Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Fwd: She Shot Him 6 Times
Wow, Rick, that's pretty radical of you. You would actually consider shooting someone who only wanted a few of your *things* to sell and feed his poor starving family? What's up with that? Must be one of those Hindu thangs. You did say, if I were her. I guess you meant,if you were in her body. But shooting an intruder in the leg is really stupid. What if they pulled out a gun and shot you back or hobbled over to you and cut your throat? My third rule, if you're going to pull a gun on somebody, be prepared to use it, with deadly force,or they might take it away from you and use it on you. But then if your horoscope doesn't show you going through a death cycle at that time, you might consider a shot in the legif you're really that mean. From: Rick Archer r...@searchsummit.com To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Sun, March 21, 2010 8:38:25 AM Subject: RE: [FairfieldLife] Re: Fwd: She Shot Him 6 Times From:FairfieldLife@ yahoogroups. com [mailto:FairfieldLi f...@yahoogroups. com] On Behalf Of lurkernomore2000200 0 Sent: Saturday, March 20, 2010 7:08 PM To: FairfieldLife@ yahoogroups. com Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: Fwd: She Shot Him 6 Times --- In FairfieldLife@ yahoogroups. com, Rick Archer r...@... wrote: That's the way gangs work. They mete out justice swiftly and finally without messing with all that legal stuff. You, apparently, would like the whole society to function that way. Rick, I believe gangs typically interact with other gangs. When they encroach on traditional law abiding citizens they generally run into a lot of organized resistance from police or other organized groups. Take a look at what is happening in Mexico. There you have the gangs encroaching into non gang, traditional life. The response from the authorities is rising up to deal with the crisis. When the gangs were just killing each other, the concern wasn't so great. There are many other examples. Look at how the west was won. Why did not outlaw gangs take over? Because most citizens are law abiding, have strong sense of right and wrong, and know what constitutes justice. And they are willing to enforce that by consensus, and often that mens force. Isn't that what kept law and order during this period. I think it is a little lame to suggest that I am advocating gang type revenge justice. I am just saying that you tread on me in such a way as to deprive me of my rights, be prepared for forceful action. Certainly there are many times when I would like to harm someone for treating me in what I feel to be an unfair manner. And I recognize that I must pursue it in a civil (court) manner. I have a customer right now who owes my (our) company $600.00, and he won't discuss it, and I would like to do something radical to show my anger and frustration. But I recognize that I may just have to go after him in small court. What do you think. You're points are well-taken. I suppose we have laws to offer a civil alternative to venting our anger in ways our baser instincts might dictate. I once knew a woman in the Indian Village area of downtown Detroit, a wealthy neighborhood directly abutting a poor neighborhood. She said that more than once, she'd wake up in the middle of the night to find a thief rummaging through her belongings in her bedroom. She got a dog, but the guy make friends with the dog when she was walking it in the park, so the next time he broke in, the dog didn't react. It's hard for me to imagine shooting anyone, but if I were her, I'd be tempted to have a gun under my pillow and shoot the guy. Maybe I'd aim for the legs. That should send a pretty clear message.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Fwd: She Shot Him 6 Times
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, lurkernomore20002000 steve.sun...@... wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Sal Sunshine salsunshine@ wrote: On Mar 20, 2010, at 1:13 PM, lurkernomore20002000 wrote: What am I missing here? Let's assume the story is true. (i think someone posted something to say it wasn't, but let's say it's true) You've go 99% of the people in the world applauding this women, who doesn't want someone to her steal her hard earned money, and is willing to risk her life to that end, and then you've got an unlikely alliance of Barry, Judy, and Rick twisting this around to make Dixon appear as though he is advocating arbitrary culling of those he deems undesireable. Yes, this guy IS undesireable, and the risk he takes when he violates someone else's rights is that he can also lose his own life, or get harmed. And aren't we all better for it? Hell yea, we are. And while I'm at it, although I'm not the type to be overly patriotic, it warms my heart when I hear about another tailiban target taken out by unmanned drones. Of course, sometimes innocent civilians are mistakedly targeted, and killed, and that bothers me. But during these times, and circumstances you've got to meet force with force, or force with greatr force, and that helps keep the world safe. You happy with the safe world we've created over in Afghanistan, lurk? How about Iraq? Sal Please tell me how you propose to deal with Islamist extremists whose objective is to kill Americans here, there, anywhere. Well, to start, by acknowledging the huge debt of the US, and the people of Eastern Europe, an the world have for the 12 year struggle where Afghani Islamic Jihadist Freedom Fighters broke the back and bank of the Soviet Union and were arguably the key factor in ending the Cold War. By stopping raw Soviet imperialism in Afganistan they stopped a highly probable capture of most middle eastern oil fields and a firm military hold all the way to the Indian Ocean. We would have a very different world today if that occurred. However, instead of thanks, the US said good-by and fuck you -- and then wonders why they don't love the US. So first, a little perspective and deserved huge respect would go a long way in dealing with the true Afghanhi heroes, many whom when fucked over did evolve into anti-americanism. True appreciation of these Afghani heroes would be a good first step and go a long way in ending hostilities with many islamic jihadists Their primary fight is with long standing American global bombastic and abusive policies and American arrogance and exceptionalism. British, Spanish, Soviet, French, German, Japanese and American imperialism have screwed so many millions of people over for centuries (in some cases). Is it a wonder some react to violence with violence? If you look at the world with a five year perspective one is bound to be confused.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Fwd: She Shot Him 6 Times
