Oath Keepers Turn Up at Michael Brown Protests in Ferguson, Missouri

a reply to: spav5

A person is never truly unarmed though. Look at special operators who can disarm people with guns and then shoot them. They were Armed with the knowledge of how to approach a armed individual. SO it is stil cowardly to shoot a un armed attacker who could possibly come back later to kill you?

originally posted by: yuppa
a reply to: spav5

A person is never truly unarmed though. Look at special operators who can disarm people with guns and then shoot them. They were Armed with the knowledge of how to approach a armed individual. SO it is stil cowardly to shoot a un armed attacker who could possibly come back later to kill you?

Listen...I believe in one's right to defend their body, their person, their loved ones, their pets.....If someone is attacking you then use what means is necessary to defend yourself.

If their only intent is to steal or harm your property and they are unarmed... if you shoot them then in my opinion you are coward.

If a person is never really unarmed then why is it necessary that you defend your property with an additional weapon? Apparently you are already armed.

originally posted by: cavtrooper7
a reply to: spav5

How do you feel about THIS?www.facebook.com...
These people were killed to protect tigers do you feel bad for THEM?

I don't believe in taking life in defense of inanimate objects. If someone were intent on killing one of my pets I would do what is necessary to protect them. If they were unarmed and were stealing my car I certainly would not feel any desire or need to shoot them.

If people kill so that they may eat? Fine. I respect that more than buying beef at the supermarket just so you do not have to get your hands bloody. If they are killing for the sake of killing then anyone who feels a need to defend other life has my blessings.

okay?

a reply to: spav5

I don't care.
If someone destroys someone esles lively hood williy nilly let them have YOURS then.
THE rest of us with stop them at the same level they would seek to violate ours.
We aren't passive victim types.

a reply to: spav5

You should have read the whole thing (which we all know that you did), because yuppa makes some valid points that you're apparently afraid to address, or just don't want to admit that you're wrong. In either case, doesn't that make you exactly what you're accusing others of being?

originally posted by: SlapMonkey
a reply to: spav5

You should have read the whole thing (which we all know that you did), because yuppa makes some valid points that you're apparently afraid to address, or just don't want to admit that you're wrong. In either case, doesn't that make you exactly what you're accusing others of being?

Well we both know thats not gonna happen prolly lol. YEah i thiink the poster is letting his emotions over ride his thinking a bit is all.

originally posted by: cavtrooper7
a reply to: spav5

I don't care.
If someone destroys someone esles lively hood williy nilly let them have YOURS then.
THE rest of us with stop them at the same level they would seek to violate ours.
We aren't passive victim types.

I already stated I will not shoot someone over my property. I don't need you to protect me, I don't ask that you protect me, and I seriously doubt that you would.

I am not a victim. I am a human being with a conscience and killing people who ARE truly valuable, over something that you have been told is valuable, is insane to me.

But carry on

originally posted by: SlapMonkey
a reply to: spav5

You should have read the whole thing (which we all know that you did), because yuppa makes some valid points that you're apparently afraid to address, or just don't want to admit that you're wrong. In either case, doesn't that make you exactly what you're accusing others of being?

He makes no valid points to me. He is unable to. I will never agree that killing people, who are valuable, because of objects that I have been told is valuable, is sane.

Now go ahead and place your gold above human life. Place your house and you car above human life..but stop acting like I am the crazy one.

Why is it so important that I am convinced? Would that then validate your insanity?

a reply to: spav5

As I stated EARLIER.
Pity is something I don't have for attackers af any type.
It's THEIR mistake,not mine.
YOU can surrender yourself as you wish I am not a pacifist,I am a warrior.
Perhaps a bystander will save you.

originally posted by: cavtrooper7
a reply to: spav5

As I stated EARLIER.
Pity is something I don't have for attackers af any type.
It's THEIR mistake,not mine.
YOU can surrender yourself as you wish I am not a pacifist,I am a warrior.
Perhaps a bystander will save you.

It has nothing to do with surrendering. I am not a pacifist. I will protect life. I just find life, which cannot be replaced, more valuable than objects that can.

