God Bless Texas

Off Topic
22

BlakeAJackson,

You would argue that burglary is punisheable by death? Because that’s what the old man did: He assumed the authority of the law, took it into his own hands, and deemed that the best thing he could do was to kill them. That, sir, is murder. Perhaps not as cruel as murdering someone over an ounce of crack, but murder nonetheless. I’m not sure you heard the tapes completely, because you can clearly hear him say “I’m gonna kill 'em!” at least twice, as well as “I can’t let them steal shit!”

At one point he even commented to the operator to bet him he couldn’t go outside and kill them without getting killed. Under any other circumstances, that’s 1st (perhaps 2nd) degree murder. I can’t believe how idiotic it is that people are willing to excuse this because he’s allegedly protecting his neighbor’s TV set and DVD player.

23

I knew Joe Horn was having a bad year with the Falcons but I didn’t think it was this bad

25

[quote]Mick28 wrote:
pookie wrote:
What if…

The 2 guys had been defrauded by the neighbor and, having been given the run around by the cops, decided to track him down and get their cash back?

-or-

The 2 guys actually know the neighbor, who’s a cheap bastard, and decided to pull a prank on him.

-or-

The neighbor has been dodging his alimony payments, and his ex-wife’s brother and friend decided to come by and collect her due.

Of course, those scenarios are bloody unlikely - the guys were most probably robbing the neighbor - but they’re not impossible. I could understand the guy shooting people coming into his own house, but going out and shooting people at his neighbor’s house is nuts.

Excellent post.
[/quote]

It was not that great of a post. IMO. Here�??s why:

What if…

The two guys were breaking in to the house to get items to pawn so they could upgrade their computers to upload the latest kiddy porn the created.

or

They where trying to steal stuff to sell, so they could get drugs. Then use those to drugs to get runaways addicted and use their addiction to prostitute them out for 5 dollars a bj so they could perpetually fund their own drug habits.

or

They where going to take whatever they got to pay for a transgender hooker to shot heroin in to their cocks while they mutilated a pit bull.

I could do this all day long. The fact of the matter is that no matter what their justification, people make choices. I can have compassion or empathy for what they have been through but I do not accept their behavior because of it. What they were doing had a high risk. They would have got shot if it was my house and I was home.

What if the next time they broke in an old person was living there and they didn’t realize they were home? Do you think they would have hurt that person? None of this justifies killing, but lets be honest they were breaking in to a home; they took the risk of getting killed. I am not surprised nor do I feel sorry for them. Everyone has challenges to overcome in their life, and I guarantee that there are people who have had it worse then these guys and did not resort to stealing. Not to mention that this was likely not the first crime they committed. It was broad daylight. That�??s pretty ballsy for armatures. The wager for sin is death.

As for anyone who is saying you must not value human life. I do not value people�??s lives, when they do not build value in their life. They were robbing. Their life was worth slightly more then the shotgun shell that took it but not much more. I feel bad that they were so week that they resorted to this type of behavior. This happened in Pasadena not some third world nation. Starvation is the only justification for theft and only if you have no means to satisfy that need. We have charities and plenty of jobs here in Texas so they are lazy assholes that want to parasite off of hard working Americans. So keep you bleeding heart for some one who deserves it like the families that come home to having their house robbed by degenerate scumbags and are working two jobs to afford what they had.

26

They are just things, just money, who can really say it’s worth it to end someones life over things. Protecting a family member or yourself is one thing but to try to defend money or posesssions(especially your neighbors) is a pathetic excuse to finally use that purty shotgun that’s been waiting to be fired.

These arguments always turn into “well you don’t know what you would have done, or well it’s never happened to you” so I’ll quickly speak on that. I got my garage and a car broken into three days ago and I caught the person in the act. No gun, no weapon, just yelled at him and told him I was calling the police. Chased him 20 yards until he got into a waiting car. Am I a sucker cause he robbed my house? No he got a bag that was filled with work files, and I would have been foolish to try to defend them. Did he deserve to freaking die over that?

28

[quote]mr_slick wrote:
Hagar wrote:
Fuck burglars. I could care less about someone who preys upon the innocent.