British, Spanish, Soviet, French, German, Japanese and American imperialism have screwed so many millions of people over for centuries (in some cases)... Don't you just love those Taliban? That Mullah Omar is really a nice guy, once you get to know him, right? Isn't he kind of like an Afghani version of Charlie Wilson, except that he has only one eye? But, that Omar doesn't seem to like your Obama very much. What's up with that? snip
[FairfieldLife] Re: Fwd: She Shot Him 6 Times
In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, tartbrain no_re...@... wrote: In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, lurkernomore20002000 steve.sundur@ wrote: Please tell me how you propose to deal with Islamist extremists whose objective is to kill Americans here, there, anywhere. Well, to start, by acknowledging the huge debt of the US, and the people of Eastern Europe, an the world have for the 12 year struggle where Afghani Islamic Jihadist Freedom Fighters broke the back and bank of the Soviet Union and were arguably the key factor in ending the Cold War. I guess this ending the cold war is kind of like the 1965 Ford Mustang. As lee Iocca said, and I paraphrase, You've got so many people taking credit for being the father of this thing, I'd hate to be the mother By stopping raw Soviet imperialism in Afganistan they stopped a highly probable capture of most middle eastern oil fields and a firm military hold all the way to the Indian Ocean. We would have a very different world today if that occurred. Sounds a little assumptive to me. Kind of like the domino theory sort of thing. Is that what you are saying? However, instead of thanks, the US said good-by and fuck you what should we have done, stuck around? Colonized it? I thought the whole idea was to say goodbye. -- and then wonders why they don't love the US. So first, a little perspective and deserved huge respect would go a long way in dealing with the true Afghanhi heroes, many whom when fucked over did evolve into anti-americanism. True appreciation of these Afghani heroes would be a good first step kind of like a cake cutting ceromony, and ringing the bell of invincibility for Afganistan? and go a long way in ending hostilities with many islamic jihadists Their primary fight is with long standing American global bombastic and abusive policies and American arrogance and exceptionalism. please site some examples of what we did to antagonize the Afgan people British, Spanish, Soviet, French, German, Japanese and American imperialism have screwed so many millions of people over for centuries (in some cases). Is it a wonder some react to violence with violence? okay, so that is the crux of your argument. This is payback? Karmic payback? I will be honest. This makes about as much sense as anything else I've heard. But does just plain hatred, and even jealousy play any role. Does the fact that their holy book prescribes killing any non believers play a role? Are you saying that we deserve this That England deserves subway bombings, that France and Copenhagen deserve having citizens murdered who poke fun at other people's religious beliefs? If you look at the world with a five year perspective one is bound to be confused. Has it ever been otherwise
RE: [FairfieldLife] Re: Fwd: She Shot Him 6 Times
From: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com [mailto:fairfieldl...@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of lurkernomore20002000 Sent: Saturday, March 20, 2010 7:08 PM To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: Fwd: She Shot Him 6 Times --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Rick Archer r...@... wrote: That's the way gangs work. They mete out justice swiftly and finally without messing with all that legal stuff. You, apparently, would like the whole society to function that way. Rick, I believe gangs typically interact with other gangs. When they encroach on traditional law abiding citizens they generally run into a lot of organized resistance from police or other organized groups. Take a look at what is happening in Mexico. There you have the gangs encroaching into non gang, traditional life. The response from the authorities is rising up to deal with the crisis. When the gangs were just killing each other, the concern wasn't so great. There are many other examples. Look at how the west was won. Why did not outlaw gangs take over? Because most citizens are law abiding, have strong sense of right and wrong, and know what constitutes justice. And they are willing to enforce that by consensus, and often that mens force. Isn't that what kept law and order during this period. I think it is a little lame to suggest that I am advocating gang type revenge justice. I am just saying that you tread on me in such a way as to deprive me of my rights, be prepared for forceful action. Certainly there are many times when I would like to harm someone for treating me in what I feel to be an unfair manner. And I recognize that I must pursue it in a civil (court) manner. I have a customer right now who owes my (our) company $600.00, and he won't discuss it, and I would like to do something radical to show my anger and frustration. But I recognize that I may just have to go after him in small court. What do you think. You're points are well-taken. I suppose we have laws to offer a civil alternative to venting our anger in ways our baser instincts might dictate. I once knew a woman in the Indian Village area of downtown Detroit, a wealthy neighborhood directly abutting a poor neighborhood. She said that more than once, she'd wake up in the middle of the night to find a thief rummaging through her belongings in her bedroom. She got a dog, but the guy make friends with the dog when she was walking it in the park, so the next time he broke in, the dog didn't react. It's hard for me to imagine shooting anyone, but if I were her, I'd be tempted to have a gun under my pillow and shoot the guy. Maybe I'd aim for the legs. That should send a pretty clear message.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Fwd: She Shot Him 6 Times
