On Feb 6, 6:49 am, Lee <[email protected]> wrote:
> You see SD what I get most out of this is that your choice of words
> clearly show how differantly we view certian subjects.
>
> 'Vermin','Cockroaches'.
>
> I may call them criminals, perhaps even animals if I was pissed off,
> but I still see them as human.
I don't see the difference between calling someone and animal and a
cockroach, they are both non-human.
>
> So what you are saying then is although you have never had any need
> for your guns, you are still scared enough by what you hear that you
> will keep them?
I take issue with this. Is this an abstract type of apprehension you
are speaking of, or are you talking about all gun owners being cowards
hiding in the corner with their hands gripped to their gun? I am not
scared of living where I do. I don't constantly look over my
shoulder, just to check to make sure I'm not going to be mugged. I am
not paranoid. And even though I have a conceal weapons permit, I
rarely carry my concealed weapon.
I don't see how this is about fear at all. Its about safety. I could
be in an unsafe position, and yet not be afraid. I could be in an
unsafe position by living in a high crime area where burglars break
into homes every night, and not have a gun. That would be unsafe for
me and my family. The only time we start talking about fear is when
we talk about the actual event of self defense, and even then fear is
probably not the right word to use. A theoretical man who feels no
fear, but who can assess a situation as being a dangerous one, and
reasonably determines that his life is in danger could use self
defense. So, its more accurate to say that when someone reasonably
apprehends that their life is in danger, self defense is justified.
So, what I'm trying to say is, I disagree, this isn't about fear. The
only reason I ever brought fear up was because others brought fear up
as a reason to regulate firearms, and I was merely pointing out that
that argument cuts both ways.
>
> So it comes back to fear then.
>
> I honestly belive that our laws re: protection are fine, I belive that
> the concept of 'reasonable force' protects us from becoming the kind
> of 'vermin' that you would have us irradicate, and is far more humane
> in it's approach, then any law giving you permission to shoot dead a
> man for no other reason, then you find him on your property.
Lee, I don't know what your getting at here. America has the law of
reasonable force as well. Most states do not justify killing someone
just because they are on your property, and that hasn't been the
argument here. I don't believe that loss of property is a good enough
excuse for killing someone. So we can get off that subject. Even the
states that do allow it, if you look at the statute, like the one that
was posted on here earlier, it appears that the justification is still
really protection of life. The texas statute says you can kill
someone who threatening your property, but it has to be AT NIGHT. Why
else would they make that distinction, other than for the reason that
when people are on your property at night, the chances that they are
there to either harm you, or willing to if they have to.
>
> On 5 Feb, 19:07, Slip Disc <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > And over here in the UK, we do not have the right to protect our homes
> > however we see fit<<Lee
>
> > Well I'm sorry to hear that Lee and I guess my views stem greatly from
> > the fact that it is different in the US especially here in Texas,
> > Arizona and other states that have the Castle
> > Law.http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Castle_Doctrine
>
> > I've never had any problem so far with being around to find an
> > intruder or someone robbing the place but I've always had good dogs
> > and mostly have monitored security alarm systems when not living in a
> > rural area. What I'm hearing as of late, though, is an increase in
> > home invasions and bold attempts by criminals to commit crimes. Such
> > brazen acts are consistent with dire financial times and will continue
> > if counteraction is not taken. People do desperate things in desperate
> > times so being prepared is key, I'm glad to have the castle law should
> > I decide to purchase a shotgun for protection. I look at it like
> > ridding the city of vermin.
>
> > There are some good point being made as to the unnecessary killing of
> > an intruder. My property is surrounded by fencing so anyone on my
> > property is obviously an intruder with ill intent. However, I would
> > have to feel imminent threat substantial enough to use deadly force. I
> > can't just go out and slaughter someone because they are standing on
> > my property, that is merely trespassing. If the intruder has a weapon
> > and threatens me with it, I have the legal right to defend myself with
> > deadly force. I find this to be fair reasoning. Without the castle
> > law all the good decent people will be needlessly slaughtered by free
> > roaming criminals until there aren't any good people left. It's time
> > we take a stance and stamp out the cockroaches of society, sending the
> > message that their behaviour will not be tolerated. The police are
> > impotent in the sense they are not there when you need them, but the
> > shotgun in the closet is there when you need it.
>
> > Remember that background checks are important and deter criminals from
> > obtaining guns legally. So it's not that everyone is going to be
> > walking around with a gun just because the law changes to allow for
> > the right to own and protect. I suggest you all appeal to HMG to
> > establish new laws concerning the right to protect yourselves. At
> > least talk to Prince Charles horse.
>
> > On Feb 5, 10:32 am, Lee <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > > Hey SD,
>
> > > Yes funny, more of the scare mongering though, but funny never-the-
> > > less.
>
> > > You ask what matter what weapon you choose to defend yourself? I
> > > belive that I have already answered that one, yes I could kill
> > > somebody with a lump of wood, I would have to try harder, but yes it
> > > can be done.
>
> > > And over here in the UK, we do not have the right to protect our homes
> > > however we see fit. No not at all, we have a little thing called
> > > 'reasonable force'. Even if I did manage to bludgeon to death an
> > > intruder I can expect to go to trial for that.
>
> > > What would I do armed with a wooden club agianst a man armed with a
> > > magnum .44? Nowt, I would do nowt mainly because I never expect to be
> > > in such a situation. Now let me ask you how many times have you been
> > > in such a situation?