Did hell just froze over? Did soembody from California actaully agree with the Texas law?[/quote]

But is our childrens learning?

[quote]pushharder wrote:

How 'bout this angle as a reply to the above? And who better to decide than an eye witness to the actual crime.

Not suggesting that all crimes should ideally be adjudicated in this manner but just think about it.
[/quote]

Are you suggesting that someone who witnesses a crime should be allowed to decide the fate of the person committing the crime? Im sorry push, but thats the EXACT fucking reason we have laws in this nation. Think about that for a minute. Do you really want vigilante justice?

[quote]BlakeAJackson wrote:

It was not that great of a post. IMO. Here�??s why:

What if…

The two guys were breaking in to the house to get items to pawn so they could upgrade their computers to upload the latest kiddy porn the created.

or

They where trying to steal stuff to sell, so they could get drugs. Then use those to drugs to get runaways addicted and use their addiction to prostitute them out for 5 dollars a bj so they could perpetually fund their own drug habits.

or

They where going to take whatever they got to pay for a transgender hooker to shot heroin in to their cocks while they mutilated a pit bull.

I could do this all day long. The fact of the matter is that no matter what their justification, people make choices. I can have compassion or empathy for what they have been through but I do not accept their behavior because of it. What they were doing had a high risk. They would have got shot if it was my house and I was home.

What if the next time they broke in an old person was living there and they didn’t realize they were home? Do you think they would have hurt that person? None of this justifies killing, but lets be honest they were breaking in to a home; they took the risk of getting killed. I am not surprised nor do I feel sorry for them. Everyone has challenges to overcome in their life, and I guarantee that there are people who have had it worse then these guys and did not resort to stealing. Not to mention that this was likely not the first crime they committed. It was broad daylight. That�??s pretty ballsy for armatures. The wager for sin is death.

As for anyone who is saying you must not value human life. I do not value people�??s lives, when they do not build value in their life. They were robbing. Their life was worth slightly more then the shotgun shell that took it but not much more. I feel bad that they were so week that they resorted to this type of behavior. This happened in Pasadena not some third world nation. Starvation is the only justification for theft and only if you have no means to satisfy that need. We have charities and plenty of jobs here in Texas so they are lazy assholes that want to parasite off of hard working Americans. So keep you bleeding heart for some one who deserves it like the families that come home to having their house robbed by degenerate scumbags and are working two jobs to afford what they had.
[/quote]

What does it matter if they had a right or wrong justification for doing what they did? Is it right to allow a bystander to decide whether they live or die? Who are you to decide how much another’s life is worth? They took the risk of getting killed, but does this give a neighbor the right to kill them?

The wages of sin is death? Please move back to Iran where they execute you for premarital sex and chop off 5-year old’s hands for stealing apples. Fucking think about what you are saying for a minute, but first only after getting out of your “AMERICA FUCK YEAH” mindset. Are you completely ignorant of the fact that we have laws and a legal system in this country?

It wasnt his stuff being stolen, it wasnt his house, he called the police and told them he was going to kill the burglars, left his house, murdered them, and then returned to the house. That sounds an awful lot like premeditated murder. Please explain to me how that could be anything BUT premeditated murder.

30

[quote]pushharder wrote:
The way I see it “the law” should not be deified. It is not omniscient and omnipresent, however, it greatly desires omnipotence.[/quote]

You’re way off track.

It’s not about deifying the law or the government. It’s about recognizing that the legal system has checks and balances in place to prevent abuse and injustices from happening. It’s not 100%, but it certainly outperforms vigilante justice. It also prevents eye-for-eye escalations. What if the relative of the 2 dead guys decide to track down the old geezer and exact their punishment for murdering their siblings? Where does it end? When a family runs out of bullets or members?

It’s also about fitting the punishment with the crime. Who here hasn’t done dumb stuff when they were younger? Stuff you regret, or at the very least, wouldn’t do again? Whatever happened to letting someone reform and change their ways? How many people wouldn’t be around anymore if everyone who has ever stolen something got a shotgun blast to the face?

32

[quote]pushharder wrote:

Good point but doubtlessly it’s not the one you intended to make.[/quote]

Too bad you weren’t around 2000 years ago when Jesus asked “Let him who is without sin cast the first stone.” You sure could’ve shown him and that whore.