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, wle...@... wrote: When Asked By The Arraignment Judge, Why Did You Shoot The Man 6 Times? ~ The Woman Replied Under Oath, Because, When I Pulled The Trigger The 7th Time, It Only Went Click.. The day before I have to go there, I'm kinda hoping this is not a belated response to my request for fun things to do in Houston. :-)
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Fwd: She Shot Him 6 Times
Just do NOT take a woman's purse when there, of course U had no such intension in any way to do so, HA! HA! HO! NO it is NOT such a resonance to Ur travel plans,but to let U know how free U may be in Texas In a message dated 3/20/2010 9:05:02 A.M. Eastern Daylight Time, no_re...@yahoogroups.com writes: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, wle...@... wrote: When Asked By The Arraignment Judge, Why Did You Shoot The Man 6 Times? ~ The Woman Replied Under Oath, Because, When I Pulled The Trigger The 7th Time, It Only Went Click.. The day before I have to go there, I'm kinda hoping this is not a belated response to my request for fun things to do in Houston. :-) To subscribe, send a message to: fairfieldlife-subscr...@yahoogroups.com Or go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/ and click 'Join This Group!'Yahoo! Groups Links
[FairfieldLife] Re: Fwd: She Shot Him 6 Times
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Mike Dixon mdixon.6...@... wrote: Now you see, here is the lesson, she should have had an automatic pistol. She could have walked up to the guy, shot six times, and put him out of our misery with a seventh, eighth and ninth to the head! Lesson two, never let the perpetrator live to testify against you. Mike, I have to say, if this is a long-term TM meditator's way to make us feel all warm and fuzzy about the coming ideal society and Age of Sat Yuga Maharishi promised, it didn't exactly work. Sounds a lot more like valuing money over human life to me. Oh. Never mind. That's where Maharishi was at, too.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Fwd: She Shot Him 6 Times
Not according to Snopes.com she didn't http://www.snopes.com/crime/justice/click.asp http://www.snopes.com/crime/justice/click.asp%20 --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, wle...@... wrote: From: rfl...@... Sent: 3/19/2010 11:48:26 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time Subj: Fwd: She Shot Him 6 Times My, my, my...
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Fwd: She Shot Him 6 Times
Barry, it wasn't meant to make you feel *all warm and fuzzy*. That would have taken the perp walking up and shoving money *into* the waitress's purse, IMHO. That waitress deserves an award of some kind for saving society the cost of prosecution and incarceration of the perpetrator as well as the cost of further crimes and lives. I would like to do what I could to lift her spirits up and let her know she has my support in an effort to ease her conscience. Human Beings aren't an endangered species. I have no problem *culling* society of those that live on the edge, endangering the rest of us for their lack of intelligence or compassion. Maharishi once said, at the first symposium on CI, if your neighbor won't be quiet out of love and respect, let him be quiet out of fear. I would ad, and if your neighbor won't be quiet out of love, respect OR fear, send them on *vacation* to come back at a better time when society wants to deal with them. From: TurquoiseB no_re...@yahoogroups.com To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Sat, March 20, 2010 6:58:55 AM Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: Fwd: She Shot Him 6 Times --- In FairfieldLife@ yahoogroups. com, Mike Dixon mdixon.6569@ ... wrote: Now you see, here is the lesson, she should have had an automatic pistol. She could have walked up to the guy, shot six times, and put him out of our misery with a seventh, eighth and ninth to the head! Lesson two, never let the perpetrator live to testify against you. Mike, I have to say, if this is a long-term TM meditator's way to make us feel all warm and fuzzy about the coming ideal society and Age of Sat Yuga Maharishi promised, it didn't exactly work.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Fwd: She Shot Him 6 Times
oops---extra space at the end of the hyperlink. Try this. http://www.snopes.com/crime/justice/click.asp http://www.snopes.com/crime/justice/click.asp --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, hermandan0 no_re...@... wrote: Not according to Snopes.com she didn't http://www.snopes.com/crime/justice/click.asp http://www.snopes.com/crime/justice/click.asp%20 --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, WLeed3@ wrote: From: rflaxy@ Sent: 3/19/2010 11:48:26 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time Subj: Fwd: She Shot Him 6 Times My, my, my...
[FairfieldLife] Re: Fwd: She Shot Him 6 Times
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, hermandan0 no_re...@... wrote: Not according to Snopes.com she didn't http://www.snopes.com/crime/justice/click.asp Good work. But the link doesn't work. Try this: http://www.snopes.com/crime/justice/justice.asp Click on the last item on the list for the Snopes.com debunking.
