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.

 

Ohio shopper shoots teen dead outside mall for trying to steal newly bought Nike Air Jordans

page: 8
53
<< 5  6  7    9  10  11 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Dec, 27 2014 @ 12:31 AM
link   

originally posted by: Sremmos80
a reply to: OccamsRazor04

But they will come and my family is in just as much danger as before the 1 million were killed.
So what was solved?

No they won't. If 1 year later there are 200,000 criminals you are much safer. There is no perfectly safe world, only safer. Every criminal who is gone permanently makes the world safer, it can not be argued, it's simple fact. If we have 1 million criminals, and a new one starts tomorrow .. we would have had 1,000,001 criminals, now we have 1,000,000. Every one that is gone makes us safer.




posted on Dec, 27 2014 @ 12:32 AM
link   

originally posted by: stumason
a reply to: OccamsRazor04

At this point, I would ask "what is a criminal"?

The story is about stealing shoes at gunpoint. That is a criminal.
ETA: No one said kill all criminals. I said I am fine with killing everyone who uses a gun to rob people. that is not every criminal. I do not think the man who broke into my house should die for it.
edit on 27-12-2014 by OccamsRazor04 because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 27 2014 @ 12:32 AM
link   

originally posted by: Kuroodo
The sad part is that they're worth like $300 and people would literally die for them...


People have killed .. and will kill for a hell of alot less than that ..



posted on Dec, 27 2014 @ 12:33 AM
link   
a reply to: stumason




You'll be telling me that the USA isn't a democracy next.....


It's not. The Constitution guarantees a republican form of government, not democratic. The US is a "Constitutional Republic", in fact the longest current surviving one on Earth. In a Constitutional Republic the rights of the few cannot be voted out by the majority.

"Democracy is two wolves and a lamb voting on what to have for lunch. Liberty is a well-armed lamb contesting the vote." ~ Benjamin Franklin



posted on Dec, 27 2014 @ 12:34 AM
link   

originally posted by: Sremmos80
a reply to: OccamsRazor04

How Is using some ones wife as center piece in a purely hypothetical situation not an appeal to emotion?

I already explained. Look up Veil of Ignorance. SOMEONE's loved one is the next potential victim.

So unless you are saying you do not care who gets killed as long as it's not your loved one, my statement is valid.



posted on Dec, 27 2014 @ 12:35 AM
link   
a reply to: OccamsRazor04

A poor attempt to dodge the question - you are advocating "killing or removing all criminals". What is a "criminal"? Yes, we know what this guy allegedly did, but you seem happy for this to happen to "all criminals". It's a very subjective term and not only do laws change over time - therefore changing what is a crime - but not all Laws are considered just.

Black and White thinking, pardon the pun.



posted on Dec, 27 2014 @ 12:36 AM
link   

originally posted by: OccamsRazor04

originally posted by: Sremmos80
a reply to: OccamsRazor04

How Is using some ones wife as center piece in a purely hypothetical situation not an appeal to emotion?

I already explained. Look up Veil of Ignorance. SOMEONE's loved one is the next potential victim.

So unless you are saying you do not care who gets killed as long as it's not your loved one, my statement is valid.




everyone out there is someones loved one....to use your own arguements against you...do you have any proof ? or are you using it for conjecture ?
edit on 27-12-2014 by hopenotfeariswhatweneed because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 27 2014 @ 12:37 AM
link   

originally posted by: stumason
a reply to: OccamsRazor04

A poor attempt to dodge the question - you are advocating "killing or removing all criminals". What is a "criminal"? Yes, we know what this guy allegedly did, but you seem happy for this to happen to "all criminals".

Not at all what I said. Not even close. Can you show me where I stated that? I can save you the time, I didn't.

It's a very subjective term and not only do laws change over time - therefore changing what is a crime - but not all Laws are considered just.

Black and White thinking, pardon the pun.

Again moot point, I never advocated for this. I did say all people who use guns to rob people can die and I am perfectly happy with that.



posted on Dec, 27 2014 @ 12:40 AM
link   

originally posted by: hopenotfeariswhatweneed

originally posted by: OccamsRazor04

originally posted by: Sremmos80
a reply to: OccamsRazor04

How Is using some ones wife as center piece in a purely hypothetical situation not an appeal to emotion?

I already explained. Look up Veil of Ignorance. SOMEONE's loved one is the next potential victim.

So unless you are saying you do not care who gets killed as long as it's not your loved one, my statement is valid.




everyone out there is someones loved one....to use your own logic against you...do you have any proof ? any links that this happened or are you using it for conjecture ?

The conjecture started with people on your side, saying for all we know he could have straightened up after this.
Conjecture.

I added yes, and for all we know your loved one is the next person he robs at gunpoint. So if he has 2 choices, choice one is become clean, and choice two the person you love most in the world is his next victim, robbed at gunpoint, are you not relieved you never have to discover which choice he made?

I did not start the conjecture, I finished it.



posted on Dec, 27 2014 @ 12:42 AM
link   
a reply to: Sremmos80

Was the target of this robbery someone's husband, father, brother or son who did not get the choice in the life threatening situation, the only one who could have prevented it was the deceased.

Oh well.

Look it's tragic for the deceased family, no doubt about it, but everything he got he deserved. The family don't deserve it, but that's their dead sons fault, no one else's.

I won't change my opinion and won't lose a seconds sleep about.

Anyone remember that chubby lad getting bullied and he slams the little rat bully into the deck....instant karma..just like this.