33

[quote]BlakeAJackson wrote:

The wager for sin is death.

[/quote] Sin? Or crime? Because I’m afraid the bible isn’t stuck into the Constitution. Sorry for that. So if we go by the law, which is all that matters here, robbery does not merit death.

You don’t value life if the person doesn’t value their life, okay that’s all heart-warming and enlightening and what-not, but again… we’re talking about the legal repercussions of robbery, murder, and vigilantism. Whether or not you, or that old man, value life only under whatever circumstances you might like or dislike, it doesn’t matter. What he did was murder, not self-defense. Even assuming the, infact, one of those robbers stepped onto his land, it doesn’t justify the murder of the other one.

Personal beliefs and vigilantism have no place in the law.

34

Hmm, aside from my previous statement, I do agree with pushharder’s comment that sometimes laws are just legislative whims of the moment.

Painful fact: “Under God” was a legislative whim, so even the ultra Conservatives have to thank such moments.

The abolishion of capital punishment a few decades ago was a judicial whim (never nominate Supreme Court judges with an obvious agenda).

Most of the bogus laws that openly and shamelessly imply the morality of the extreme upon others who don’t share their views are momentary legislative whims.

37

fuck them fucking fuckers

38

Push, we arent talking about any score of the unjust laws that have been passed in this nation on a legislative whim, we arent talking about little black slave girls, and we arent talking about unquestionable adherence to the law. What we are talking about is a guy who saw some people robbing his neighbors house, called the police, told the police that he was going to kill them, went to his neighbors house, and then shot and killed both men.

He had prior intent and he acted upon it. You cant claim self defense if you set out to kill someone in the first place. When did death become a fitting punishment for B&E? The fact that people have practiced vigilante justice for thousands of years does nothing to prove that it is a better system of justice than an established legal system. Vigilante justice is emotional, unthinking, and binds the definition of “criminal” and the fate of whoever is considered a criminal (in fact, to many, YOU would be a criminal because of your own lifestyle) to the witness’s own values.

Laws are standards to which citizens have agreed (by obtaining the benefits of citizenship) to abide by. The law exists in order to be respected. Im sorry, but you cannot pick and choose what laws you want to obey and when you want to obey them and not submit to the possible consequences. We arent talking about a frivolous law somewhere out there on the fringe. We are talking about two men being killed by a bystander for a non-violent crime. Hell, you know, I dont like the fact that my neighbors probably have oral sex. I think oral sex is immoral and wrong on so many levels and shows complete disrespect for human life. I think Im going to go kill them.

Where did I say anything about nanny government? Point that out to me because apparently I missed it.

39

[quote]pushharder wrote:
pookie wrote:
pushharder wrote:

Good point but doubtlessly it’s not the one you intended to make.

Too bad you weren’t around 2000 years ago when Jesus asked “Let him who is without sin cast the first stone.” You sure could’ve shown him and that whore.

I reread the article and couldn’t find the place where the two thieves were repenting on the guy’s lawn. I’ll read it one more time just to be sure.

Funny how things change with time. 120 years ago when the Dalton boys tried to ride out of town after robbing the bank and were gunned down by townspeople, nobody seemed to be crying about the evils of vigilantism. Nobody lamented. Nobody moaned (except the wounded Daltons).

I guess now we’re too sophisticated. Too altruistic. Too benevolent. Too high fallutin’. Too devoted to spotless and high brow adherence to the law.

Oh and almost forgot, too addicted to the government tit.

Happy Thanksgiving.[/quote]

Addicted to the government tit? Where are you getting this shit, Push, its great.

Nobody moaned 120 years ago because there was no adequate authority to enforce THE LAW.

I notice you keep referring to instances 100+ years ago. It seems you have a pretty tough time dealing with this whole “modern civilization thing”. How’s this: 300 years ago, you would have been ostracized and possibly punished for having sex with someone besides your wife. It seems you want to kick ass and apply your morality to others (IE vigilante justice) but youll be damned if anyone else tells you what to do.

I would rather take direction from the voice of a representative government (regardless of how flawed or corrupt the current US government is) than from some fundamentalist wacko with a shotgun any day.