11/13: Destroying Pakistani firearms - Page 7

MaggieL · 11-29-2001, 10:30 AM

The point of the analogy was that you don't equip yourself with a fire extinguisher in the hopes that a fire is going to happen, and I haven't armed myself because I'm itching for a firefight. Please refrain from clairifying my analogies until you understand them. It had nothing to do with bodycount.

And the comment about Jag's age isn't that "being young, he must not be able to engage in debate" but rather "I finally understood why he was unwilling to engage in debate when I found out how young he is".

Dham, you did your best to load your hypothetrical emotionally by brining my daughter into it. But knowing her, I know it's a much more unlikely scenario than even you admit it is--she shares my values about a lot of things.

The place to get *that* shitfaced--so throughly besotted that you don't know where you are--is *not* anywhere outside your home...even in the backyard. It's just plain *stupid* to do that, which is what Darwin Awards are awarded for.

I'm unmoved by "poor guy, he was too drunk to be responsible for himself" arguments. He deliberately incapacitated himself, and then went bouncing around in public. As it was, he randomly picked the worst possible house on the block to try to *break into*, and consequently got killed rather than arrested, or caused some other disaster. Perhaps he *thought* he was trying to get into his own house. But the reason he couldn't even *tell* was *his* doing; I'll shed no tears for him.

His irresponsibility could have killed *someone else*, so he wasn't the only potential victim of his own recklessness. Saying "he didn't deserve to die" is empty--he willingly started a crapshoot where he or any number of the people around him could have gotten hurt. Would he have "deserved" to die if he'd wandered into the path of an oncoming train?

If you're going to deliberately fuck yourself up, especially to that degree, you have a responsibility to protect others from the consequences of your decision just as much as someone who decides to arm himself has a responsibility to ensure that his use of deadly force is appropriate.

I've been intoxicated myself...sometimes *very* intoxicated, and deliberately so. But I was at pains beforehand to ensure that *I* would be safe and would not endanger others just because I was taking a mental holiday. The fact that you make yourself incapable of being responsible does not relieve you of responsibility.

If I'm an "elitist" because I accept responsibility for my own behavior and distain those who don't, then I'll wear that title proudly.

warch · 11-29-2001, 11:38 AM

Am I my brother's keeper? If not, well then sorry to bug you. If so, then when?

russotto · 11-29-2001, 02:48 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Undertoad
turn on all the lights, and watch and wait. If yes, if you have 30 seconds you get the cell phone and the gun and go out the BACK door, probably dialing 911 at the same time. You take the gun so that A) he won't get it, and B) you have some recourse if he has non-drunk, non-naked friends outside.

Uh-uh. I don't leave the house. I'm not letting some drunk and violent (he broke down the door) guy have free run of my house. Besides, I don't have a cell phone. This applies whether I have a gun or not, BTW.

MaggieL · 11-29-2001, 08:25 PM

Two small corrections: The naked guy was *at* the back door, and it's not clear from what I've read at what point the shooter realized he was naked or drunk.

And nothing I read said he *did* break in, only that he was *trying* to get in through a locked sliding glass door, and evidently making enough noise at it to awaken the shooter.

In case anybody's unclear as to my point of view, I'm *not* holding a brief for the shooter, what's known about the case is enough that he should at least stand trial for manslaughter.

But the drunk was a bozo.

jaguar · 11-30-2001, 04:01 AM

argh
I never said you were itching for a firefight - merely that one has gain at zero cost and the other has gain at a cost......

As for being unwilling to debate i find that ironic since you seem to be more interested in nitpicking an analergy than attempting to mount a plausable defense to the damning evidence the CDC has produced.

MaggieL · 12-19-2001, 10:29 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by MaggieL

But the drunk was a bozo.

And here's a further update on the case. The shooter, Bellina, is being sued by the drunk's family. Also named in the suit is Bellina's business (deep pockets, of course)...and the *bar* where the drunk got drunk. So this clown disn't accidently get out into public, he was actually out *driving* in that condition, or worse....since he had time to get home, take off his clothes and then got outside to pee. His BAC was .22 at autopsy.

