Florida's new "Shoot to kill"

[DarthSydodyas]

It's the weather, I tell ya!

 

[spanglechick]

It would be interesting for all of us to meet somewhere.

So many will never come out from behind their computerscreens.
Thats ok such is the nature of the internet.
I have found that all we can do here is argue and share opinion.
all the insults are as nothing all the threats are as nothing.
That is the disconnection that emboldens so many to be so nasty from the safe place behind their computer screens.
Human nature tends to take over and rational arguments become insults
once either oponnent in an internet argument replys with an insult the "insulter" has lost, has surrendered the argument.
We have All done it.
Many do this with out even understanding what it is that they have done.

Some of the most immature posters insult other posters Prior to an argument.
When this happens it becomes obvious that they Have no argument and only populate the boards to serve some emotional need that they are not able to satisfy in real life.
So many here refuse logic, and hope that the political positions that they have been tought will somehow win the day.
It becomes a self defence mecanism. It is the "I dont want to look like a fool for falling for this silly Political position" issue.
No one wants to admit when they are wrong.
That is understandable. It is also arrogant.
So many will not let them selves give an inch on a political position (even the ones that they where tought) reguardless of how obviously wrong it is.
That is Human nature, We are all Humans.
It is easy to forget that WARS are fought over such things.
So,

What is it that you would DO?
Many here complain about what is happening, what would you do instead?
Give up?
But then that is incorrect isnt it.
What would you HAVE US do....

You are again "SAFE" from behind your computer screen V Panda, (and all the other regular suspects.)

So, Spout yer poison...............

Curious...
Why do you start a new line with every sentence?
It makes your posts look like poetry.
And yet they are far from it.

 

[spring-peeper]

Guns are neccessary to keep power in the hands of the people.

Thats why commies don't like them.

Yes, I remember well seeing "the power of the people" against the "commie" rescuers in NO recently.

 

[pbman]

Yes, I remember well seeing "the power of the people" against the "commie" rescuers in NO recently.

Thats a weak strawman.

Or do you only like the rules of debate, when it suits you?

 

[GarfieldLeChat]

Polite yes safe? well,
what is safe? what does that mean to you?
it is kinda like trying to define truth, or Quality
it becomes a philosophical question.
is England a Safe country?a polite country? are we talking about country or culture.
and WHAT is the culture.

So many choose to judge others in a different place in different conditions with their values. That is invalid. but it makes great sport.

so judge away
it will make you feel better about yourself.

no ....


you see ....


that ...

doesn't...


Work...

You see ... regardless of the lack of actual scale of the subjective thing you are attempting to measure it does not negiate the fact you can agree a formula with which to define postive or negative results of your study. we call these your hypotheses, you know like being shot with a gun or not being shot without a gun ...

what your suggesting is that it's not really quatifable, but of course the subjective nature means you have to find the median live the common average if you like; let's face it most people when pushed will answer the same way on this one with the possible exception of goths; would you rahter be dead or alive? shit i'm willing to bet that the vaste majority of people would say alive.... every fucking time ...

and this medain line becomes quantifable, therefore we are measuring your subject thing against it's effects. thus allowing people to choose not to have to face being killed by removing the weapons which kill them signifcantly increases their chances of being alive ...

It's simple really you fucking dullard

 

[pbman]

You mean your answer about having been too good a shot to join up in case you embarassed the army with your marksmanship, or the one about you having been too old after 9/11?

Pathetic chickenhawk loser.

lol

Freeloading commie.

 

[Bernie Gunther]

I seem to recall that VP has actually served in the military pbman, while you just sit at home jerking off over the pictures of civilians that yours has shot.

 

[sleaterkinney]

Thats a weak strawman.

Or do you only like the rules of debate, when it suits you?

yeah, just because some people kill with guns, why should you ban them?.

 

[Bernie Gunther]

I wonder if pbman still supports the rights of Iraqis to keep and bear AK47s, RPGs and the like? After all, he's often made the argument that the right to keep and bear arms is the only guarantee against oppressive government.

 

[pbman]

I wonder if pbman still supports the rights of Iraqis to keep and bear AK47s, RPGs and the like? After all, he's often made the argument that the right to keep and bear arms is the only guarantee against oppressive government.

Of course.

The many honest people their need them to protect themselves form bathist thugs and out of town terroists.

Without so many guns in the hands on honest people, our job thier would be ten times harder.

 

[pbman]

yeah, just because some people kill with guns, why should you ban them?.

Some people missues drugs.

Should we ban them as well?

F--- the nanny state.

 

[newharper]

Of course.

The many honest people their need them to protect themselves form bathist thugs and out of town terroists.

Without so many guns in the hands on honest people, our job thier would be ten times harder.

Aah, an updated episode of Bonanza then.

 

[GarfieldLeChat]

Some people missues drugs.

Should we ban them as well?

F--- the nanny state.

erm ... no.. you... see...

cos the line on this one is that drugs are illigal precisely beacuse they do kill people ... far less each year than your guns do...

btw you should come live in the uk for a bit before lecturing on what a nanny state is ... my guess is that you's soon be come contrite with rage at the interferance which goes on by the state here...

