- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: HuffPo: Shooting In Self-Defense Is Illegal Because It Denies Criminals A Fair Trial
Posted on 4/30/17 at 11:19 pm to Wally Sparks
Posted on 4/30/17 at 11:19 pm to Wally Sparks
quote:
Here's his Twitter account. Have fun.
over / under on how long it takes for him to shut that account down???
0
Posted on 5/1/17 at 12:03 am to braindeadboxer
quote:
We should use firearms against the liberal degenerates in self defense if the nation
This is what it's going to come to.
Posted on 5/1/17 at 12:12 am to member12
quote:
This is the same publication that thinks we should eliminate white men's right to vote.
Wasn't that "white men shouldn't vote" article submitted by a troll just to stir up shite?
Posted on 5/1/17 at 12:15 am to AUstar
quote:
Wasn't that "white men shouldn't vote" article submitted by a troll just to stir up shite?
Yes
Posted on 5/1/17 at 12:41 am to L.A.
quote:
Dang, denying someone the right to a fair trial is my favorite part of shooting them in self defense.
Posted on 5/1/17 at 12:53 am to FeauxPaw
quote:Hire an editor.
I almost feel bad for the guy, having dyslexia and all that.
Posted on 5/1/17 at 1:13 am to Mo Jeaux
quote:
The article is a year old. Why the outrage now?
This might be the dumbest question posed on the poliboard today.
Posted on 5/1/17 at 6:35 am to SavageOrangeJug
This sounds like an argument a college freshman would make.
Posted on 5/1/17 at 6:41 am to Evolved Simian
quote:
This might be the dumbest question posed on the poliboard today.
Well, I posted it yesterday, but why is the question dumb?
Posted on 5/1/17 at 6:48 am to RCDfan1950
quote:
And dying by not defending one's self or dependents...is what. Fair?
Just giving their fair share.
Posted on 5/1/17 at 6:49 am to Mo Jeaux
quote:
Well, I posted it yesterday, but why is the question dumb?
Because they may have just found the article? The thought process illustrated in the article doesn't bother you at all?
Posted on 5/1/17 at 8:00 am to SundayFunday
quote:
His thoughts can be viewed on his blog, My Head Hurts
How did he come up with that stupid of a name for his blog? Is that what people were telling him after reading his garbage, but he was too stupid to realize he was being insulted?
Posted on 5/1/17 at 8:08 am to DawgsLife
quote:
Because they may have just found the article? The thought process illustrated in the article doesn't bother you at all?
Not when you don't want to miss any chance to slam the board, brah.
We gotta keep your priorities in line here.
Posted on 5/1/17 at 8:26 am to SavageOrangeJug
I just want to break this down to illustrate the poor quality of journalistic writing today:
It does not "impose" on "justice," whatever that means. This writer is probably attempting to say that the main problem with self defense is that it preempts the trial process for the alleged aggressor. Self defense is a legal defense, meaning that the person to stand trial is the one who used self defense, not the alleged aggressor. When you kill someone in self defense, you have still committed a homicide. The burden of proof shifts to you to prove it was justified. So, 0/2 here.
How can you be "devoid" of your rights? Deprived, maybe? Whatever. When an aggressor presents a mortal threat to another, an exigency is created. The law has recognized for centuries that you do not get judicial process when you present an immediate, dangerous threat. You surrender your rights the second you present a mortal threat to another unless you timely withdraw from the attack and back off. Should police not kill active shooters and tranquilize them instead so we can make sure they get fair trials?
I'm not going to read the rest of the article because I'm sure it's more of the same. It's like a high 14 year old thought about the topic for 2 minutes, penned the article, and got it published without an editor's proofread or critique. In short, Huffington Post.
quote:
The main problem with the notion of self-defense is it imposes on justice, for everyone has the right for a fair trial.
It does not "impose" on "justice," whatever that means. This writer is probably attempting to say that the main problem with self defense is that it preempts the trial process for the alleged aggressor. Self defense is a legal defense, meaning that the person to stand trial is the one who used self defense, not the alleged aggressor. When you kill someone in self defense, you have still committed a homicide. The burden of proof shifts to you to prove it was justified. So, 0/2 here.
quote:
Therefore, using a firearm to defend oneself is not legal because if the attacker is killed, he or she is devoid of his or her rights.
How can you be "devoid" of your rights? Deprived, maybe? Whatever. When an aggressor presents a mortal threat to another, an exigency is created. The law has recognized for centuries that you do not get judicial process when you present an immediate, dangerous threat. You surrender your rights the second you present a mortal threat to another unless you timely withdraw from the attack and back off. Should police not kill active shooters and tranquilize them instead so we can make sure they get fair trials?
I'm not going to read the rest of the article because I'm sure it's more of the same. It's like a high 14 year old thought about the topic for 2 minutes, penned the article, and got it published without an editor's proofread or critique. In short, Huffington Post.
This post was edited on 8/12/17 at 8:23 pm
Posted on 5/1/17 at 8:26 am to DawgsLife
quote:
Because they may have just found the article?
OK. quote:
The thought process illustrated in the article doesn't bother you at all?
Bother me? Well, I know what the Huff Post is and what it's all about, so not particularly.
Posted on 5/1/17 at 8:27 am to Y.A. Tittle
quote:
Not when you don't want to miss any chance to slam the board, brah.
We gotta keep your priorities in line here.
Wut?
Posted on 5/1/17 at 8:35 am to SavageOrangeJug
Bet they would change their mind in a face to face confrontation.
Posted on 5/1/17 at 8:40 am to SavageOrangeJug
quote:
Shooting In Self-Defense Is Illegal Because It Denies Criminals A Fair Trial
Gheez, America is under siege from every possible form of attack, the Ghetto's are just headquarters for guerilla bands of attacks and the MSM is their mouth piece.
Posted on 5/1/17 at 8:42 am to SavageOrangeJug
People who think this way will go extinct.
So I don't worry too much about them.
So I don't worry too much about them.
Posted on 5/1/17 at 8:43 am to SavageOrangeJug
quote:
Therefore, using a firearm to defend oneself is not legal because if the attacker is killed, he or she is devoid of his or her rights.
frick me running. Of course it is -legal- to apply deadly force in appropriate situations. That is not very clear thinking by this idiot dweeb. Should it be legal is the question.
Deadly force is the force used that you know might cause death or serious bodily harm. If your life is threatened you have a right to apply deadly force. You can’t wait for someone else to act for you. This is pretty well established law.
Page 3 of 4
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News