Carry on, warrior.

ASSESMENT of my sanity as a tool is an impotent debate position unless of course YOU ARE a mental health professional.
I would say without MY kind in your defence you wouldn't HAVE a place anyway.
THE real world can be hostile for those who aren't capable.

www.facebook.com...

a reply to: spav5

Just remember that disagreeing with valid points does not make them invalid. You can disagree all you want, but that doesn't change reality.

I disagree with the reason why we still have so many of our military Service Members in the Middle East, but that doesn't mean that they're not there.

LOL...you think you have the ability to assess sanity of others? From a few posts on a thread that advocate for something that is within the laws that a sane society has put into place? Are you serious?

I give two flying turds if you're convinced or not--why is it so important to you to continue trying to convince us that we're wrong? I don't need to convince you to know that if you walk into my home with intent to do something illegal, I will assume (and rightfully so) that you intend to harm me or my family to get what you want, and I will eliminate that threat by whatever means necessary. If you, or anyone else, is "insane" enough to enter my home or place of business with ill intent, prepare to defend your life. It's that simple--you place my personal safety in harm's way, yours will be, too. It's legal. It's absolutely sane.

I still stand by my first comment to you in this thread:

Protecting someone else's property isn't worth losing one's life over because a bunch of immature future Darwin award winners want to take what isn't theirs. However, if these looters want to put their own life in danger for doing something illegal, that's their own choice, and that's what we call Natural Selection.

And this comment:

It's about protecting the freedom to own said property. We have a right to be secure in our property, and nearly every state has laws that allow for deadly force during an invasion of your property where you fear for your life (and it happening during non-peaceful protests or riots would certainly fall under that fear).

The thing for which you seem to fail to account is that when property is taken, often life is as well, and not by the person who owns the property.

The discussion between you and I is obviously complete, because once you start calling people who protect their lives and property in whatever way is lawful 'insane,' then you reduce your credibility to zero, and future discussion is a lesson in futility.

Like cavtrooper7 says, "THE real world can be hostile for those who aren't capable." Why choose to be incapable and instead fall victim to the hostility when you can have control over your own survival?

That's rhetorical; no answer is necessary.

originally posted by: SlapMonkey
a reply to: spav5

Just remember that disagreeing with valid points does not make them invalid. You can disagree all you want, but that doesn't change reality.

I disagree with the reason why we still have so many of our military Service Members in the Middle East, but that doesn't mean that they're not there.

LOL...you think you have the ability to assess sanity of others? From a few posts on a thread that advocate for something that is within the laws that a sane society has put into place? Are you serious?

I give two flying turds if you're convinced or not--why is it so important to you to continue trying to convince us that we're wrong? I don't need to convince you to know that if you walk into my home with intent to do something illegal, I will assume (and rightfully so) that you intend to harm me or my family to get what you want, and I will eliminate that threat by whatever means necessary. If you, or anyone else, is "insane" enough to enter my home or place of business with ill intent, prepare to defend your life. It's that simple--you place my personal safety in harm's way, yours will be, too. It's legal. It's absolutely sane.

I still stand by my first comment to you in this thread:

Protecting someone else's property isn't worth losing one's life over because a bunch of immature future Darwin award winners want to take what isn't theirs. However, if these looters want to put their own life in danger for doing something illegal, that's their own choice, and that's what we call Natural Selection.

And this comment:

It's about protecting the freedom to own said property. We have a right to be secure in our property, and nearly every state has laws that allow for deadly force during an invasion of your property where you fear for your life (and it happening during non-peaceful protests or riots would certainly fall under that fear).

The thing for which you seem to fail to account is that when property is taken, often life is as well, and not by the person who owns the property.

The discussion between you and I is obviously complete, because once you start calling people who protect their lives and property in whatever way is lawful 'insane,' then you reduce your credibility to zero, and future discussion is a lesson in futility.

Like cavtrooper7 says, "THE real world can be hostile for those who aren't capable." Why choose to be incapable and instead fall victim to the hostility when you can have control over your own survival?

That's rhetorical; no answer is necessary.

Property can be replaced lives cannot. To place more value on objects, than life, is insane. Why does it make you so upset that I disagree with you? Perhaps you have not really thought about how you feel about this topic? I have thought about it extensively. Your words do not faze me.

Keep trying to convince yourself of who you are not and you will never discover who you are.

Sorry you feel so passionately about property and so little about human life. I cannot help you though..you will have to do your own soul searching.

a reply to: spav5

Dude we get it, you are a bleeding heart liberal type that does not mind depending on the government to protect and save you. You are not alone, there are alot of misinformed naive people in the world

We are not talking about a guy taking your TV or car radio, most will agree that is not worth taking a life over, but to have your whole livelihood taken or destroyed by worthless thugs, for no reason other than they are upset that another thug was shot for making very bad life decisions??? Guess what, now said shop owner or resident cant feed his wife and kids , they are traumatized and dont know what will come next, and they did absolutely nothing wrong but open a store in a crap neighborhood, so much for helping out the local hood...Sorry that aint gonna happen to those that work hard for what they have and have more respect for themselves.

originally posted by: DeadFoot
a reply to: ~Lucidity

I'm having trouble understanding why they would be there aside from having a few topics circulate the internet like this.

Seems far fetched but I wouldn't completely rule it out since there are so many absurd things going on that are true.

originally posted by: chewi
a reply to: ~Lucidity
Are these allowed to do this and if this isn't an advert for banning firearms then what is. Why do you Americans want to keep your firearms. Hunting, Defence or control. I am really confused as to the argument for firearms.

Good thing it's an American argument that doesn't affect you then huh? I'm sure your own country has issues you can deal with there.

originally posted by: spav5

originally posted by: cavtrooper7
a reply to: spav5

As I stated EARLIER.
Pity is something I don't have for attackers af any type.
It's THEIR mistake,not mine.
YOU can surrender yourself as you wish I am not a pacifist,I am a warrior.
Perhaps a bystander will save you.

It has nothing to do with surrendering. I am not a pacifist. I will protect life. I just find life, which cannot be replaced, more valuable than objects that can.

Carry on, warrior.

If your argument is "life which cannot be replaced is more valuable than objects that can" Let us hear your condemnation of black people who kill other black people and also completely innocent white people for their belongings.

Go on, I'll wait for your targetted condemnation just like you are targettinf the Oath Keepers.

originally posted by: Wiz4769
a reply to: spav5

Dude we get it, you are a bleeding heart liberal type that does not mind depending on the government to protect and save you. You are not alone, there are alot of misinformed naive people in the world

We are not talking about a guy taking your TV or car radio, most will agree that is not worth taking a life over, but to have your whole livelihood taken or destroyed by worthless thugs, for no reason other than they are upset that another thug was shot for making very bad life decisions??? Guess what, now said shop owner or resident cant feed his wife and kids , they are traumatized and dont know what will come next, and they did absolutely nothing wrong but open a store in a crap neighborhood, so much for helping out the local hood...Sorry that aint gonna happen to those that work hard for what they have and have more respect for themselves.

You get nothing but what you are told to get. It can be replaced.

originally posted by: chuck258

originally posted by: spav5

originally posted by: cavtrooper7
a reply to: spav5

As I stated EARLIER.
Pity is something I don't have for attackers af any type.
It's THEIR mistake,not mine.
YOU can surrender yourself as you wish I am not a pacifist,I am a warrior.
Perhaps a bystander will save you.

It has nothing to do with surrendering. I am not a pacifist. I will protect life. I just find life, which cannot be replaced, more valuable than objects that can.

Carry on, warrior.

If your argument is "life which cannot be replaced is more valuable than objects that can" Let us hear your condemnation of black people who kill other black people and also completely innocent white people for their belongings.

Go on, I'll wait for your targetted condemnation just like you are targettinf the Oath Keepers.

What part of my statement do you not understand? I typed as slowly as I could. No one said anything about white or black. Why does your bigotry have to seep into every thought you have?

Try reading what I wrote or at least let me know that you did not read it.