It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Family, Friends Of Dead Home Invaders Say “They Didn’t Deserve To Get Killed.”

page: 17
21
<< 14  15  16    18  19  20 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on May, 10 2014 @ 08:59 AM
link   
a reply to: Kryties



....only in America!


I swear that you are trolling. But I'll play. Somebody breaks in your home. What do you do? (Let's say that you are in UK? or where ever you are?)




posted on May, 10 2014 @ 09:27 AM
link   
a reply to: Kryties

This here is an example of counter intelligence. Just watch yourselves.



posted on May, 10 2014 @ 04:38 PM
link   
me i would have used a silencer. just bury them in lyme in the basement



posted on May, 10 2014 @ 05:35 PM
link   
You can shoot people for any reason that fits your needs or desires, I really don't care why!

But if you ever shot my child I would hunt down and cripple every one of your loved ones.

it's called a vendetta!

Who wants to play???????

E'nuff said!
edit on 10-5-2014 by AlaskanDad because: changed everyone to every one



posted on May, 10 2014 @ 05:38 PM
link   
a reply to: AlaskanDad

vendettas aren't games



posted on May, 10 2014 @ 06:41 PM
link   

originally posted by: AlaskanDad
You can shoot people for any reason that fits your needs or desires, I really don't care why!

But if you ever shot my child I would hunt down and cripple every one of your loved ones.

it's called a vendetta!

Who wants to play???????

E'nuff said!


Even if your child was caught red handed killing someone? My what a shining example of parenting that would be. You are obviously trolling the thread,but please continue.



posted on May, 10 2014 @ 06:56 PM
link   
 


off-topic post removed to prevent thread-drift


 



posted on May, 10 2014 @ 07:00 PM
link   

originally posted by: rockoperawriter
a reply to: AlaskanDad

vendettas aren't games


WHAT?! Vendettas are the ULTIMATE game...



posted on May, 11 2014 @ 08:12 AM
link   
 


off-topic post removed to prevent thread-drift


 



posted on May, 11 2014 @ 10:02 AM
link   
Having read the comments the following can also be added:

The lines are drawn, there are those who support shooting the intruder, and those who think such is wrong. That will never change, yet it appears that there is a bigger picture here that is being missed and it is a reflection of society.

What is being shown, is that there is a lack of fear of consequences that has come up through society all over the country. People of all ages, no longer fear the consequences for their actions. Jail is no longer a place to fear. There is no fear that breaking the law is no longer there. Now days if a person breaks the law, in the USA, most of the time, they are given a place to live, a free education, free medical, food to eat, a place to sleep. The only thing that they do not get is the freedom to go where they want, until they are released. Jail or the threat of jail or even prison is no longer a threat.

Even suspension from school is no longer a threat. People tend to look at such, shrug their shoulders, and then move on. Fear is what is lacking. And these children, had no fear of consequences, did not think what they were going to get into any amount of trouble. Nor did their parents or friends believe that they were in any danger, or ultimately doing anything wrong. They, like so many, chose not to see what all was going on or if anything was wrong. Rather they were just ignoring the signs, and choosing to think that everything was alright.

Now there is a mess to be cleaned up, and the question should be, how to clean it up and deal with it all. The reality is that perhaps the problem is not the home owner, but society at large that does not believe that there should be consequences for the actions.

And the new bad thing is guns, and people will use these 2 as the poster children for such. And then when the next person gets killed in their home, the other side will use such as validation for their point of view. And neither side is willing to admit that the problem is greater than both sides.



posted on May, 11 2014 @ 02:45 PM
link   
a reply to: sdcigarpig

poorly thought out etiological paradigm.
the problem is not the EMOTION of FEAR.
the problem is deeper in the human than that
THE problem is deeper that EMOTIONS.
What is deeper to the human character than emotions.
MORALS. and not just the RELATIVE morals. people espouse moral relativity
which holds that theft can be right in certain situations.

the problem is fewer and fewer people are believing in ultimate universal objective morals.
thou shalt not steal
thou shalt not lie
thou shalt not murder
thou shalt not covet thy neighbors wife/goods

THAT IS THE ROOT PROBLEM.
when you go to identifying problems make certain it is the problem.