RE: [FairfieldLife] Re: Fwd: She Shot Him 6 Times
From: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com [mailto:fairfieldl...@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Mike Dixon Sent: Saturday, March 20, 2010 9:48 AM To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Fwd: She Shot Him 6 Times Barry, it wasn't meant to make you feel *all warm and fuzzy*. That would have taken the perp walking up and shoving money *into* the waitress's purse, IMHO. That waitress deserves an award of some kind for saving society the cost of prosecution and incarceration of the perpetrator as well as the cost of further crimes and lives. I would like to do what I could to lift her spirits up and let her know she has my support in an effort to ease her conscience. Hermandan0 saved you the trouble by providing a link demonstrating that the woman doesn't exist. Human Beings aren't an endangered species. I have no problem *culling* society of those that live on the edge, endangering the rest of us for their lack of intelligence or compassion. So you get to decide who gets culled? I have a problem with that. Do you think everyone should carry guns around and just cull anyone they think needs culling? . http://geo.yahoo.com/serv?s=97359714/grpId=3920196/grpspId=1705077076/msgId=244061/stime=1269096516/nc1=3848641/nc2=5522123/nc3=5191952
[FairfieldLife] Re: Fwd: She Shot Him 6 Times
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Mike Dixon mdixon.6...@... wrote: Barry, it wasn't meant to make you feel *all warm and fuzzy*. That would have taken the perp walking up and shoving money *into* the waitress's purse, IMHO. That waitress deserves an award of some kind for saving society the cost of prosecution and incarceration of the perpetrator as well as the cost of further crimes and lives. I would like to do what I could to lift her spirits up and let her know she has my support in an effort to ease her conscience. Mike - I wonder what you'd think of how it works in the UK! Shimon Lawrence 19, of Babbington Road, Streatham, was robbed of a mobile phone and punched to the ground on May 20 last year in Colliers Wood. But, in the heat of the moment, he went on to pick up a knife dropped by one of his three attackers and gave chase in a bid to get his property back. Mr Lawrence, a business studies student, cornered the trio in a shop and threatened them with the knife. His stolen phone was returned to him, at which point he dropped the weapon and walked away. However the police were called by the shop staff and he was arrested soon afterwards. Mr Lawrence was sentenced to 12 months detention after pleading guilty to affray and having a bladed article at Kingston Crown Court on December 22 last year. However, that sentence was overturned and replaced by a six- month suspended term by Lord Justice Hughes, Mr Justice McCombe and Mrs Justice Sharp, at London's Criminal Appeal Court. Full story: http://tinyurl.com/ya32k7x
[FairfieldLife] Re: Fwd: She Shot Him 6 Times
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Rick Archer r...@... wrote: Mike Dixon wrote: snip Human Beings aren't an endangered species. I have no problem *culling* society of those that live on the edge, endangering the rest of us for their lack of intelligence or compassion. So you get to decide who gets culled? I have a problem with that. Do you think everyone should carry guns around and just cull anyone they think needs culling? And Mike, what if it turns out somebody else thinks *you're* among those who should be culled (quite possibly for the same reasons)?
[FairfieldLife] Re: Fwd: She Shot Him 6 Times
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T5Xl0Qry-hA .
[FairfieldLife] Re: Fwd: She Shot Him 6 Times
What am I missing here? Let's assume the story is true. (i think someone posted something to say it wasn't, but let's say it's true) You've go 99% of the people in the world applauding this women, who doesn't want someone to her steal her hard earned money, and is willing to risk her life to that end, and then you've got an unlikely alliance of Barry, Judy, and Rick twisting this around to make Dixon appear as though he is advocating arbitrary culling of those he deems undesireable. Yes, this guy IS undesireable, and the risk he takes when he violates someone else's rights is that he can also lose his own life, or get harmed. And aren't we all better for it? Hell yea, we are. And while I'm at it, although I'm not the type to be overly patriotic, it warms my heart when I hear about another tailiban target taken out by unmanned drones. Of course, sometimes innocent civilians are mistakedly targeted, and killed, and that bothers me. But during these times, and circumstances you've got to meet force with force, or force with greatr force, and that helps keep the world safe. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend jst...@... wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Rick Archer rick@ wrote: Mike Dixon wrote: snip Human Beings aren't an endangered species. I have no problem *culling* society of those that live on the edge, endangering the rest of us for their lack of intelligence or compassion. So you get to decide who gets culled? I have a problem with that. Do you think everyone should carry guns around and just cull anyone they think needs culling? And Mike, what if it turns out somebody else thinks *you're* among those who should be culled (quite possibly for the same reasons)?
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Fwd: She Shot Him 6 Times
On Mar 20, 2010, at 1:13 PM, lurkernomore20002000 wrote: What am I missing here? Let's assume the story is true. (i think someone posted something to say it wasn't, but let's say it's true) You've go 99% of the people in the world applauding this women, who doesn't want someone to her steal her hard earned money, and is willing to risk her life to that end, and then you've got an unlikely alliance of Barry, Judy, and Rick twisting this around to make Dixon appear as though he is advocating arbitrary culling of those he deems undesireable. Yes, this guy IS undesireable, and the risk he takes when he violates someone else's rights is that he can also lose his own life, or get harmed. And aren't we all better for it? Hell yea, we are. And while I'm at it, although I'm not the type to be overly patriotic, it warms my heart when I hear about another tailiban target taken out by unmanned drones. Of course, sometimes innocent civilians are mistakedly targeted, and killed, and that bothers me. But during these times, and circumstances you've got to meet force with force, or force with greatr force, and that helps keep the world safe. You happy with the safe world we've created over in Afghanistan, lurk? How about Iraq? Sal
[FairfieldLife] Re: Fwd: She Shot Him 6 Times
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Sal Sunshine salsunsh...@... wrote: snip You happy with the safe world we've created over in Afghanistan, lurk? How about Iraq? Hey, Sal, don't you think you should apologize to Lurk for having falsely accused him of lying about some posts you made (and falsely denied making) before you go after him again?
