Heres a illegal vs american WTF story.

[fudgie]

Yea, this sounds like justice.  This kinda sh!t really makes me po'd.


http://www.kdvr.com/news/kdvr-theives-free-victim-arrested-txt,0,231586.story

3 can keep a secret if 2 are dead............

[Chrisj CMA]

hopefully this is going to be a case where its actually good to get charged with the whole pile and found innocent so no one can come back later and get you for something else.  I pray it works oout goot for the feller

[hotglue #43]

Wonder if they were the same illegals that stole my lowboy trailer!!!!!!  They got caught...and
They were shipped back to Mexico..This is after I said I would file charges... and were probably back in the States before I was able to go down near Mexico to get my trailer.  
The world is not right....They don't follow the law of the land... and evidently the law of the land does not apply to them.  

[RoadKill]

He shot at them because they were dark skinned...it was a race crime for sure. Just another rich old white guy getting in the way of poor folk out there working hard to put food on the table. Now that people like him have made their occupation more hazardous we will have to subsidize their efforts with tax dollars. We will call it the steal one,get one free program. to kick off the new program these two "undocumented hero's" will be presented with a second trailer and a gov't spending card at a ceremony on the white house lawn. And if we find out that Mr.Wallace is registered as Republican we will make him pay for the medical expense he forced the state to pay for the man shot,and orthodontic care for the family of the other man.

Now that I have explained why you are wrong,Strong Eagle will insult you and call names,Bobbo will find a snopes article claiming your punctuation was misplaced and therefor the entire article is bogus,and Scanner will call your source a right wing propaganda machine that only reports from the planet Beck.

I wonder what Walkure will contribute ? 

Welcome to the U.S.A. today 

Hank Jr - The USA Today	powered by Aeva

[fudgie]

He shot at them because they were dark skinned...it was a race crime for sure. Just another rich old white guy getting in the way of poor folk out there working hard to put food on the table. Now that people like him have made their occupation more hazardous we will have to subsidize their efforts with tax dollars. We will call it the steal one,get one free program. to kick off the new program these two "undocumented hero's" will be presented with a second trailer and a gov't spending card at a ceremony on the white house lawn. And if we find out that Mr.Wallace is registered as Republican we will make him pay for the medical expense he forced the state to pay for the man shot,and orthodontic care for the family of the other man.

Now that I have explained why you are wrong,Strong Eagle will insult you and call names,Bobbo will find a snopes article claiming your punctuation was misplaced and therefor the entire article is bogus,and Scanner will call your source a right wing propaganda machine that only reports from the planet Beck.

I wonder what Walkure will contribute ? 

Welcome to the U.S.A. today 

Hank Jr - The USA Today

You.....are a funny guy!  God bless Hank Jr. 

[Walküre]

I wonder what Walkure will contribute ?  

Glad you're concerned...

Of course, I'm sure you disagree with all laws, on use of deadly force for self-defense. Judging by what is here, you can just open fire no matter what, just 'cuz someone steals something of yours - does that count if someone steals an ear of corn, from a farmer, or takes an orange, or a grape in a supermarket? Or maybe the low-down, "deserves to die" scum takes a - god forbid - NEWSPAPER off your porch??!!? By all means, blow the little F****R AWAY!!! Don't matter WHO he is, the 15  year old next door, your mother's best friend, of a person of Mexican descent....let GOD sort them out!!  Regardless, they are still human.

The story says:

He yelled at them to stop, but they sped away, stealing his trailer. He told police he fired two shots at the pickup.

Most, if not all, laws state something similar to:

law justifies use of deadly force when you are:

Trying to protect yourself or another person from death or serious bodily harm;
Trying to prevent a forcible felony, such as rape, robbery, burglary or kidnapping.
Using or displaying a handgun in any other circumstances could result in your conviction for crimes such as improper exhibition of a firearm, manslaughter, or worse.

Example of the kind of attack that will not justify defending yourself with deadly force: Two neighbors got into a fight, and one of them tried to hit the other by swinging a garden hose. The neighbor who was being attacked with the hose shot the other in the chest. The court upheld his conviction for aggravated battery with a firearm, because an attack with a garden hose is not the kind of violent assault that justifies responding with deadly force.

