
[QUOTE=DrMonumbo;18827763]By no means did I say his intoxication is justification for anything, it explains his behavior. Meanwhile you still insist he's a raping murdering psycho path when there is in fact no evidence what so ever to suggest this.[/QUOTE]
There's also no evidence to say that he wasn't.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.