[FairfieldLife] Re: Fwd: She Shot Him 6 Times
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, lurkernomore20002000 steve.sun...@... wrote: What am I missing here? Let's assume the story is true. (i think someone posted something to say it wasn't, but let's say it's true) You've go 99% of the people in the world applauding this women, You've taken a poll? who doesn't want someone to her steal her hard earned money, and is willing to risk her life to that end, How did she risk her life? She had the gun. And she shot him in the back as he was running away from her. and then you've got an unlikely alliance of Barry, Judy, and Rick twisting this around to make Dixon appear as though he is advocating arbitrary culling of those he deems undesireable. That's exactly what he *was* advocating: I have no problem *culling* society of those that live on the edge, endangering the rest of us for their lack of intelligence or compassion. Yes, this guy IS undesireable, and the risk he takes when he violates someone else's rights is that he can also lose his own life, or get harmed. In this country, he risks getting caught, tried by a jury of his peers, and put in jail if there's no reasonable doubt that he's guilty. And aren't we all better for it? Hell yea, we are. I think you're trying to violate *my* rights. Do I get to shoot you dead because you're advocating throwing out the Constitution?
RE: [FairfieldLife] Re: Fwd: She Shot Him 6 Times
From: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com [mailto:fairfieldl...@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of lurkernomore20002000 Sent: Saturday, March 20, 2010 1:13 PM To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: Fwd: She Shot Him 6 Times What am I missing here? Let's assume the story is true. (i think someone posted something to say it wasn't, but let's say it's true) You've go 99% of the people in the world applauding this women, who doesn't want someone to her steal her hard earned money, and is willing to risk her life to that end, and then you've got an unlikely alliance of Barry, Judy, and Rick twisting this around to make Dixon appear as though he is advocating arbitrary culling of those he deems undesireable. His words: I have no problem *culling* society of those that live on the edge, endangering the rest of us for their lack of intelligence or compassion. Such a compassionate statement, huh? Yes, this guy IS undesireable, and the risk he takes when he violates someone else's rights is that he can also lose his own life, or get harmed. And aren't we all better for it? Hell yea, we are. The implication of the fictitious story is that execution is an appropriate sentence for purse snatching, and that all citizens should be authorized to play judge, jury, and executioner on the spot. It might be argued that she would have been justified in firing one shot to disable the guy, but her intent in firing six or more was obviously to kill him. And then Bill Hicks took it to the next logical step by saying that we should be able to shoot people who take two parking places. The story has no inherent worth. It merely panders to the murderous tendencies in those who find it inspiring. And I doubt that shooting a purse snatcher or two would stop many purse snatchers. It would probably just incline the more hardened criminals to shoot first and then take the purse. I find it ironic that probably many of those who get their ya-ya's from this story consider themselves Christians, yet the mentality the story portrays is the polar opposite of what Christ taught. But such hypocrisy is par for the course with fundamentalist Christians, and with the right wing in general.
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Fwd: She Shot Him 6 Times
On Sat, Mar 20, 2010 at 1:13 PM, lurkernomore20002000 steve.sun...@sbcglobal.net wrote: What am I missing here? Let's assume the story is true. It's not. It's an urban legend. And while I'm at it, although I'm not the type to be overly patriotic, it warms my heart when I hear about another tailiban target taken out by unmanned drones. Of course, sometimes innocent civilians are mistakedly targeted, and killed, and that bothers me. Why? The Taliban are terrorists, i.e. they target civilians. We are fighting terror, sort of like stomping out the vineyards where the grapes of wrath are stored. Some civilians will get hurt in the process. Appears to be Allah's will. -- My late grandfather told me that if I ate a meatball every day for a hundred years, I would live to a ripe old age.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Fwd: She Shot Him 6 Times
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Rick Archer r...@... wrote: From: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com [mailto:fairfieldl...@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of lurkernomore20002000 Sent: Saturday, March 20, 2010 1:13 PM To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: Fwd: She Shot Him 6 Times What am I missing here? Let's assume the story is true. (i think someone posted something to say it wasn't, but let's say it's true) You've go 99% of the people in the world applauding this women, who doesn't want someone to her steal her hard earned money, and is willing to risk her life to that end, and then you've got an unlikely alliance of Barry, Judy, and Rick twisting this around to make Dixon appear as though he is advocating arbitrary culling of those he deems undesireable. His words: I have no problem *culling* society of those that live on the edge, endangering the rest of us for their lack of intelligence or compassion. Such a compassionate statement, huh? Yes, this guy IS undesireable, and the risk he takes when he violates someone else's rights is that he can also lose his own life, or get harmed. And aren't we all better for it? Hell yea, we are. The implication of the fictitious story is that execution is an appropriate sentence for purse snatching, and that all citizens should be authorized to play judge, jury, and executioner on the spot. It might be argued that she would have been justified in firing one shot to disable the guy, but her intent in firing six or more was obviously to kill him. And then Bill Hicks took it to the next logical step by saying that we should be able to shoot people who take two parking places. The story has no inherent worth. It merely panders to the murderous tendencies in those who find it inspiring. And I doubt that shooting a purse snatcher or two would stop many purse snatchers. It would probably just incline the more hardened criminals to shoot first and then take the purse. I find it ironic that probably many of those who get their ya-ya's from this story consider themselves Christians, yet the mentality the story portrays is the polar opposite of what Christ taught. But such hypocrisy is par for the course with fundamentalist Christians, and with the right wing in general. This kind of ugliness, in my view, is just one example of how the lack of any expressed moral base for TMers can manifest itself [even in long term practitioners]. To me it shows how the concept that TM somehow automatically makes us more moral without any expressed moral base is total crap.
