Subject:
|
Re: Foundation of a republic (was Gun control)
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.off-topic.debate
|
Date:
|
Mon, 8 Jan 2001 16:16:35 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
272 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Scott Arthur writes:
> > But can't you say that about everything in a debate of this sort? And if
> > you're going to make a relativist claim like that, then you undermine your
> > own stance, as well.
>
> I was using what you said... "Branch Davidians _perceived_ a rampage".
Oh. Well, you don't expect me to pay attention when I'm typing, to you?
> It may have been their "perception" - but they have been wrong.
I think you meant "they may have been wrong." Anyway, I'm not sufficiently
well-versed in the Waco story, but there are many who identify the use of
riot tanks as somewhat excessive given the situation at hand.
> > I perceive a burglar entering my home, but he
> > perceives himself as a clever entrepeneur who's figured out a way to beat
> > the high cost of living. Who is right?
>
> In either case, s/he'd be breaking the law. That, however, does not mean I
> have the absolute right to claim his life. Personally, if it was a choice
> between him taking my stereo - or me taking his life. I'd let him have the
> stereo... and my CD's - I'm insured.
Really? I'll have to make a note of your address in that case. I'm
quibbling now, but even if you don't have the "absolute right" to take his
life, you do have the right to stop him by any means necessary given the
potential danger you and your family face because of his presence. If that
results in his death, then he has reaped the fruits of his decision to
burglarize the home of someone willing to protect it. If he is maimed,
likewise. But certainly doesn't have a right to sue you (as he is currently
able to do in parts of my fine, litigious nation).
Dave!
|
|
Message has 1 Reply:
 | | Re: Foundation of a republic (was Gun control)
|
| (...) In the UK, the "potential danger" is almost nil. If I killed him in anything other than strict self defense, I'd be of to jail. See: (URL) If that (...) If he does not have the right to sue in the US... why/how does it happen? Scott A (...) (23 years ago, 8-Jan-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
Message is in Reply To:
| | Re: Foundation of a republic (was Gun control)
|
| (...) I was using what you said... "Branch Davidians _perceived_ a rampage". It may have been their "perception" - but they have been wrong. (...) In either case, s/he'd be breaking the law. That, however, does not mean I have the absolute right to (...) (23 years ago, 8-Jan-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
11 Messages in This Thread:
 
 
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
This Message and its Replies on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
