New Posts
By:
Filters
  • Hi there guest! Welcome to PoliticalJack.com. Register for free to join our community?

Justified?

Guns allow pussies to play "tough guy".

By the logic in this case, the shooter in the Auburn University pool party case should be released for acting in self-defense. He didn't pull his gun until after he was hit over the head with a beer bottle.
 
Yeah, the shooters response was strange: He's worried about the safety of his wife, grandchild and dog so he initiates gun play when he simply could have put the car in drive and left the scene? What if the other guy had had a gun and returned fire? Would he have been justified?
 
I've done a good bit of driving in that area. The entrance/exit ramps do seem to have been engineered by Rube Goldberg. Still, had this guy not had a gun in his glove compartment, he would have most likely gotten over the mishap and gone on about his business.

Guns don't kill people. Paranoid, chickensh!t pussies with guns kill people.
 
i agree, guns are used in far too many situations where their LETHAL use is not warrented...
 
NightSwimmer said:
Guns allow pussies to play "tough guy".

By the logic in this case, the shooter in the Auburn University pool party case should be released for acting in self-defense. He didn't pull his gun until after he was hit over the head with a beer bottle.
Click to expand...

you certainly can be killed by being hit over the head with a beer bottle,,i wonder if you think someone has to be killed in order to apply self-defense..or must it always be "like" force..i.e. bottle vs bottle,,bat vs bat,,knife vs gun...
 
Mr. Mutt,

Wow, I have never heard such a power and intelligent retort before! I mean, I brought up the fact the the biker, who could have driven away, instead, got off his bike, advanced on the car driver who stayed in his car, stopped at a stop light, agrued with him, then assaulted him, and the driver, in fear of his life, protected himself in self defense, then turned himself into the police, explaining what was done, and you, whoa, didn't respond with just a common, nuh uh, but rather, an adament "NUH UH."

I would have hated to get into a debate with you in the first grade, you would have indeed ruled.
 
oicu812 said:
you certainly can be killed by being hit over the head with a beer bottle,

NS: My point precisely.

,i wonder if you think someone has to be killed in order to apply self-defense..or must it always be "like" force..i.e. bottle vs bottle,,bat vs bat,,knife vs gun...
Click to expand...

Why do you wonder what I think? What do you think about the shooting in Auburn, Alabama last Saturday? Should the shooter be arrested?
 
Mr. Mutt,

Understand, you are a shallow thinker, and when challenged, run away like a little girl.

But seriously, my friend, you should not be so afraid to debate me. Ask others here, I am magnanimous in victory.
 
NightSwimmer said:
Guns allow pussies to play "tough guy".

By the logic in this case, the shooter in the Auburn University pool party case should be released for acting in self-defense. He didn't pull his gun until after he was hit over the head with a beer bottle.
Click to expand...

ok, then you agree the shooter in the auburn case was justified as per the info you supplied...{im not familiar with the spec. other than this thread}..is the logic applied, the same logic you would present?
 
oicu812 said:
ok, then you agree the shooter in the auburn case was justified as per the info you supplied...{im not familiar with the spec. other than this thread}..is the logic applied, the same logic you would present?
Click to expand...

If being slapped (and/or punched) in the face justifies use of gunfire in response, then the shooter in Auburn was even more justified after having been hit in the head with a beer bottle. The bottle wasn't thrown at him. It was used as a club.

Attack with a weapon is typically a greater threat to one's existence than is a bare-handed punch. Wouldn't you agree?
 
Attack with a weapon is typically a greater threat to one's existence than is a bare-handed punch. Wouldn't you agree?[/QUOTE]

yes.
 
Cerulean Mutt said:
http://www.stltoday.com/news/local/...cle_d3983faf-137a-5679-9ddd-c6cf5cbb90b8.html
Let me get this straight: you're sitting in your car arguing with somebody about their poor driving, things get heated, airborne saliva is exchanged, and you get punched / slapped. You say you feel threatened, so instead of returning the favor or just driving away you bust a cap in the guy?
Good lord, have we all turned into lily livered chicken shits?
Click to expand...

Of course it was justified. Why carry a gun if you aren't going to use it to protect yourself and your family. Setchfield had a .380 and Randall was at his window, and Randall was only wounded. What kind of bullshit is that? Randall hit the man sitting inside his car with his wife and grandson; he should have killed Randall. . Had it been me, the man would be at room temperature now with a third eye.
 
then i assume he may be charged with that violation, however, perhaps if it were in plain sight, he would not have been attacked, rendering our exchange, moot.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

Back
Top