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Fwd: She Shot Him 6 Times
On Sat, Mar 20, 2010 at 2:02 PM, Rick Archer r...@searchsummit.com wrote: *From:* FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com [mailto: fairfieldl...@yahoogroups.com] *On Behalf Of *lurkernomore20002000 *Sent:* Saturday, March 20, 2010 1:13 PM *To:* FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com *Subject:* [FairfieldLife] Re: Fwd: She Shot Him 6 Times The implication of the fictitious story is that execution is an appropriate sentence for purse snatching, and that all citizens should be authorized to play judge, jury, and executioner on the spot. It might be argued that she would have been justified in firing one shot to disable the guy, but her intent in firing six or more was obviously to kill him. And then Bill Hicks took it to the next logical step by saying that we should be able to shoot people who take two parking places. The story has no inherent worth. It merely panders to the murderous tendencies in those who find it inspiring. And I doubt that shooting a purse snatcher or two would stop many purse snatchers. It would probably just incline the more hardened criminals to shoot first and then take the purse. In Texas, and I assume other states, you have to take a concealed weapon course which includes reading the applicable laws, statues and ordinances. There are lectures, some work with anger management, training on the firing range and the constant instructions on taking aim with the intention of killing. This story is not true but knowing Houston, land of Lawrence v. Texas, if the story were true, the lady would most likely be no billed as I suspect she would be in Dallas. Austin, well, it's 50/50. There was the rape case where at first the assailant was no billed because the victim asked her rapist to use a condom thereby assenting to intercourse. In the urban legend the woman used more force than police use and her life was not in eminent danger. In the training courses you're told to pull out the gun with the intent to kill, not stop, not maim and only if in eminent danger for your life. The legendary woman would have violated her instructions and overreacted. None the less, I could see her being no billed by the grand jury. I think the legendary lady should be no billed as a form of grand jury nullification. I still maintain that zero tolerance works starting with purse snatchers might be overkill and stretching the limits of the law, but it would cut down this form of crime and more serious crime. As far as Rick saying the sane people on FFL don't take me seriously, he assumes that only those he's already or planning on interviewing are sane. Rick is showing how full of shit he really is. -- My late grandfather told me that if I ate a meatball every day for a hundred years, I would live to a ripe old age.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Fwd: She Shot Him 6 Times
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, do.rflex do.rf...@... wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Rick Archer rick@ wrote: snip I find it ironic that probably many of those who get their ya-ya's from this story consider themselves Christians, yet the mentality the story portrays is the polar opposite of what Christ taught. But such hypocrisy is par for the course with fundamentalist Christians, and with the right wing in general. This kind of ugliness, in my view, is just one example of how the lack of any expressed moral base for TMers can manifest itself [even in long term practitioners]. To me it shows how the concept that TM somehow automatically makes us more moral without any expressed moral base is total crap. Based on a sample of, what, three? You aren't exactly in a position to complain about anybody else's hypocrisy, BTW.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Fwd: She Shot Him 6 Times
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Sal Sunshine salsunsh...@... wrote: On Mar 20, 2010, at 1:13 PM, lurkernomore20002000 wrote: What am I missing here? Let's assume the story is true. (i think someone posted something to say it wasn't, but let's say it's true) You've go 99% of the people in the world applauding this women, who doesn't want someone to her steal her hard earned money, and is willing to risk her life to that end, and then you've got an unlikely alliance of Barry, Judy, and Rick twisting this around to make Dixon appear as though he is advocating arbitrary culling of those he deems undesireable. Yes, this guy IS undesireable, and the risk he takes when he violates someone else's rights is that he can also lose his own life, or get harmed. And aren't we all better for it? Hell yea, we are. And while I'm at it, although I'm not the type to be overly patriotic, it warms my heart when I hear about another tailiban target taken out by unmanned drones. Of course, sometimes innocent civilians are mistakedly targeted, and killed, and that bothers me. But during these times, and circumstances you've got to meet force with force, or force with greatr force, and that helps keep the world safe. You happy with the safe world we've created over in Afghanistan, lurk? How about Iraq? Sal Please tell me how you propose to deal with Islamist extremists whose objective is to kill Americans here, there, anywhere. For the purposes of discussion, let take ill fated entry into the Iraq war off the table. I think you and I will both agree that it was a war shoved down the throats of the American people.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Fwd: She Shot Him 6 Times
