Byron Smith murder trial in US - wow
Discussion
WinstonWolf said:
And subsequently released... Not the same as being burgled however.
After a long battle and several years in prison. And you are quite right, sitting in ambush in your cellar to await a burglar isn't anything like having a car driven at you, at speed, in a known terrorist area. I know which I prefer.
Grumfutock said:
WinstonWolf said:
And subsequently released... Not the same as being burgled however.
After a long battle and several years in prison. And you are quite right, sitting in ambush in your cellar to await a burglar isn't anything like having a car driven at you, at speed, in a known terrorist area. I know which I prefer.
Grumfutock said:
WinstonWolf said:
And subsequently released... Not the same as being burgled however.
After a long battle and several years in prison. And you are quite right, sitting in ambush in your cellar to await a burglar isn't anything like having a car driven at you, at speed, in a known terrorist area. I know which I prefer.
LocoCoco said:
Bill said:
LocoCoco said:
Yes (IMO). Me too by the way, world would be better place if I was dead.
Er. Ok. 
t and don't deserve their lives. 
Disastrous said:
Genuinely, that's getting to the verge of being a little bit dangerous, if you see yourself as judge and jury (hopefully not executioner) over whether people deserve to live or not!
To be fair to Loco, he hasn't expressed that he sees himself as such. Grumfutock said:
Dan_1981 said:
You're right, one of them signed up for it and was being paid.
Oh I see. You are only judged to be under threat and at risk if it isn't your choice and it is free. OK I get it now. Please!The two cases are not a sensible comparison to make.
I've said several times that the old guy is a crazy nut job who will likely end up in prison for the rest of his life.
It doesn't mean I don't have some sympathy for him.
eta: - I'm not 100% on your stance - two joyriders get killed for doing a minor crime but in an area populated with blokes with guns and you think the soldier has been badly treated?
Two other kids commit a crime in an area populated with blokes with guns and this time its the criminals that have been badly treated?
Or are we arguing the same point here? Neither the soldier or the old bloke should have gone / go to jail if they had only killed the people involved and old guy hadn't "finished them off"
Edited by Dan_1981 on Friday 25th April 13:29
TheJimi said:
LocoCoco said:
Bill said:
LocoCoco said:
Yes (IMO). Me too by the way, world would be better place if I was dead.
Er. Ok. t and don't deserve their lives. Disastrous said:
Genuinely, that's getting to the verge of being a little bit dangerous, if you see yourself as judge and jury (hopefully not executioner) over whether people deserve to live or not!
To be fair to Loco, he hasn't expressed that he sees himself as such. Anyway, not meaning to have a go. I think it's a bit of a shame if he really feels like that, as there's really a fantastic world out there full of lots of amazing people.
hman said:
All this could have been avoided by installing a decent guard dog.
You presumably suggest this because it would have been legal.IHNFY- so was the initial shooting of the burglars. He went too far, no question, but his initial action was legitimate under the laws where he lived.
Rovinghawk said:
You presumably suggest this because it would have been legal.
IHNFY- so was the initial shooting of the burglars. He went too far, no question, but his initial action was legitimate under the laws where he lived.
Perhaps the guy actually wanted to execute some people and thought that this was a means without penalties.IHNFY- so was the initial shooting of the burglars. He went too far, no question, but his initial action was legitimate under the laws where he lived.
blindswelledrat said:
Disastrous, I agree with Locococo and demand to know why anybody feels they believe they have the right not to be fingered against their will?
Until you can adequately explain why, then I retain the right to believe that no one should automatically be exempt from fingering.
Have you got your threads confused?Until you can adequately explain why, then I retain the right to believe that no one should automatically be exempt from fingering.
Dan_1981 said:
Not at all, plenty of people come under risk and threat, some of them are paid to do it and trained to react to it, other people are old people who probably at some point in life have felt safe in their own home.
The two cases are not a sensible comparison to make.
I've said several times that the old guy is a crazy nut job who will likely end up in prison for the rest of his life.
It doesn't mean I don't have some sympathy for him.
eta: - I'm not 100% on your stance - two joyriders get killed for doing a minor crime but in an area populated with blokes with guns and you think the soldier has been badly treated?
Two other kids commit a crime in an area populated with blokes with guns and this time its the criminals that have been badly treated?
Or are we arguing the same point here? Neither the soldier or the old bloke should have gone / go to jail if they had only killed the people involved and old guy hadn't "finished them off"
No. I think that they are totally different cases. The old bloke didn't "fear for his life". If he did why would wait in ambush? Logically you would take measures to make your home safer or call the police. I know I would. I also agree that the "finish them off shot" will be or should be his undoing.The two cases are not a sensible comparison to make.
I've said several times that the old guy is a crazy nut job who will likely end up in prison for the rest of his life.
It doesn't mean I don't have some sympathy for him.
eta: - I'm not 100% on your stance - two joyriders get killed for doing a minor crime but in an area populated with blokes with guns and you think the soldier has been badly treated?
Two other kids commit a crime in an area populated with blokes with guns and this time its the criminals that have been badly treated?
Or are we arguing the same point here? Neither the soldier or the old bloke should have gone / go to jail if they had only killed the people involved and old guy hadn't "finished them off"
Edited by Dan_1981 on Friday 25th April 13:29
The soldier was judged by some mythical idea that he is trained and will fire at the car until it draws level with him and then stop as it is no longer a threat. Oh if only we could all react so calmly. On a par with "But why didn't the police just wound him".
Bill said:
blindswelledrat said:
Disastrous, I agree with Locococo and demand to know why anybody feels they believe they have the right not to be fingered against their will?
Until you can adequately explain why, then I retain the right to believe that no one should automatically be exempt from fingering.
Have you got your threads confused?Until you can adequately explain why, then I retain the right to believe that no one should automatically be exempt from fingering.
blindswelledrat said:
Not at all, it was just a tongue-in-cheek comment to exemplify how ludicrous Loco's argument was that you somehow have to justify basic obvious rights in order to maintain them. Tell me why you should be allowed to live? Tell me why you have the right not to be finger....oh forget it.
Gotcha. I thought you meant to be on the "19-y-o who fingered a 12-y-o and got away with it" thread. 
Somehow I missed that thread.NRS said:
So because it's the law then it's ok?
What's the difference that it's in your home?
Can you really not see the difference between,What's the difference that it's in your home?
a) Someone slipping £10 out of your bank account, and
b) Waking in the early hours of the morning to find an armed intruder lifting your wallet from the bedside table?
It's the law because most people CAN see the difference and that's how they decided the law should be.
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff