Quote:
Originally Posted by foundit66
So if individuals get the chance, they should go for it.
Take the law into their own hands if they so please.
And make it quick, cause you only have the opportunity after the crime to make it happen. And make sure you're killing the right guy, cause otherwise you'll probably go to jail.
|
Right. You takes your chances.
Quote:
Cops on the scene? 911 told you not to?
Don't worry about it. IGNORE the LEGAL authority and take your shot.
|
911 operators have no legal authority. If cops are on the scene, they'll make the determination whether it's justified or not. It all works out.
Quote:
I can't help but notice that you don't even try to refute my point.
If you can correct what I said about your opinions, then do so.
Otherwise, don't try to claim I was inaccurate without actually showing how I was supposedly inaccurate.
|
Your point was based on your interpretation of mine. Why would I refute a point based on something erroneous?
Quote:
Over and over again you try to justify these things by harping on how bad the assailant was. That shouldn't be a justification for shooting somebody in the back.
The fact that you use it as a justification PROVES that we're talking about VIGILANTISM.
|
I think you have crossed threads here. This is the death penalty for raping children thread.
And I don't think the state should have more authority than they currently have. The state killing someone after the fact, to me, is different than stopping a crime in progress. Once law enforcement has custody, the rules change.
07-07-2008, 01:57 PM
Re: Court rejects death penalty for raping children
LinkBacks (?)
Linear Mode