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend jst...@... wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, lurkernomore20002000 steve.sundur@ wrote: What am I missing here? Let's assume the story is true. (i think someone posted something to say it wasn't, but let's say it's true) You've go 99% of the people in the world applauding this women, You've taken a poll? No, I haven't. The percentage is guaranteed to be high who doesn't want someone to her steal her hard earned money, and is willing to risk her life to that end, How did she risk her life? She had the gun. And she shot him in the back as he was running away from her. That is true and then you've got an unlikely alliance of Barry, Judy, and Rick twisting this around to make Dixon appear as though he is advocating arbitrary culling of those he deems undesireable. That's exactly what he *was* advocating: I have no problem *culling* society of those that live on the edge, endangering the rest of us for their lack of intelligence or compassion. I think most people want to live, and let live. And when someone violates that in one way or another, by force of ideology that gets put onto practice, then you're going to have problems Yes, this guy IS undesireable, and the risk he takes when he violates someone else's rights is that he can also lose his own life, or get harmed. In this country, he risks getting caught, tried by a jury of his peers, and put in jail if there's no reasonable doubt that he's guilty. We all know it doesn't alway work out that way. People like instantaneous justice especially when it is clear cut. And aren't we all better for it? Hell yea, we are. I think you're trying to violate *my* rights. Do I get to shoot you dead because you're advocating throwing out the Constitution? Somebody blatantly violates your rights. They steal your property. I have no problem with them suffering some immediate consequences
[FairfieldLife] Re: Fwd: She Shot Him 6 Times
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Rick Archer r...@... wrote: From: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com [mailto:fairfieldl...@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of lurkernomore20002000 Sent: Saturday, March 20, 2010 1:13 PM To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: Fwd: She Shot Him 6 Times What am I missing here? Let's assume the story is true. (i think someone posted something to say it wasn't, but let's say it's true) You've go 99% of the people in the world applauding this women, who doesn't want someone to her steal her hard earned money, and is willing to risk her life to that end, and then you've got an unlikely alliance of Barry, Judy, and Rick twisting this around to make Dixon appear as though he is advocating arbitrary culling of those he deems undesireable. His words: I have no problem *culling* society of those that live on the edge, endangering the rest of us for their lack of intelligence or compassion. Such a compassionate statement, huh? Yes, this guy IS undesireable, and the risk he takes when he violates someone else's rights is that he can also lose his own life, or get harmed. And aren't we all better for it? Hell yea, we are. The implication of the fictitious story is that execution is an appropriate sentence for purse snatching, and that all citizens should be authorized to play judge, jury, and executioner on the spot. It might be argued that she would have been justified in firing one shot to disable the guy, but her intent in firing six or more was obviously to kill him. Why should someone be allowed to take the property another person worked hard to obtain. What is the appropiate penalty for that. A waitress at a bus stop with her pay check and maybe some money and personal poccessions and someone comes by a takes it from her by force. If they get shot and injured or shot and die- not many are going to have sympathy. I am not. But you may just be a more compassionate person than I And then Bill Hicks took it to the next logical step by saying that we should be able to shoot people who take two parking places. I didn't get that import The story has no inherent worth. It merely panders to the murderous tendencies in those who find it inspiring. And I doubt that shooting a purse snatcher or two would stop many purse snatchers. It would probably just incline the more hardened criminals to shoot first and then take the purse. They probably have that mindset already I find it ironic that probably many of those who get their ya-ya's from this story consider themselves Christians, yet the mentality the story portrays is the polar opposite of what Christ taught. Yes, I do marvel at that disconnect between what Christ taught, and how many, followers believe they are following his word, especially having just finished a book about Jesus. But such hypocrisy is par for the course with fundamentalist Christians, and with the right wing in general. A pretty broad statement
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Fwd: She Shot Him 6 Times
I think the law decided, not me. From: Rick Archer r...@searchsummit.com To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Sat, March 20, 2010 9:21:07 AM Subject: RE: [FairfieldLife] Re: Fwd: She Shot Him 6 Times From:FairfieldLife@ yahoogroups. com [mailto:FairfieldLi f...@yahoogroups. com] On Behalf Of Mike Dixon Sent: Saturday, March 20, 2010 9:48 AM To: FairfieldLife@ yahoogroups. com Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Fwd: She Shot Him 6 Times Barry, it wasn't meant to make you feel *all warm and fuzzy*. That would have taken the perp walking up and shoving money *into* the waitress's purse, IMHO. That waitress deserves an award of some kind for saving society the cost of prosecution and incarceration of the perpetrator as well as the cost of further crimes and lives. I would like to do what I could to lift her spirits up and let her know she has my support in an effort to ease her conscience. Hermandan0 saved you the trouble by providing a link demonstrating that the woman doesn't exist. Human Beings aren't an endangered species. I have no problem *culling* society of those that live on the edge, endangering the rest of us for their lack of intelligence or compassion. So you get to decide who gets culled? I have a problem with that. Do you think everyone should carry guns around and just cull anyone they think needs culling? .