The newspaper article also discloses that the drunk set off Bellina's burgular alarm trying to get into his house.

alleycat · 12-19-2001, 11:26 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by warch
I'll vote for basic human rights over traditional cultural practice any day.

Hear! Hear!

11-29-2001, 10:30 AM	#91
MaggieL in the Hour of Scampering Join Date: Jan 2001 Location: Jeffersonville PA (15 mi NW of Philadelphia) Posts: 4,060	The point of the analogy was that you don't equip yourself with a fire extinguisher in the hopes that a fire is going to happen, and I haven't armed myself because I'm itching for a firefight. Please refrain from clairifying my analogies until you understand them. It had nothing to do with bodycount. And the comment about Jag's age isn't that "being young, he must not be able to engage in debate" but rather "I finally understood why he was unwilling to engage in debate when I found out how young he is". Dham, you did your best to load your hypothetrical emotionally by brining my daughter into it. But knowing her, I know it's a much more unlikely scenario than even you admit it is--she shares my values about a lot of things. The place to get that shitfaced--so throughly besotted that you don't know where you are--is not anywhere outside your home...even in the backyard. It's just plain stupid to do that, which is what Darwin Awards are awarded for. I'm unmoved by "poor guy, he was too drunk to be responsible for himself" arguments. He deliberately incapacitated himself, and then went bouncing around in public. As it was, he randomly picked the worst possible house on the block to try to break into, and consequently got killed rather than arrested, or caused some other disaster. Perhaps he thought he was trying to get into his own house. But the reason he couldn't even tell was his doing; I'll shed no tears for him. His irresponsibility could have killed someone else, so he wasn't the only potential victim of his own recklessness. Saying "he didn't deserve to die" is empty--he willingly started a crapshoot where he or any number of the people around him could have gotten hurt. Would he have "deserved" to die if he'd wandered into the path of an oncoming train? If you're going to deliberately fuck yourself up, especially to that degree, you have a responsibility to protect others from the consequences of your decision just as much as someone who decides to arm himself has a responsibility to ensure that his use of deadly force is appropriate. I've been intoxicated myself...sometimes very intoxicated, and deliberately so. But I was at pains beforehand to ensure that I would be safe and would not endanger others just because I was taking a mental holiday. The fact that you make yourself incapable of being responsible does not relieve you of responsibility. If I'm an "elitist" because I accept responsibility for my own behavior and distain those who don't, then I'll wear that title proudly. __________________ "Neither can his Mind be thought to be in Tune,whose words do jarre; nor his reason In frame, whose sentence is preposterous..."

11-29-2001, 08:25 PM	#94
MaggieL in the Hour of Scampering Join Date: Jan 2001 Location: Jeffersonville PA (15 mi NW of Philadelphia) Posts: 4,060	Two small corrections: The naked guy was at the back door, and it's not clear from what I've read at what point the shooter realized he was naked or drunk. And nothing I read said he did break in, only that he was trying to get in through a locked sliding glass door, and evidently making enough noise at it to awaken the shooter. In case anybody's unclear as to my point of view, I'm not holding a brief for the shooter, what's known about the case is enough that he should at least stand trial for manslaughter. But the drunk was a bozo. __________________ "Neither can his Mind be thought to be in Tune,whose words do jarre; nor his reason In frame, whose sentence is preposterous..."

11-30-2001, 04:01 AM	#95
jaguar whig Join Date: Apr 2001 Posts: 5,075	argh I never said you were itching for a firefight - merely that one has gain at zero cost and the other has gain at a cost...... As for being unwilling to debate i find that ironic since you seem to be more interested in nitpicking an analergy than attempting to mount a plausable defense to the damning evidence the CDC has produced. __________________ Good friends, good books and a sleepy conscience: this is the ideal life. - Twain

11-29-2001, 11:38 AM	#92
warch lurkin old school Join Date: Oct 2001 Location: Minnesota Posts: 2,796	Am I my brother's keeper? If not, well then sorry to bug you. If so, then when?

Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)