Verbal threats are not enough to justify the use of deadly force. There must be an overt act by the person which indicates that he immediately intends to carry out the threat. The person threatened must reasonably believe that he will be killed or suffer serious bodily harm if he does not immediately take the life of his adversary.

I'm certain someone will pluck out the "Trying to prevent a forcible felony, such as rape, robbery, burglary or kidnapping." from above. Well, the robbery had ALREADY OCCURED, and the shooter was NOT trying to prevent it. The key here is that the robbers were running away.

Now, whether you AGREE with the laws of the land, or not, they are STILL the laws of the land. The story points out, that the persons shot at, and the one killed, were running AWAY from the shooter. And were NOT making ANY threatening, or even provocative actions TOWARDS the shooter.

Therefore, under the laws of this land, until they are changed, he is guilty of manslaughter at the very least, and depending on a jury of his peers, murder.

I don't say all this is right, but it is the fact of law. You can't shoot ANYONE for stealing and running. Whether it be a dollar or ten thousand dollars. It's what keeps an unscroupulous person, who hates his neighbor because he's, say, a "damn liberal", from saying "he stole my dog, so I shot him...".

THAT'S what Walküre will contribute...

And I'm sure it will piss some of you off....

Oh well...

R

[Desertwndrr]

Are you serious??  I've had my concealed weapons license for 15 years.  Luckily I have never had to use it.  Never had to pull out a firearm for any reason.  God forbid that I ever have to.  But did you read the story?  Specifically this line? 

"Wallace did not want to talk on camera, but when we asked him if the two men threatened him he said, "They almost ran me over.""

In my mind it would be not only justified, but 'self defense' to discharge a weapon at a thief stealing something and trying to run me over.  I would argue that those two idiots were using the motor vehicle as a deadly weapon in this case.  Or maybe you don't see an individuals personal protection as justification for the use of a firearm.  Those guys are lucky that he missed.

An armed society IS a polite society!

[fudgie]

Yes, but he was attempting to be run over. Like I read on another board, how many cops have shot at a back of a vehicle that tried to run them down? Who knows, they may have thought to turn around and come back?  The dude was in his 80's and could have been taken easily by these 2.
I hold no predujuce on who it is if someone is running me down. A vehicle can be used as a deadly weopon. He displayed his gun on his own property, that should not be held against him.
Dad was weed eating one day along our road, a hiway. Car load of kids went off the road and was aiming at him. He whipped out his .357 mag and they got back on the road pretty fast!
I have to disagree that these are 'laws of the land'. More tho of 'laws of man'. To me laws of the land would be you steal my crap, your gonna get shot if i catch you.

[fstsix]

Colorado (Make My Day Law).............................................................DA says Make My Day Law protects man who shot, killed neighbor in barking dog dispute

9NEWS Northern Reporter - Written by: Roger Wolfe - November 13, 2004

AULT - A Weld County man accused of killing his neighbor last week in a squabble over a barking dog will not be prosecuted. The district attorney says the shooting was justified under Colorado¹s Make My Day Law.

Richard Hammock, 48, died Nov. 2 from a shotgun wound. His dog had been shot with a pellet gun and he went to his neighbor¹s house to confront him about the incident. Hammock was carrying a three-foot club when he went to 33-year-old Eric Griffin¹s home. The district attorney says Hammock broke out the glass on Griffin¹s front door and then Griffin shot him.

Griffin was arrested for the shooting, but district attorney Al Dominguez says he can't prosecute him because of the court's interpretation of the Make My Day Law. He says he believes it was a mistake for the state Legislature to pass the law.

The law recognizes that citizens have the right to expect absolute safety within their homes. The occupant is justified in using any degree of physical force, including deadly force, against another person who makes an uninvited entry into the home and either has or might commit a crime there.

[RoadKill]

I wonder what Walkure will contribute ?  

Glad you're concerned...