>
> > > On 5 Feb, 14:10, Slip Disc <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > > > News Bulletin!!
>
> > > > Man kills intruder with wooden club. After sustaining several blows to
> > > > the body and head the gun wielding intruder fell dead to the floor.
> > > > Homeowner, Mindseye Lee, stated that the intruder would not heed his
> > > > warnings and continued to threaten the Lee family with his gun,
> > > > demanding they hand over their valuables, "that's when I took my
> > > > wooden club and beat him to death", Lee said. "he wouldn't stop and
> > > > kept pointing that gun at me and my family", Lee continued, "I do
> > > > think that intruders can be dealt with with violence, and indeed
> > > > should anybody break into my house I'll be waiting for them armed and
> > > > ready, just not with a gun". Lee stated that he didn't intend to kill
> > > > the intruder but just wanted to protect his family from the gun toting
> > > > creep. No charges will be filed against Mindseye Lee.
> > > > The intruder, identified as Vato Inyaface, was wanted by police on
> > > > several warrants including two for murder of innocent homeowners
> > > > during a burglary by Inyaface. Though illegal, Inyaface had several
> > > > weapons in his vehicle. Police commended Mr. Lee for ridding society
> > > > of this lowlife career criminal who might have gone on to kill more
> > > > innocent homeowners.
>
> > > > Lee,
> > > > What does it matter what weapon you use when being armed and ready to
> > > > mete out violent justice. One could just as easily kill a intruder
> > > > with a iron skillet. The point really is "You have the RIGHT to
> > > > protect your home however you see fit" and as KC points out you see
> > > > fit to use your wooden club. Personally I don't have the strength or
> > > > agility to take on one or several intruders with a baseball bat so I
> > > > would prefer to have the right to own a firearm. I will not be told
> > > > by some politician that I don't have the right to keep an intruder
> > > > from raping and killing my family. Besides, what are you going to
> > > > accomplish with a wooden club when 3 creeps come barging into your
> > > > home?
>
> > > > I don't have to kill the intruder, I could easily shoot him in the leg
> > > > and wait for the police to come and haul him off. I could keep the
> > > > intruder at bay without firing a shot at all. The idea is that if I
> > > > don't have a means of leveling out the playing field then I am at the
> > > > mercy of a merciless person. What are you going to do with a wooden
> > > > club against a 44 magnum?
>
> > > > On Feb 5, 5:55 am, Lee <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > > > > Hey Vam,
>
> > > > > Indeed I do not find that fear is a suitible answer to many things,
> > > > > down that road lies sooo much crap that it starts to appal me if I
> > > > > dwell on it too long.
>
> > > > > We have seen in our histopry, and contiune to see now what sorts of
> > > > > responses fear can illicit.
> > > > > Fear of the black man, fear of the Muslim extreamist, fear of the
> > > > > homosexual agenda regards the institue of marriage(which I just don't
> > > > > understand BTW).
>
> > > > > To me life is ultimate, I don't belive that any of us have the right
> > > > > to take another(human) life, easecily if doing so is motivated by such
> > > > > a thing as fear.
>
> > > > > Of course some fear must remain, such fear is quite healthy.
>
> > > > > In answer to your questions though, I don't really advocate that
> > > > > striving for a fearless state is an ideal to try and achive, nor do I
> > > > > think that anybody should lay down their lives for such.
>
> > > > > I do think that intruders can be dealt with with violence, and indeed
> > > > > should anybody brake into my house I'll be waiting for them armed and
> > > > > ready, just not with a gun.
>
> > > > > I have used gun before, I was an air cadet at some stage in my life,
> > > > > and have soot both on rangesm and out hunting rabbits, I see the
> > > > > appeal of guns, I have enjoyed myself when ever I have fired one.
> > > > > They still scare me shitless though, probably becuse it's sole use is
> > > > > to kill, and as you can probably tell by now, that's a big no no in my
> > > > > book.
>
> > > > > My comment about America, is really my admision that I have no idea
> > > > > what should be done for the best there. Many Americans will not give
> > > > > up their right to bear arms, and as it is enshrined in their law, then
> > > > > I really don't see why they should, however the title of this thread
> > > > > is Guns in Britain, and as a residant I say that we neither require
> > > > > them nor want them.
>
> > > > > On 5 Feb, 11:28, Vamadevananda <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > > > > > Lee, if I have understood the discussion :
>
> > > > > > ( 1 ) Fear is an argument for gun ownership, and KC says that it is
> > > > > > good enough, particularly since the law so permits.
>
> > > > > > ( 2 ) In addition, KC and others are saying, the " perceived " (
> > > > > > may
> > > > > > not be actual ) danger of harm ( not necessarily of life ) is enough
> > > > > > to kill an intruder, especially since it is impossible to determine
> > > > > > precisely if the danger is actual or not, if the danger is to life
> > > > > > or
> > > > > > not.
>
> > > > > > It is all then fear, as I read it.
>
> > > > > > ( 3 ) The third fact in the argument is that my life, the life of
> > > > > > my
> > > > > > near ones, is more precious ( valuable ) than that of the intruder
> > > > > > ( even if he is only perceived as a killer, and may not indeed be
> > > > > > so ).
>
> > > > > > This survival instinct is natural to each one of us. It too
> > > > > > reduces us to being in a state of constant fear and insecurity, such
> > > > > > as is
>
> ...
>
> read more »
--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
""Minds Eye"" group.
To post to this group, send email to [email protected]
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
[email protected]
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/Minds-Eye?hl=en
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