posted on May, 11 2014 @ 02:55 PM
link   
a reply to: IseeThroughYourBS

no they are serious. have one, it's a waiting game. now pranks those are games



posted on May, 11 2014 @ 04:27 PM
link   

originally posted by: sdcigarpig
Having read the comments the following can also be added:

The lines are drawn, there are those who support shooting the intruder, and those who think such is wrong. That will never change, yet it appears that there is a bigger picture here that is being missed and it is a reflection of society.


it will change and it will change with one simple event: The event would be that the folks who think it is not okay to shoot an intruder is this: the sooner they experience a home invasion in their home or in their parents home, and the invaders confront the lawful residents of the home, then the non shooters will change their minds and become shooters.

so to assert that it will NEVER change is patently incorrect.

[quote]
And the new bad thing is guns, and people will use these 2 as the poster children for such. And then when the next person gets killed in their home, the other side will use such as validation for their point of view. And neither side is willing to admit that the problem is greater than both sides.


are you a middle born child? just out of professional curiosity



posted on May, 11 2014 @ 07:03 PM
link   
a reply to: spirited75
Morals are not the issue. Too many times the very set of morals that you are espousing, has been used as weapon to keep society divided and split, to justify the mistreatment of people or groups.

This very country was started, because of a difference in morals. And ask some of the very people who those same morals have been used against. This country is diverse in nature, from all sorts of backgrounds, and beliefs. So with all of those beliefs that are around, how can it be a lack of morals?

But if you look at religion and the very moral paradigm that is used as an argument, then one has to go back to the very basic fear. If you step out of line you go someplace horrible after life. That in itself is shows the one thing that is the laws of cause and effect, where if you do something there is an effect that will follow, that many young people do not have a grasp on.



posted on May, 11 2014 @ 07:11 PM
link   
a reply to: spirited75
But what I stated is true, and ultimately the past has shown.

In the last few major shootings which made national headlines, the lines were drawn and the entire events were politicized. The victims were shown as a reason for more gun control, and at the same time to show the reason why there should be more guns in society to keep order and to protect the innocent.

And both sides are using such events to get a political point across. And when it is something where a crime is being committed, the first thing that comes out is how the friends and family of the criminal who got shot, is never at fault, it is always something else, to draw attention away from the fact that they were breaking the law in the first place. And when the victim ends up dead then we ask what kind of monster could do such a thing and how could such be prevented.

But never is it asked, why did the person, the criminal, do the deed in the first place. We all know that breaking the law is wrong, we know that stealing is against the law and is wrong, so then why is this still occurring to the point where people get into the situation where one person or the other gets shot and killed.

It has to be society, and the lack of fear of breaking the law, the fact that jail and prison are no longer feared. Most of those around the age of 30 or older are of the age to remember when being suspended had a real sting to it, where it was going to affect a person. So what has changed in all of those years, where such crimes were not committed by children, but adults? It has to be a lack of fear of the consequences.



posted on May, 12 2014 @ 12:34 AM
link   

originally posted by: AlaskanDad
You can shoot people for any reason that fits your needs or desires, I really don't care why!

But if you ever shot my child I would hunt down and cripple every one of your loved ones.

it's called a vendetta!

Who wants to play???????

E'nuff said!

I,ll play..maybee you should of raised your kids right..but no you raised little criminals, your the one who needs to look in the mirror to ask why didnt i give my children guidance and rules/respect..one day its home invasions..next lets rape the occupant, play stupid games win stupid prizes
I,ll say it again..did they "deserve" to die..no, but THEY made the choice to home invade in a country full of gun owners..this is natural selection.
edit on 12-5-2014 by vonclod because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 12 2014 @ 06:39 AM
link   

originally posted by: sdcigarpig
a reply to: spirited75
But what I stated is true, and ultimately the past has shown.

And when it is something where a crime is being committed, the first thing that comes out is how the friends and family of the criminal who got shot, is never at fault, it is always something else, to draw attention away from the fact that they were breaking the law in the first place.



don't look now but guess what? When you state "...the criminal who got shot, is never at fault..."
the word FAULT means that you are referring back to a standard of right versus wrong, and guess a little longer----that is what morals speak to.




