[quote]WhiteFlash wrote:
[quote]DoubleDuce wrote:
[quote]knee-gro wrote:
[quote]DoubleDuce wrote:
[quote]knee-gro wrote:
[quote]DoubleDuce wrote:
[quote]knee-gro wrote:
[quote]Bauber wrote:
Well I don’t think it was barbaric. I meant the beating he got was pretty brutal to his pride and head. I mean if it were me - I would have filled him full of .45 caliber hollow points after he swung at me…
I am not going to fistfight anyone. I value my body over some idiot who wants to try and harm me for no reason. So, I will just gladly pull the trigger to avoid bodily harm.[/quote]
Let me get this straight, someone throws a punch at you and deserves to die? Under those same conditions - some single tweeker, while you’re with your buddies? A guy your size.
You need to man the fuck up and stop being an oversized pussy.
I know 'murica is full of backward hicks and has stupid gun laws but if you could legally get away with this then I don’t know what to tell ya. No developed country allows that.[/quote]
What a tool.
Defense laws have nothing to do with deserving to die. If that were the case, you could shoot someone after they had swung at you and then retreated. That of course isn’t the case meaning your claim is ignorant and lacks any real thought.
Defense laws are about law abiding people not having the duty to take injury for the sake of preserving their attackers well being.
There is no death penalty for violently attacking someone. There are sometimes however natural consequences that can include death.
Free men have no duty to provide for the safety of a violent attacker at risk to their own body. You suggesting that he does have a duty and that the law should reflect such is to claim that the government owns his body and has the right to risk his health as it sees fit.
You are the one that is a backwards European know it all with your nose so far up your own ass you walk around claiming everyone else smells like shit.[/quote]
What are you babbling about DoubleDouche, you don’t think shooting that scrawny little man for a girly swing would have been over the top?
Especially for a guy as big as bauber?
[/quote]
Does the guy have a knife? does he have a gun? Does he have aids? No man should be forced to take that risk.
And I was also referring to you ignorant stereotyping bigoted derogatory insults. Are all people in Portugal as much a bigot as you, or should I not file this as a negative reflection on your country and instead as just one idiot.[/quote]
Where do you draw the line?
What if some punk looking kid comes to me and says “hey dude got a lighter”? should I just answer “yeah I got just the thing to light you up” and then shoot him in the kneecap because I don’t want to take risks?
Actually, this sounds kinda cool now that I think about it.
Bottom line is, a punch doesn’t warrant going Frank Castle on someone.
[/quote]
Reductio ad absurdum. I could equally accuse your of forcing me to watch while my wife is raped and murdered because you don’t want the criminal killed. Where do you draw the line man? Why do you want my wife raped and beaten to death?
In reality, drawing a weapon would almost certainly have ended the black guy’s bravado and the fight with no one hurt. It’s why there are different requirements for using deadly force vs. using threat of deadly force. If you get attacked you have the right to use the threat (drawing a weapon).[/quote]
That is an absolutely retarded comparison. Not even remotely the same thing. If some dude takes a swing at you and you immediately draw down him because you can, you have major issues and need to reevaluate your life. [/quote]
It was supposed to be a dumb comparison. I was illustrating the fallacy knee-guy here was using.
And it depends on the situation. It is something basically every cop would do though.