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Fwd: She Shot Him 6 Times
Our society IS culled every day! People are arrested for all sorts of crime and taken off the streets, if they are lucky enough to be caught by law enforcement. While this story is fictitious, crimes like this happen in reality and I believe in most states, a person can use deadly force to defend their lives and property. Had I been born and raised in Cuba, I probably would have been culled, but for political reasons, not because I was a threat to anyones life or property. From: authfriend jst...@panix.com To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Sat, March 20, 2010 10:16:32 AM Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: Fwd: She Shot Him 6 Times --- In FairfieldLife@ yahoogroups. com, Rick Archer r...@... wrote: Mike Dixon wrote: snip Human Beings aren't an endangered species. I have no problem *culling* society of those that live on the edge, endangering the rest of us for their lack of intelligence or compassion. So you get to decide who gets culled? I have a problem with that. Do you think everyone should carry guns around and just cull anyone they think needs culling? And Mike, what if it turns out somebody else thinks *you're* among those who should be culled (quite possibly for the same reasons)?
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Fwd: She Shot Him 6 Times
B..B... B..Bingo! From: lurkernomore20002000 steve.sun...@sbcglobal.net To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Sat, March 20, 2010 11:13:11 AM Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: Fwd: She Shot Him 6 Times What am I missing here? Let's assume the story is true. (i think someone posted something to say it wasn't, but let's say it's true) You've go 99% of the people in the world applauding this women, who doesn't want someone to her steal her hard earned money, and is willing to risk her life to that end, and then you've got an unlikely alliance of Barry, Judy, and Rick twisting this around to make Dixon appear as though he is advocating arbitrary culling of those he deems undesireable. Yes, this guy IS undesireable, and the risk he takes when he violates someone else's rights is that he can also lose his own life, or get harmed. And aren't we all better for it? Hell yea, we are. And while I'm at it, although I'm not the type to be overly patriotic, it warms my heart when I hear about another tailiban target taken out by unmanned drones. Of course, sometimes innocent civilians are mistakedly targeted, and killed, and that bothers me. But during these times, and circumstances you've got to meet force with force, or force with greatr force, and that helps keep the world safe. --- In FairfieldLife@ yahoogroups. com, authfriend jst...@... wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@ yahoogroups. com, Rick Archer rick@ wrote: Mike Dixon wrote: snip Human Beings aren't an endangered species. I have no problem *culling* society of those that live on the edge, endangering the rest of us for their lack of intelligence or compassion. So you get to decide who gets culled? I have a problem with that. Do you think everyone should carry guns around and just cull anyone they think needs culling? And Mike, what if it turns out somebody else thinks *you're* among those who should be culled (quite possibly for the same reasons)?
RE: [FairfieldLife] Re: Fwd: She Shot Him 6 Times
From: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com [mailto:fairfieldl...@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of lurkernomore20002000 Sent: Saturday, March 20, 2010 4:38 PM To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: Fwd: She Shot Him 6 Times I think you're trying to violate *my* rights. Do I get to shoot you dead because you're advocating throwing out the Constitution? Somebody blatantly violates your rights. They steal your property. I have no problem with them suffering some immediate consequences That's the way gangs work. They mete out justice swiftly and finally without messing with all that legal stuff. You, apparently, would like the whole society to function that way.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Fwd: She Shot Him 6 Times
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Rick Archer r...@... wrote: That's the way gangs work. They mete out justice swiftly and finally without messing with all that legal stuff. You, apparently, would like the whole society to function that way. Rick, I believe gangs typically interact with other gangs. When they encroach on traditional law abiding citizens they generally run into a lot of organized resistance from police or other organized groups. Take a look at what is happening in Mexico. There you have the gangs encroaching into non gang, traditional life. The response from the authorities is rising up to deal with the crisis. When the gangs were just killing each other, the concern wasn't so great. There are many other examples. Look at how the west was won. Why did not outlaw gangs take over? Because most citizens are law abiding, have strong sense of right and wrong, and know what constitutes justice. And they are willing to enforce that by consensus, and often that mens force. Isn't that what kept law and order during this period. I think it is a little lame to suggest that I am advocating gang type revenge justice. I am just saying that you tread on me in such a way as to deprive me of my rights, be prepared for forceful action. Certainly there are many times when I would like to harm someone for treating me in what I feel to be an unfair manner. And I recognize that I must pursue it in a civil (court) manner. I have a customer right now who owes my (our) company $600.00, and he won't discuss it, and I would like to do something radical to show my anger and frustration. But I recognize that I may just have to go after him in small court. What do you think.
