debate over shooting orders in riots and arson.
on 12/21/2011 at 08:11 AM
- Rob can’t even spell sissy - I still shudder at people such as this being able to vote. You know why liberals/leftist generalize that allowing the police to shoot during a riot is an open door to shooting for dropping gum on the pavement, don’t you? Because when they get a law passed - it is a toe in the door which they then bull push their way through to remove all freedom and rights possible to control other people.I ask you. Is that stupid er what?
I have no problem with shoot to kill - rioters (exactly what were they rioting over again - oh yeah - a criminal who shot a cop who shot back as he was going down - and the scum with a gun (isn’t there like, gun control laws over there?!?) died). So let’s riot and destroy and maim our neighbors and the place we live (few animals soil where they live, even less intentionally destroy it in a hissy fit).
So the liberals/leftist want to take away the right to shoot to protect life from stuck on stupid scum - here’s my counter offer - anyone arrested for rioting is not allowed any dole/benefit other than life or death healthcare.
Get a job, and find out what it’s like to be an adult and a real citizen for once in your miserable life.
I liked Kris Kristopherson (sp?) comment at the end of his acceptance for Veteran of the Year - Every politician should serve in the military.
Used to be, now they are all lawyers - no wonder the world is going to hell.
just isn’t the English way
Right. That’s why British troops fired on Colonial militia at Concord. “It wasn’t the English way…”
Then there’s the Luddites:
The government eventually defeated the Luddites. As many as forty Luddites were killed in action, twenty-four were executed, thirty-four were transported to Australia and twenty-four were imprisoned. Although the rise of the Luddites was short lived, they impacted society a great deal and even today Luddism is still around.
Source: http://www2.needham.k12.ma.us/nhs/cur/Baker_00/baker_1800_soc/baker_br_rb_p4/luddites.htm
Not that “Luddism is still around.” Didn’t do a good enough job!
Not the English way? Damn well better start being the English way again or you’re all gonna speak Arabic and pray to Mecca. No, I’m not talking about this particular round of over-indulged, spoiled, rioters. I’m talking about the creeping Sharia laws that are infiltrating ‘Jolly Old England.’ Might be old, sure ain’t jolly now, is it?
And don’t get me started on the ‘English way’ in Ireland from Cromwell on…
Who’s this “idiot head of a police association” think he’s kidding? His job is to keep the peace. If that requires killing some malcontents, sobeit. It certainly used to be the English way.
Well Chris lets not forget that at Concord, we weren’t yet the USA and the Brits were after the stored munitions. Which at that point in time was to be used against what was considered to be the legal authority in the colonies. Which was the king and parliament. But lets not rehash an old war. Thing is, the pygmies running things these days are too pc.
I really think there is a dictatorship of pc and it’s not only seriously hurting this country, its done its damage in Europe and America as well. And it was taking roots in the USA long before any of us ever heard of Obama, btw.
Yeah, it gets maddening here seeing this stuff happen. This is not the generation that fought Rorkes Drift or even the two world wars. And that’s damn unfortunate. And if you think it’s pretty bad (and it is) with too many Brits saying sorry for past deeds, some silly Americans are doing it too and worse yet, they do it over here. It very embarrassing when they do that.Well Chris lets not forget that at Concord, we weren’t yet the USA and the Brits were after the stored munitions. Which at that point in time was to be used against what was considered to be the legal authority in the colonies.
My point. They were still English subjects. Yet it’s not the ‘English way’ to fire on English citizens? One could claim they were still just rioting until Concord.
There used to be a thing called the Riot Act http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Riot_act unfortunately the bed wetters had it repealed in 1973. Whilst I tend to favour shooting rioters what I am concerned about is just how crap the police in Britain ar ethese days. the upper echelons have been filled by lefty placemen and women who frequently are “common purpose” graduates. The lower ranks have some decent people but there are some true grade a morons who i wouldn’t trust to tie their own laces. Seriously I would not want some of these people to have acccess to firearms. What really made me laugh though was some bed wetter gave a reason for not shooting at rioter because “they might shoot back” well if thats how these dorks feel then we might as well give up now.
this is worth a read
http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/jamesdelingpole/100125446/by-all-means-shoot-rioters-but/
Had to refresh myself on the Riot Act. Thanks for the link. Wouldn’t work here in the States. 1st Amendment says
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.
I think the accent is on peaceably to assemble, something the rioters in England and the OWS crowd in the US forgot. Peaceably. You didn’t see this kind of anti-social behavior at any TEA party rallies. I’ve been to two of them. We came, we protested, we listened to speeches. We cleaned up our mess, we went home to go to work the next day. I’m certain that Courthouse Square hadn’t been that clean in decades.
Oh, I almost forgot, we VOTED in November 2010. Can’t forget that part of the TEA party rallies. And we’ll vote again in November 2012. The OWS crowd has done nothing but piss us off.
The moral delemma really does not exist as far as I’m concerned.
Someone....Anyone who forces themselves on my property or my family will have to suffer the consequences of my trying to exterminate them. No, I do not run away or surrender my chatels or life to some low-life, violent scum as advised by the P.C. Liberal morons.
I’ll stand my ground and use whatever weapons available to put-down the interlopers.
I’ll deal with the consequences later.
In other words, I heartly endorse the following credo:
Kill ‘em all and let God, Allah or some other deity of their choice sort ‘em out!
NJY, I don’t recall a better statement of the ‘Castle Doctrine’. But we were talking about England here. They don’t recognize that doctrine, unless your name is Elizabeth, Charles, William, etc. The peons get peed on. And if you defend yourself in Britain, well, you’ve violated the civil rights of the criminal and you are therefore a criminal.
Did I get that pretty much correct peiper?
They have relaxed (under public pressure) the idea of defense of the home. You don’t have to run away for example. I recall even back home (unless things changed) self defense was accepted only where you could not reasonably get away, if deadly force was used.
Last week some thugs invaded a home looking for money and jewels etc. One of the punks had a hatchet, grabbed a member of the household and was gonna cut off fingers unless told where the money was. His mother managed to get a knife from the kitchen and stabbed one of them in the arm, and they ran away. They were later arrested but no charges against the woman.
12/21/2011 at 09:05 AM
12/22/2011 at 12:49 AM