 

[detective-boy]

All the actual US laws I have looked on the links from this thread (including the Flordia ones on the site which lists the laws in every state) have the rider that any right to use force is predicated on the shooter having a reasonable belief that someone is at imminent risk / that someone is entering their property unlawfully, etc.

Thi requirement is pretty much the same as the UK laws on self-defence and use of force in prevention of crime. It also, to my mind, does not merit the "Shoot first" title - the FIRST requirement is to establish your belief. If your really do "shoot first" you are likely to be in deep shit if the victim is NOT acting unlawfully.

Has Florida changed this? If so, does someone have a link to the text of the new law?

 

[sleaterkinney]

Some people missues drugs.

Should we ban them as well?

F--- the nanny state.

I thought drugs were banned pb?.

 

[ViolentPanda]

lol

Freeloading commie.

Is that the best you can do, jerkoff?

Some of us here have actually had the courage of our convictions and served our country. Not you though, coward. Not you.

Go masturbate over your latest copy of Guns and Ammo, Chickenhawk. It's all you're good for.

 

[pbman]

Is that the best you can do, jerkoff?

Some of us here have actually had the courage of our convictions and served our country. Not you though, coward. Not you.

Go masturbate over your latest copy of Guns and Ammo, Chickenhawk. It's all you're good for.

Yawn.

Thats the poorest try at a wind up i've seen in months.

 

[ViolentPanda]

Yawn.

Thats the poorest try at a wind up i've seen in months.

I'm not trying to wind you up, shit-for-brains.

I'm stating a truth. You've never served in your country's armed forces, and yet you feel qualified to "shout the odds" at those of us who have, and when questioned you make chickenshit cowardly excuses for why you never served.

I respect someone who comes right out and says "fuck serving in the military, I don't want that", but jism-sacks who beat their chests and spout chickenhawk bullshit? You should have your cowardly arses kicked from here to next sunday.

 

[Rentonite]

VP you are Really very emotional arent you.
So What was it you where tryng to say in your last post?

 

[Streathamite]

Yawn.

Thats the poorest try at a wind up i've seen in months.

it's true tho', is it not? You're quite willing to see 2000 US soldiers - and many, many more Iraqis - dying in a war to defeat a non-existent threat, but has there ever, ever been the remotest chance of you having sufficient courage of your convictions, to risk YOUR life for your country/
Or for any cause?
any chance of you getting within a 100 miles of a combat zone?
nope.
nil.
zip.
nada.
there's more chance of the pope converting to Judaism!
chickenhawk.

 

[Streathamite]

Of course.

The many honest people their need them to protect themselves form bathist thugs and out of town terroists.

Without so many guns in the hands on honest people, our job thier would be ten times harder.

errm....I hate to point this out to you, but your own government's officials have now admitted the majority of Insurgents are neither ba'athist remnants, nor from other countries...just ordinary Iraqis sick of their land being occupied.
never mind the facts eh, peabrain?

 

[nino_savatte]

VP you are Really very emotional arent you.
So What was it you where tryng to say in your last post?

Owwwwwwww kayyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyy!

 

[ViolentPanda]

VP you are Really very emotional arent you.
So What was it you where tryng to say in your last post?

I'm not "trying to say" anything, numbnuts.

I'm stating loud and proud that pbman is a cowardly lying jerk-off.

Same as I'm happy to state that you're a piece of racist filth.

See, nice and plainly stated, so even a racist goon like you can understand it.

 

[monkeyhead]

it's true tho', is it not? You're quite willing to see 2000 US soldiers - and many, many more Iraqis - dying in a war to defeat a non-existent threat, but has there ever, ever been the remotest chance of you having sufficient courage of your convictions, to risk YOUR life for your country/
Or for any cause?
any chance of you getting within a 100 miles of a combat zone?
nope.
nil.
zip.
nada.
there's more chance of the pope converting to Judaism!
chickenhawk.

now who does that sound like? lives in a big white house, dresses up in military uniforms for publicity stunts, MISSION ACCOMPLISHED apparently, any ideas?

 

[Streathamite]

yup makes sense. given that ol' leadhead uncritically parrots everything bushbot central tells him to, and that many here reckon him to be a purposebuilt GOP plant

 

[PrinceToad]

[the law permits] the use deadly force if "he or she reasonably believes it is necessary to do so to prevent death or great bodily harm to himself or herself or to another person"
http://www.shootfirstlaw.org/law/
I do believe that there are a number of places around the world where people are using this as a justification to attack US interests.

 

[pbman]

[the law permits] the use deadly force if "he or she reasonably believes it is necessary to do so to prevent death or great bodily harm to himself or herself or to another person"
http://www.shootfirstlaw.org/law/
I do believe that there are a number of places around the world where people are using this as a justification to attack US interests.

Of course.

Lots of people don't like freedom.

 

[PrinceToad]

Lots of people don't like freedom.

Chickenhawk gun-nuts for starters.

 

[kyser_soze]

There was a 15x3 ad in the Guardian on Saturday from a group called The Brady Campaign/ www.shootfirstlaw.org warning potential holidaymakers about the change in the law...

 

[nino_savatte]

Lots of people don't like freedom.

Oh really? Name some.