Of course, I'm sure you disagree with all laws, on use of deadly force for self-defense. Judging by what is here, you can just open fire no matter what, just 'cuz someone steals something of yours - does that count if someone steals an ear of corn, from a farmer, or takes an orange, or a grape in a supermarket? Or maybe the low-down, "deserves to die" scum takes a - god forbid - NEWSPAPER off your porch??!!? By all means, blow the little F****R AWAY!!! Don't matter WHO he is, the 15  year old next door, your mother's best friend, of a person of Mexican descent....let GOD sort them out!!  Regardless, they are still human.

The story says:

He yelled at them to stop, but they sped away, stealing his trailer. He told police he fired two shots at the pickup.

Most, if not all, laws state something similar to:

law justifies use of deadly force when you are:

Trying to protect yourself or another person from death or serious bodily harm;
Trying to prevent a forcible felony, such as rape, robbery, burglary or kidnapping.
Using or displaying a handgun in any other circumstances could result in your conviction for crimes such as improper exhibition of a firearm, manslaughter, or worse.

Example of the kind of attack that will not justify defending yourself with deadly force: Two neighbors got into a fight, and one of them tried to hit the other by swinging a garden hose. The neighbor who was being attacked with the hose shot the other in the chest. The court upheld his conviction for aggravated battery with a firearm, because an attack with a garden hose is not the kind of violent assault that justifies responding with deadly force.

Verbal threats are not enough to justify the use of deadly force. There must be an overt act by the person which indicates that he immediately intends to carry out the threat. The person threatened must reasonably believe that he will be killed or suffer serious bodily harm if he does not immediately take the life of his adversary.

I'm certain someone will pluck out the "Trying to prevent a forcible felony, such as rape, robbery, burglary or kidnapping." from above. Well, the robbery had ALREADY OCCURED, and the shooter was NOT trying to prevent it. The key here is that the robbers were running away.

Now, whether you AGREE with the laws of the land, or not, they are STILL the laws of the land. The story points out, that the persons shot at, and the one killed, were running AWAY from the shooter. And were NOT making ANY threatening, or even provocative actions TOWARDS the shooter.

Therefore, under the laws of this land, until they are changed, he is guilty of manslaughter at the very least, and depending on a jury of his peers, murder.

I don't say all this is right, but it is the fact of law. You can't shoot ANYONE for stealing and running. Whether it be a dollar or ten thousand dollars. It's what keeps an unscroupulous person, who hates his neighbor because he's, say, a "damn liberal", from saying "he stole my dog, so I shot him...".

THAT'S what Walküre will contribute...

And I'm sure it will piss some of you off....

Oh well...

R

"for trying to defend his property and his life."  Wallace did not want to talk on camera, but when we asked him if the two men threatened him he said, "They almost ran me over."
 DAMN REPUBLICAN LIAR ! Glad we have liberals to keep that in check...Even if they dont read too guud.

Law of the land?  You are confused...Come steal ANYTHING from me and I will show you "law of the land" .  If you steal an ear of Corn you are subject to the owners mercy..better hope I'm not havin a bad day. I'll shoot a thief in the eye and deal with the rest when I run out of ammo. If that is not a deterrent, try me!   Why is it you are not a thief as an occupation? Did you raise your children to steal?  And BTW.("I'm certain someone will pluck out the "Trying to prevent a forcible felony, such as rape, robbery, burglary or kidnapping." from above. Well, the robbery had ALREADY OCCURED, and the shooter was NOT trying to prevent it. The key here is that the robbers were running away.").rape is NOT a felony in MANY jurisdictions.So if some one steals your daughter virginity that would be fine by you as long as they run AWAY afterwards? They will plea bargain it down to a jay walking ticket anyhow.

You liberals are incredibly sheltered. You may try just sitting thru' a full days docket at the district court some time. If it doesnt BLOW YOUR MIND you dont have one. The first time you hear "but it was only a little bomb,yer honor" and "It's not like I GAVE the coke to the 2 yr old" and watch them walk out free after being chastised by a judge,then instructed to check in weakly. you may change your outlook.
Imagine all the "red handed",caught on video,crimes that were not even prosecuted due to "lack of funding" and mandatory furloughs for court staff due to cut-backs not to mention jail overcrowding. Then once convicted they are released early to make room for the next ones and all we have to track them by is a computer generated number attached to the made up name and DOB they gave because I.C.E. was too busy (in KANSAS! ) to even inquire anything more than "did he say he had a job and they took taxes out ?" !    

To be honest this is exactly the kind of bleeding heart response I expected but seriously I expected it from others. I only included you to "poke the bear" and you took the bait.   I hope the hope and change works for you...meanwhile I'll just shoot first and let the family sue me, all they will get from me is debt anyhow  

[fudgie]

fstsix that reminds me of a story......
I had a party a few years ago. Few bikers, brand not important, and some coworkers were there. Things were going good at 2am when the neighbors, 24ish, g/f 22ish,was making false accusation to one of the guys. Wife asked them to leave to avoid anything else. They left. 1/2 hr later he shows back up and we didnt pay attention. Next thing we he pulls out a 9mm and shoots at the ground. My co worker and I approach him and he starts retreating all the while firing at the ground at our feet. He swings at the gunman and then takes off. Fired around 8 shots. A friend just showed up and saw him come over with a gun in his waist. He went and got his own and almost put a round in him but luckily he retreated before he did. All this happened in less then a min.
I know what is like to be shot at, as do some on here. I will not be a victim.

[Trynt]

Walküre is  correct.  In most states you cannot legally use deadly force to protect property.  Texas  however one exception of which I'm aware.  See the excerpt from the Texas law:


"A person is justified in using deadly force against another to protect his property to the degree he reasonably believes the force is immediately necessary to prevent the other's imminent commission of arson, burglary, robbery, theft during the nighttime or criminal mischief during the nighttime, and he reasonably believes that the property cannot be protected by any other means."

 "A person is justified in using deadly force against another to pervent the other who is fleeing after committing burglary, robbery, or theft during the nighttime, from escaping with the property and he reasonable believes that the property cannot be recovered by any other means; or, the use of force other than deadly force to protect or recover the property would expose him or another to a substantial risk of death or serious bodily injury. (Nighttime is defined as the period 30 minutes after sunset until 30 minutes before sunrise.)"

Walkure will have to determine whether that would include an ear of corn. 

[fstsix]

Fudgie, glad to here it came out alright, I brought up this because while i was living in the Springs back in 1993 my next door Neighbor's son was shoot and killed when he was gestured to pull over by a retired Col, this Make My Day law cuts like a double edged sword the POS had the gun and knew when he pulled over he was gonna rock in roll! The boys dad was a friend and owned the little TV repair shop at the end of my street, if ya want to here his story he is full of $hit.. read the replies he knew better, http://www.thehighroad.org/archive/index.php/t-230073.html He was still under the "Make My Day" Law in his car? And walked away!

[Walküre]

Sadly, it boils down to what people figure is the value of human life. The original post said he was in the house, when he saw it. Since he then got his gun, and ran outside, he felt his trailer was worth another human being's life. Personally, I don't feel ANY trailer is worth another person's life. Nor is my car, my house, my Valk. However, my family, or personal life, IS worth another's life, if they are intent upon taking mine.

Now, if they were moving down the street, and he ran in front of the fleeing vehicle, gun raised, and they "almost ran me over", that is just stupidity, as far as I am concerned. And the Texas law? I'm pretty certain there are other ways to recover the trailer, than killing the driver. Again, is the trailer worth another person's life, or do we just like to "shoot people" for theft? I'm not saying the owner, wasn't chased down, with the intent to run him over, but it sounds pretty unlikely. To me, it sounds more like rationalization and justification for shooting someone. For stealing a TRAILER!!

I always hear the "polite society" crap - I feel the opposite is true - if EVERYONE is armed, and ready, willing, and able to shoot another human over ANY theft, that if I were going to steal a trailer, I'd just shoot the owner first, no questions asked, THEN steal the trailer...it goes both ways! And, how much of a stretch is it, to shoot for LESSER crimes??

I live in Indiana. We have some of the most liberal gun laws around. ANY other state's CCW license, is accepted here, and I've never know anyone refused a CCW. Of course, felons, etc are refused, but I don't know any of them. I stay away from scooters...

I hold a lifetime CCW, which I finally bought last year, along with my wife, after having a CCW for 20 years. I have guns, my wife has guns, and I pack often. I have NEVER had to take one out. I HAVE however, been in a few sticky situations. The very last thing I would do, is shoot someone. And it WOULD be under direct threat on mine or my family's lives. Not some stupid trailer, or car, or anything else that could be "replaced".

I am sure there's a LOT more to the original story - I would hate to think that ALL policemen, Prosecuting attorneys, juries, etc, are SO inept, that were it a clear-cut case, of self-defense, that he wouldn't be exhonerated. I wouldn't want to be so jaundiced as to believe that's the case. The article said NOTHING about him having ANY injuries, whatsoever. So I still have to believe that the owner of the trailer, was in the wrong. You can NOT bring a life back, regardless. Was the death worth the crime? Not to me. You might be different. If that's the case, you really aren't the kind of person I want to be around - I'd hate to piss you off, and chances are likely, I might...

Sadly, I was 100 miles from home, once, with a "friend", who stole one of those big old "Hi-Jacker" jacks out of a truck, as we left a bar. We were in HIS car, and he took off driving away - the owner had just come out of the bar, and hopped in the truck and chased us, until the guy I was with, threw the jack out of the car. Now, I didn't have much choice in this, and I certainly wasn't going to get out of the car, but I could have been shot, under the circumstances in the story above. I never talked with the other guy again, and was pretty pissed, as you can imagine, but it WAS NOT WORTH MY LIFE that night, yet some of you argue, I should have been shot, and it would have been justified, FOR A FREAKIN' JACK!!?? I've never stole in my life. Well, maybe paperclips, but not anything of consequential value.

And, I HAVE been shot at, for putting a coat around a gal, after her hubby slapped the sh*t out of her, in a bar, and she walked out in the snow, coatless. Next time, I'll still take her the coat, I'll just slap him unconscious first...

And, poke the bear? Geez, why??

And as for the possibility of them turning around, and coming back? THEN you are in danger, and THEN you can shoot them, under the law...but not in the back, AFTER the crime has been done.

Just my take on it...

[RoadKill]

"And, poke the bear? Geez, why??"  Maybe I like hearing your side..and you articulate well (less offensive than myself and a couple others here)     (SO FAR !  )

I am sad to say,(although after fighting my demons, they have won and we are on the same side now)that I believe all men are createdequal BUT equality doesn't always last long. Some human life is worth more than property and some aint worth my toenail clippings. I dont feel that I am the one to judge who is,or is NOT,worthy. That is not what I mean to express at all. However...No thief's life is worth mine or another life I know to be as worthy as my own. If they choose to gamble with that then I am just a pawn in some grand scheme.
If that last ear of corn may feed a neighbors child,or those paper clips will sell for the last nickle I need to purchase medicine for a loved one,I will not take that chance and if the death of a redhanded thief deters any future such offenses then I have done a favor to all of polite society wishing not to be deprived of goods.   

What can I come steel from you? What ever it is I'm sure you dont need it as much as I do. I could really use a Valkyrie with a straight frame. Send me the keys + a location and we can avoid all the violence.

[RoadKill]

"...but it WAS NOT WORTH MY LIFE that night,"  What was it worth? Fear of loosing your life was a HUGE deterrent, was it not? Your friend obviously had more balls than you because it didnt deter him.
If fear of just a painful gunshot wound didnt bother him do you think a trip thru' our corrupt court system would do any better? If there is absolutely nor reason NOT to steal what would protect others from being violated in the same way? I would shoot to stop,not to kill. But under stress I'm a very poor shot so I might miss the knees and strike somewhat higher.

[Dogg]

I would shoot anyone trying to steal my valk....it IS worth more than..ok, I edited it. feel free to add at your own leisure...

[KW]

Why do you guys continue to argue with the 3 or 4 liberal loons that haunt this site? They refused to share the same set of facts and most of their points are about their “feelings” and lack any truthfulness or intellectual integrity.  Their rants are transparent and not taken seriously by any serious people.  Why bother? Entertainment value? Sport?  I admit; I’ve nearly fallen out of my chair laughing when reading some of their “facts. . . ” but still, why bother?

[Walküre]

Loons? So now it comes down, to calling names?

Actually, there are a lot more "liberal loons" here than you'd like to believe. Most don't bother with closed-minded people, because it's like trying to teach a pig to sing - just annoys the pig. Case in point.

Rants are transparent, and not taken seriously? Ha. You can live in your beliefs that I lack truthfulness, OR intellectual integrity. However, that doesn't make it so...

[RoadKill]

Loons? So now it comes down, to calling names?

Actually, there are a lot more "liberal loons" here than you'd like to believe. Most don't bother with closed-minded people, because it's like trying to teach a pig to sing - just annoys the pig. Case in point.

Rants are transparent, and not taken seriously? Ha. You can live in your beliefs that I lack truthfulness, OR intellectual integrity. However, that doesn't make it so...

I knew you were a bit on the liberal side but I didnt know you were a loon until you got offended,Who else were you calling a loon if there are more than 3 or 4 ? 

I never minded jokes about ugly people before....Should I ?       

[Walküre]

"...but it WAS NOT WORTH MY LIFE that night,"  What was it worth? Fear of loosing your life was a HUGE deterrent, was it not? Your friend obviously had more balls than you because it didnt deter him.
If fear of just a painful gunshot wound didnt bother him do you think a trip thru' our corrupt court system would do any better? If there is absolutely nor reason NOT to steal what would protect others from being violated in the same way? I would shoot to stop,not to kill. But under stress I'm a very poor shot so I might miss the knees and strike somewhat higher.

Hmmm...no...that wasn't the "deterent" at all. I'm not afraid of dying, and never have been, and if you'll bother to read my post again, you will see that I was pissed, not afraid of being shot. I merely stated that HAD they shot me, it wouldn't have been worth my life. I AM afraid of dying, needlessly, though. Two separate things.

And no, he didn't have "more balls" than I did, he had more beers.

My deterrent is and always has been, that it's not right to take from others. No amount of "threats" will change why I do things. I do things because I know right from wrong. Period.

As for my Valk, and where I live...NEVER confuse kindness for weakness. Read back, I never said I wouldn't fight for simple possessions that are mine - I just won't kill for them. Again, two entirely different things. You want anything I have? You'd have to steal it. And pay the consequences...you just wouldn't die, unless you threatened me or mine...

but I really don't for a moment think you or anyone else in the forums would even consider taking something from anyone. At least, I hope not. Didn't want to insinuate that.

We have differences of opinions. I happen to feel that human life, ANY human life, is not to be snuffed out, by another human. I can understand self-defense, but I cannot understand simply defense of properties. When properties take precedence over human life, there's something wrong...

[Walküre]

I knew you were a bit on the liberal side but I didnt know you were a loon until you got offended,Who else were you calling a loon if there are more than 3 or 4 ? 

I never minded jokes about ugly people before....Should I ?       

Now, do you REALLY mean to tell me, that "loon" wasn't meant to be an insult? Get real. And offended? Believe me, you nor anyone else, can "offend" me. You can only offend someone who is unsure of themselves, or their convictions. And I am neither. I can safely say I haven't been "offended" in many, many years. Not that I haven't met offensive people...I just find it strange that those unsure of THEMselves, have the need to always lash out at others, resorting to calling them names.

That's it in a nutshell...

As for "ugly people jokes", if you find humor in the physical attributes of others, that's your prerogative...

[fat6man]

Mr. Wallace is well within his rights to defend his life. If Torres and Cardona have arrest records and are in the USA illegally then why have authorities releast them???? What needs to happen here is the Jefferson County DA's office should drop any and all charges against Mr. Wallace and prosecute the real criminals here which are Torres and Cardona without any plea bargains!!! They should also be deported from this country if here illegally upon completion of there JAIL TIME. (Bread & Water will do)
The Jefferson County DA's office needs to come up for some air!!!     

[Skinhead]

If thieves know that a property owner cannot use deadly force to protect their property, and also know that the police are not there to stop them (also cannot use deadly force to protect property), what is deters them from stealing?  It is the same with high spped vehicle chases.  If the police are not allowed to pursue due to the possibility of the criminal or the cop from injuring an innocent, why would the criminal stop?  I would go balls out rather than stop, knowing if I stop I'm doing time.

Don't you think that thieves will think twice about stealing your property if there is a good chance they will be killed or seriously injured, versus all the property owner can do is yell "stop, I'm calling the police".