Lovely stuff, I have a warm glow thinking how this dead scum passed away.



posted on Dec, 27 2014 @ 12:42 AM
link   

originally posted by: NOTurTypical

originally posted by: Krakatoa

originally posted by: Sremmos80
a reply to: Krakatoa

His actions showed an intent to steal.
We are speculating if he planned to kill.

As soon as he brandished that gun, he made it clear he was threatening deadly force. That was his decision....period.


Precisely right. The nanosecond the gun was brandished he was expressing an intent to take the shoes by deadly force if need be. That's the logical conclusion.


Logically the fact he didnt shoot and demanded the shoes should tell you he wasnt gonna shoot, are you seriously entertaining the thought that if the Shooter had of handed over the shoes the Robber would have turned murderer???
Why if that was his intent would he give the man a chance for any form of retaliation and not just shoot and take the shoes from his corpse? Logic should tell you this was a robbery attempt not a murder attempt

In other posts of yours and people who share you view its not the intent that counts rather the fact the man felt threatened for his life, you can feel threatened for your life with a pellet gun if you think its real.

So what is it, intent or interpretation of intent that counts?
If it turns out this was a pellet gun will you still hold the same stance that the kid got what he deserved?
Im genuinely curious about this and would like to hear your view, please dont bring out the tired strawman nonsense



posted on Dec, 27 2014 @ 12:43 AM
link   
a reply to: OccamsRazor04

Ya it has nothing to do with what you are getting at.

The idea is that parties subject to the veil of ignorance will make choices based upon moral considerations, since they will not be able to make choices based on self- or class-interest

It says that it is not based on self interest



posted on Dec, 27 2014 @ 12:44 AM
link   
a reply to: OccamsRazor04

Yup your all right Im a straw man with no clue .Shoes are more important than human life ,
Infact im about to put my ruby slippers on click my heels .
An repeat theres no place like home 3 times.

Anyway best wishes to you and yours this holiday season peace an all that good stuff



posted on Dec, 27 2014 @ 12:45 AM
link   

originally posted by: OccamsRazor04

originally posted by: Sremmos80
Rampant speculation to justify the kill kill kill them all attitude.

Judge dredd is looking like he would be rather accepted in this thread

Not kill them all. Only those with callous disregard for human life.

You bring a gun to rob someone, that is callous disregard for human life.


Id say killing someone who is trying to steal material possesions whether armed or not shows a callous disregard for human life, how you all cant is really beyond me



posted on Dec, 27 2014 @ 12:46 AM
link   

originally posted by: stumason
a reply to: OccamsRazor04

A poor attempt to dodge the question - you are advocating "killing or removing all criminals". What is a "criminal"? Yes, we know what this guy allegedly did, but you seem happy for this to happen to "all criminals". It's a very subjective term and not only do laws change over time - therefore changing what is a crime - but not all Laws are considered just.

Black and White thinking, pardon the pun.


I think you are reading what you want to, the point made was by killing this scum the world is not a safer place, the point made was that it is a safer place by one and if you extrapolate this, then yes, eventually the world would be safer.

No one suggested culling all criminals, but when one pulls a gun and is removed from the gene pool then it's nothing but a good thing.



posted on Dec, 27 2014 @ 12:47 AM
link   
a reply to: OccamsRazor04

Well you said it can't be argued so I guess it has been spoken!

I stand by my point that crime happens in a void and where there is a space to be filled it will be.

We can use ridiculous numbers to obsure the point but that isn't very productive



posted on Dec, 27 2014 @ 12:48 AM
link   
a reply to: OccamsRazor04




I did not start the conjecture, I finished it.


actually no you promoted it



posted on Dec, 27 2014 @ 12:48 AM
link   
a reply to: IkNOwSTuff




Logically the fact he didnt shoot and demanded the shoes should tell you he wasnt gonna shoot, are you seriously entertaining the thought that if the Shooter had of handed over the shoes the Robber would have turned murderer???


When someone points a gun at you it's not the right time to play the "what if" game. People have been killing other people for Air Jordans since I was in high school. (1995) As said earlier, only the fool waits for a shot to be fired before shooting first when a gun is pointed at them. Nobody is responsible for that young man's death besides that young man, he pulled the weapon and he could have chose not to do that, he made the fatal mistake.



posted on Dec, 27 2014 @ 12:49 AM
link   
a reply to: TheCrowMan

Yes it was his fault but why do we need to celebrate that a kid made a decision that took his life?



posted on Dec, 27 2014 @ 12:51 AM
link   

originally posted by: IkNOwSTuff
Logically the fact he didnt shoot and demanded the shoes should tell you he wasnt gonna shoot, are you seriously entertaining the thought that if the Shooter had of handed over the shoes the Robber would have turned murderer???
Why if that was his intent would he give the man a chance for any form of retaliation and not just shoot and take the shoes from his corpse? Logic should tell you this was a robbery attempt not a murder attempt

Keep blood off the shoes. Why do I need to figure out why someone has not shot me yet?


In other posts of yours and people who share you view its not the intent that counts rather the fact the man felt threatened for his life, you can feel threatened for your life with a pellet gun if you think its real.

Yes. Intent calls for being inside another person's mind. You can never know intent, only actions and the possible ramifications of those actions.


So what is it, intent or interpretation of intent that counts?
If it turns out this was a pellet gun will you still hold the same stance that the kid got what he deserved?
Im genuinely curious about this and would like to hear your view, please dont bring out the tired strawman nonsense

Yes, he did. Even if it was a plastic toy gun.



new topics

top topics



 
53
<< 5  6  7    9  10  11 >>

log in

join