We all know that breaking the law is wrong, we know that stealing is against the law and is wrong, so then why is this still occurring to the point where people get into the situation where one person or the other gets shot and killed.



again your comment that breaking the law is wrong, and stealing is against the law, means that you believe that one of the morals is OBEY THE LAW. So you are telling me that morals are not the problem and then in the next breath are telling me that the person who does the shooting and crimes in not following the same morals as the rest of us.



It has to be society, and the lack of fear of breaking the law, the fact that jail and prison are no longer feared. Most of those around the age of 30 or older are of the age to remember when being suspended had a real sting to it, where it was going to affect a person. So what has changed in all of those years, where such crimes were not committed by children, but adults? It has to be a lack of fear of the consequences.


you can continue to believe that it is lack of fear of consequences till the cows come home. morals are deeper and more permanent fixtures in our personalities than feelings. violate and go against your morals and the feelings of afraid and ashamed will happen.

i am not going to try to convince you that the basic problem is the NEW AGE moral relativity and secular humanism, when you lace the depth of thought to acknowledge that morals are deeper in the human character and personality that feelings.



posted on May, 12 2014 @ 08:03 AM
link   
a reply to: spirited75
You keep trying to shape the argument into a religious one, rather than one that is more on a social nature. The very word morals and what you quoted is from the Judaic religion, and its commandments. Yet fail to see that even in the different texts that those are used, there were punishments that went along for breaking those laws. Even today there are countries where if you break a moral law, the punishment is harsh, and hard, even death. And if that is not enough to keep people in line, those who follow a strict religious belief, there is the ultimate threat that comes with such, and that is being denied in going to heaven. So there you have it, even when using the idea of a religious morality, there is still the threat and fear of what happens either during or after one life is there.



posted on May, 12 2014 @ 09:00 AM
link   

originally posted by: sdcigarpig
a reply to: spirited75

But never is it asked, why did the person, the criminal, do the deed in the first place. We all know that breaking the law is wrong, we know that stealing is against the law and is wrong, so then why is this still occurring to the point where people get into the situation where one person or the other gets shot and killed.

It has to be society, and the lack of fear of breaking the law, the fact that jail and prison are no longer feared. Most of those around the age of 30 or older are of the age to remember when being suspended had a real sting to it, where it was going to affect a person. So what has changed in all of those years, where such crimes were not committed by children, but adults? It has to be a lack of fear of the consequences.




The reasons why a criminal commits a criminal act are irrelevant when it gets to the point that a law-abiding, legal gun owner finds himself in a situation where he's justified in using his firearm to defend himself. Part of the problem with today's society is that we spend far too much time worrying about why the criminal does this, or why the criminal does that. It's fine as an intellectual pursuit, but when it starts shaping policy and influencing law (as it has for the past half-century or so), we wind up with a system that coddles and protects the criminals at the expense of upright citizens.

I believe that we each have a God-given right to defend our own lives. I wrote about it here: www.newamericanman.com...



posted on May, 12 2014 @ 09:12 AM
link   

originally posted by: sdcigarpig
a reply to: spirited75
You keep trying to shape the argument into a religious one, rather than one that is more on a social nature. The very word morals and what you quoted is from the Judaic religion, and its commandments. Yet fail to see that even in the different texts that those are used, there were punishments that went along for breaking those laws. Even today there are countries where if you break a moral law, the punishment is harsh, and hard, even death. And if that is not enough to keep people in line, those who follow a strict religious belief, there is the ultimate threat that comes with such, and that is being denied in going to heaven. So there you have it, even when using the idea of a religious morality, there is still the threat and fear of what happens either during or after one life is there.



i never brought the word religion into this discussion-----------you did.
in fact i steered it away from that due to atheists and agnostics having such an amount of emotional overreaction to anything that hints of religion.
you cannot talk about morals and values honestly without discovering where they originated-------religions.

here is a moral you keep bringing up-----Obey the law. this moral that both theists and atheists and agnostics can agree upon OBEY THE LAW.

simple sectarian ===== obey the law.

these immoral criminals broke into an old woman's home, and they were not afraid of her or of any consequences that she could bring to bear on the lawlessness, because they had tested her several times before/ (previous breaking)
but she outsmarted them and invited her brother there, probably prior military. and he killed the fearless immoral criminals.



new topics

top topics



 
21
<< 14  15  16    18  19  20 >>

log in

join