Another happy Somali immigrant
in [Motorcycles]
|
From: 83LowRider on 19 May 2010 13:14 Datesfat Chicks wrote: > Furthermore, murder at age 18 is different than murder at age 38. It > is easier to brainwash someone to do that at 18. I don't think you can equate an 18 year old in the states, living at mom and dads house, playing Wii, with an 18 year old Somalian carrying an AK-47. He is plenty old enough to know what he was doing.
From: 83LowRider on 19 May 2010 13:18 Rob Kleinschmidt wrote: > Once you decide that's OK, it opens an awful wide door. > Just on the off chance that I or somebody I know was > picked up on suspicion of something, whether I did it or not, > I think I'd want a trial. I understand your principle, but being as he was taken from a boat he had boarded (in order to take prisoners) it leaves little doubt... but okay, have a trial, then shoot him. Criminal 'justice' demands three things to be effective, Certainty - you WILL be caught Severity - you will pay a high price for your crime Swiftness - you won't linger in and out of a courtroom for years to come. There is virtually no deterrence for Somali pirates. Most face no sort of punishment here or in their homeland.
From: Twibil on 19 May 2010 14:12 On May 19, 12:01 am, "83LowRider" <a...(a)ddresswilldo.com> wrote: > > > > Of course, if we're going to start executing people for stupidity > > you're likely to have bought into more trouble here than you really > > wanted. > > He wasn't taken in for being stupid. He was arrested for > kidnapping and theft. He SHOULD BE shot or hanged, > as should any person trying to kidnap and hold innocent > civilians. Maybe then, those like him would get the message. Yup. Ignorance of the law is no excuse. (So what's yours?) The pirate was sentenced according to our present laws, and does someone really have to explain to you why we don't summarily shoot or hang people just because some yahoo thinks it would be a good idea?
From: sean_q_ on 19 May 2010 15:14 Datesfat Chicks wrote: > Someone has to > actually pull the trigger before I draw the line. Somehow this gives me an image of you lying in a Detroit street full of bullet holes, saying, "OK, that does it, I'm drawing the line!" SQ
From: Datesfat Chicks on 19 May 2010 15:40
"sean_q_" <nospam(a)no.spam> wrote in message news:qMWIn.12559$rU6.4661(a)newsfe10.iad... > Datesfat Chicks wrote: > >> Someone has to actually pull the trigger before I draw the line. > > Somehow this gives me an image of you lying in a Detroit > street full of bullet holes, saying, "OK, that does it, > I'm drawing the line!" I live in Marshall, MI, by the way. My Detroit days are behind me. There was a lot of weird stuff going on in Detroit. I was robbed at gunpoint twice about 7 years apart. One day I was driving down the freeway and someone on a pedestrian overpass was urinating on the traffic below. There were numerous property crimes, including my truck spare tire being stolen. Anyway, that being said ... I used to sleep with two handguns. My rationale (unless I had a guest over) was that if it was moving in the apartment and not me I was legally entitled to shoot it. My handguns are now in my safe and haven't been fired in a couple years. (Rationale for keeping them locked up: I sometimes leave my door unlocked and there are children in the apartment complex.) That is the Marshall experience. My general philosophy is that I would avoid pulling the trigger on another human being unless absolutely necessary, even if I sustain a moderate amount of risk myself. I would not _automatically_ shoot an intruder (and I know many people would). It really is a personal decision about risk. There are some circumstances where I absolutely would not shoot, such as an armed intruder where I surprised him and he couldn't get to the gun in time (so I'm almost assured of winning the firefight), or an unarmed intruder unless he got within about 10 feet of me. There are also some circumstances where I would shoot, such as an armed intruder who either already had the gun pointed at me or was trying to achieve that. And there is a large gray area. What I was trying to say is that someone who points a gun at another human being but doesn't shoot gives an incomplete view of their psychology. On the other hand, someone who shoots ... all my questions are answered. Anyone who particpates in hostage-taking ... perhaps they aren't beyond redemption. But anyone who shoots an unarmed hostage ... all my questions are answered there ... shall I mix up some saltwater and help with testing the electric chair? Datesfat |