• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Cont: Jogging in Georgia while black - The Trial

smartcooky said:
I would threaten him with a firearm.
Click to expand...

I still say you don't threaten with a gun unless you're willing to kill, and you don't kill people for theft.

In the Arbery case, they threatened and killed him for suspicion of theft. They are flat out murderers.
 
smartcooky said:
I would threaten him with a firearm.

If he ran away or left, I would not shoot him or go after him.
Click to expand...

This is what I find interesting about an international forum.

In my US State, you would be guilty of some rather serious crimes if you pointed a gun at someone who was not an imminent threat to your life. The thief would be a petty criminal in the eyes of the law; you would be the felon.
 
Thermal said:
This is what I find interesting about an international forum.

In my US State, you would be guilty of some rather serious crimes if you pointed a gun at someone who was not an imminent threat to your life. The thief would be a petty criminal in the eyes of the law; you would be the felon.
Click to expand...

This is a generalisation, and apparently, not true in all states...

WA: Shot and killed unarmed intruder...
https://www.seattletimes.com/seattle-news/crime/arlington-homeowner-kills-suspected-burglar/
... no charges

UT: Homeowner shot and killed intruder...
https://www.heraldextra.com/news/lo...cle_6fc0ae01-c2c7-56d6-b5f0-87251c9e7cf2.html
... no charges

GA: Homeowner shot and killed intruder...
https://www.fox5atlanta.com/news/police-homeowner-will-not-be-charged-in-intruders-death
... no charges

There are literally hundreds of cases just like this in a huge range of US States. They vary between armed and unarmed intruders, intruders confronting homeowners and ones running away, inside and outside the house. No charges against the homeowners seems to be the rule rather than the exception, It varies from state to state, city to city, county to county. It appears to be something of a lottery depending on the DA or the prosecutors' mindset in each jurisdiction.

This next one, from California, seems particularly egregious...

https://www.latimes.com/local/lanow/la-me-ln-no-charges-home-burglary-20150126-story.html

The homeowner shot and killed one of two intruders, a woman who was unarmed, and running away. She claimed she was pregnant, but he shot her twice in the back, then dragged her body into his garage in an attempt to lure the other intruder in so he could shoot him too. Yet no charges were laid against the homeowner.

"Greer exercised his legal and legitimate right of self-defense when he shot and killed Andrea Miller" - LA County Deputy Assistant DA Janet Moore

This is California, a liberal left wing state with stricter gun laws that most. How does that fit into your generalisation?
 
smartcooky said:
This is a generalisation, and apparently, not true in all states.... How does that fit into your generalisation?
Click to expand...

Let's see if you can work out the difference between a generalization and a qualified example. Little hint for you in the hilited part:

Thermal said:
This is what I find interesting about an international forum.

In my US State, you would be guilty of some rather serious crimes if you pointed a gun at someone who was not an imminent threat to your life. The thief would be a petty criminal in the eyes of the law; you would be the felon.
Click to expand...
 
Thermal said:
Let's see if you can work out the difference between a generalization and a qualified example. Little hint for you in the hilited part:
Click to expand...


I know the difference - You didn't give a "qualified example" of a homeowner shooting an intruder in your State.

What State do you live in?
 
Last edited:
smartcooky said:
This next one, from California, seems particularly egregious...

https://www.latimes.com/local/lanow/la-me-ln-no-charges-home-burglary-20150126-story.html

The homeowner shot and killed one of two intruders, a woman who was unarmed, and running away. She claimed she was pregnant, but he shot her twice in the back, then dragged her body into his garage in an attempt to lure the other intruder in so he could shoot him too. Yet no charges were laid against the homeowner.
Click to expand...


That is egregious...TWO intruders? Way too many.
 
smartcooky said:
I know the difference - You didn't give a "qualified example" of a homeowner shooting an intruder in your State.

What State do you live in?
Click to expand...

Well, to answer your question that you are leaving stand as-is:

Your examples from California, Utah, etc have precisely Jack squat to do with my State, and consequently **** all to do with any generalizations I may or may not have made. Is there a reason you think they should?

Also, under my avatar you can see I live on the East Coast USA. California is sort of the West Coast, so all the more reason for you to have known your examples would have meant squat dick to any East Coast generalization. Though it would be reasonable if you had not memorized US geography, which is fair what with you being in New Zealand. .
 
Dear burglars,

There are some things I own that if I caught someone trying to steal from my home I would absolutely stop them with any means necessary, including their death.

You don't get to just walk in and steal the things I have worked so hard and damaged my body for over the years, or steal the things that allow me to work and pay for rent and food. Some of these things are either irreplaceable or more meaningful to me than some piece of crap's life.

My Winnie The Pooh I've had for 53 years and sitting out in my room is more important to me than a burglar's life. Sorry if you don't like that, but maybe you should reconsider robbing people, because we aren't always logical.

I like the threat of death hanging over the heads of would be home burglars. I should consider the safety of someone who would, in a matter of minutes, destroy my life just by walking in and taking stuff? Or worse?

Would they value my life if they surprised me in a dark hallway rather than me surprising them? I would have to assume no. Should I wait to see a gun, or just shoot them?

Was the burglar considering my life when they decided to break into my home and steal the things I work so hard for? No? Then to hell with them. Literally.

I do not own a gun anymore. I do not live in fear. This all has little to do with the thread topic.
 
smartcooky said:
<snip>

This is California, a liberal left wing state with stricter gun laws that most. How does that fit into your generalisation?
Click to expand...


You're from NZ so this may come as somewhat of a surprise to you, but the state of California is not a homogeneous entity. There are liberals, progressives, conservatives, and outright whacko right-wingnuts.

By way of example, the John Birch Society was born in California. More than a few parts of it are hotbeds of foam-at-the-mouth reactionaries.

Mebbe NZ is more monocultural, but California isn't like that, despite what conservative talk show hosts might want you to believe.
 
Thermal said:
Well, to answer your question that you are leaving stand as-is:

Your examples from California, Utah, etc have precisely Jack squat to do with my State, and consequently **** all to do with any generalizations I may or may not have made. Is there a reason you think they should?

Also, under my avatar you can see I live on the East Coast USA. California is sort of the West Coast, so all the more reason for you to have known your examples would have meant squat dick to any East Coast generalization. Though it would be reasonable if you had not memorized US geography, which is fair what with you being in New Zealand. .
Click to expand...

You're missing the point.. as usual.

Your claim, you burden to prove. Can you, or can't you, show an example of a homeowner in your state, shooting an unarmed intruder, and then subsequently being charged for the shooting.

Put up or shut up!
 
quadraginta said:
You're from NZ so this may come as somewhat of a surprise to you, but the state of California is not a homogeneous entity. There are liberals, progressives, conservatives, and outright whacko right-wingnuts.

By way of example, the John Birch Society was born in California. More than a few parts of it are hotbeds of foam-at-the-mouth reactionaries.

Mebbe NZ is more monocultural, but California isn't like that, despite what conservative talk show hosts might want you to believe.
Click to expand...

Yes, I am well aware of what California is, and is not. I probably know more about the USA than most USAians know about my country.

I was merely commenting on overall probabilities. The probability that liberal and left-wing attitudes prevail overall in states like California and New York are greater than they would be in say, Texas, Georgia or Florida.
 
It's going to be a busy fall. The Arbery lynch squad goes on trial in mid October, followed by Rittenhouse's double murder and other felonies trial in early November.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom