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.
Originally posted by bigfatfurrytexan
reply to post by Animal
If you want a response to that particular post (out of all the ones you have made), then just ask for it.
Shameful. Killing over robbery? Shooting people in the back justified? Something about this does not seem very legitimate to me.
"Deadly force" to protect your property seems like a very slippery and dangerous slope.
Shooting someone for stealing my old broken down hibachi grill? What the hell is wrong with people today?
This to me is a perfect example of why state sovereignty should be trumped by the federal government.
this is the one, correct? OK..here goes.
1. It is not "killing over burglary". it is killing men who encroached upon HIS yard after he told them to stop, and then after he warned him to not move. He was willing to allow the men to lie down and wait for the police, but they chose to run. It isn't the fact that they ran that got them shot. it was the fact that they made sudden movement. Put yourself in that position, two men standing in your yard and they make a sudden movement.
2. a "slippery slope" argument is an informal fallacy and cannot be debated. It relies on a series of "what ifs". the fact is that it is the law in Texas, and that is what the people of Texas have decided, per the process of the state and US constitution. As well, the protection of property was exactly what our founding fathers had in mind when they instituted the bill of rights. That is WHY we get to keep guns, and WHY soldiers cannot take up forced residence in your home.
3. There was no mention of what the property was. No one mentioned a hibachi grill, that i saw. It is unrelated to the case. What was stated is that they had a "bag of property".
4. State sovereignty is a constitutional matter. That is the way our nation was created. Further, Texas has "special" rights of sovereignty beyond the other states.
Now, since i went to the trouble to reply to the one specific post that you seem to have wanted me to reply to, will you address your misrepresentation of how/why they were shot in the back? Your insinuation is presumptive, as you are not including all facts in the assertion.
I have no problem with you not agreeing with the decision. But at least be honest in your discussion about it.
Originally posted by Animal
Originally posted by bigfatfurrytexan
The Universal Law of Consequences has rendered judgement.
No, some human with a gun and the propensity to KILL rendered their judgment. I guess in Texas a gun gives you the right to CHOOSE who lives and dies.
I stand by my previous statement that the Feral Government should come down on laws such as this like a ton of bricks.
Guns are for hunting and protecting ones life NOT ones Nintendo and stereo. Validating such behavior is barbaric.
you should also keep in mind,situations like this get the adrenaline pumping,makes it a little harder to think.maybe theifs should wake up and realize they will get a testicle blown off, or something if they try this crap.
Originally posted by Animal
Shameful. Killing over robbery? Shooting people in the back justified? Something about this does not seem very legitimate to me.
"Deadly force" to protect your property seems like a very slippery and dangerous slope.
Shooting someone for stealing my old broken down hibachi grill? What the hell is wrong with people today?
This to me is a perfect example of why state sovereignty should be trumped by the federal government.
Originally posted by drwizardphd
Originally posted by bigfatfurrytexan
In the state of Texas, both of your assertions are wrong. Read our law. It is that way because the people of Texas want it his way and have voted it to be so.
So in Texas, you kill people over property, and its not premeditated murder if you plan to do it beforehand? Sounds like a great place to raise the kids.
Originally posted by dr_strangecraft
It's funny that posters like animal focus on the state's law, when their real problem is with the values of the people who live here.
Posters like that don't want to live free, and they cannot stand the idea that someone else they've never met, in another state, is still living free and unafraid. Some people are allergic to liberty, and are worried that it might be contagious.
Originally posted by slackerwire
Originally posted by Animal
Shameful. Killing over robbery? Shooting people in the back justified? Something about this does not seem very legitimate to me.
"Deadly force" to protect your property seems like a very slippery and dangerous slope.
Shooting someone for stealing my old broken down hibachi grill? What the hell is wrong with people today?
This to me is a perfect example of why state sovereignty should be trumped by the federal government.
Since I know you won't shoot me, can I have your address? I'd like to come to your house and take everything you own since you won't be defending it.
I won't hurt anyone, I just want your stuff.
Address please?