I believe the lack of serious consequences is why there are so many car and property thefts.  Sure there are some who will do things regardless of the consequences, but I would put money on the crime rate decreasing significantly if deadly force were allowed in the protection of property.  I'd even extend it to be used to deter illegal immigration.

My $0.02, YMMV.

[RoadKill]

I knew you were a bit on the liberal side but I didnt know you were a loon until you got offended,Who else were you calling a loon if there are more than 3 or 4 ? 

I never minded jokes about ugly people before....Should I ?       

Now, do you REALLY mean to tell me, that "loon" wasn't meant to be an insult? Get real. And offended? Believe me, you nor anyone else, can "offend" me. You can only offend someone who is unsure of themselves, or their convictions. And I am neither. I can safely say I haven't been "offended" in many, many years. Not that I haven't met offensive people...I just find it strange that those unsure of THEMselves, have the need to always lash out at others, resorting to calling them names.

That's it in a nutshell...

As for "ugly people jokes", if you find humor in the physical attributes of others, that's your prerogative...

Whoa,easy there , My point was "if the shoe dont fit..DONT WEAR IT !"  If you were not "offended" by his post and the "name calling" did not apply to you why would you feel insulted? 

I dismiss it every time Scanner call's me a republican,he must mean somebody else!   

[Walküre]

Now, do you REALLY mean to tell me, that "loon" wasn't meant to be an insult? Get real.

Whoa,easy there , My point was "if the shoe dont fit..DONT WEAR IT !"  If you were not "offended" by his post and the "name calling" did not apply to you why would you feel insulted? 

I dismiss it every time Scanner call's me a republican,he must mean somebody else!   

You seem intent upon telling me my feelings. I say I'm not "offended" and you say, "OK, so you are insulted". No, I'm no insulted either. I'll try to narrow it down...

I try VERY hard not to purposefully either insult, or offend others, because of their opinions and feelings. And 99%, IMO, ARE opinions and feelings. And I'm quick to apologize to others, if I do inadvertently offend or insult them. Certainly not for MY feelings and opinions, but only if my words affect them in a negative way, without my intention.

I also don't allow others to insult, or offend me, based on their words, or feelings, or opinions. I just consider the source. However, that doesn't preclude me from getting PISSED, whenever someone purposefully sets out to insult, demean, or otherwise slander someone, FOR THEIR FEELINGS OR OPINIONS, regardless of what those feelings and opinions are. THAT is what "defending freedoms" is all about.

So, therefore, I DO tend to speak my piece, when I see other people strike out, to insult or offend others, based on their feelings, opinions, philosophy, religion, and politics, among others.

This nation has been basically cleft in half, with two distinct opinions about which direction it should go. Time and history has proven, that chances are VERY good, that this country will NOT end up in solely in EITHER direction, but will continue someplace in the middle. However, that "no man's land" in the middle, will have to shrink, if we ever expect to return to the "glory years" of the America we all long for. But, it seems to be going just the opposite. A few kind words, and considerations of OTHER peoples feelings, and beliefs, will go a long way towards reducing the rift.

I will admit, I read the story 4 or 5 times, and picked up the "first degree murder", each time, but only picked up the "attempted" just a moment ago. I have been laboring under the misconception that the thief that was shot, died. read it wrong the first time, and kept reasserting it wrong, after that.

I still think there's more to the story, that Fox news hasn't expanded on. I still find it difficult to believe that the DA is so incompetent, as to prosecute someone who is totally free of guilt...

I'm done with the thread. Have to go adjust carbs...NOT looking forward to that! We'll all just have to continue to disagree. Verbal ping-pong is good and healthy, but when someone brings a ball bat to the table, the stakes change. And this is such a volatile subject, I'd hate to see the bats come out...

Have a great ride, today, all! And if you aren't riding, you aren't trying...well, or it's raining...or something...or you're adjusting carbs!

[bigguy]

Only 3 or 4 liberals on this board. What happened to em all?

It seems that most of the bike board I belong to aren't very tolerant of liberals. I got so tired of being shouted down I just stopped talking about anything but motorcycles.
Hat's off to Walküre for having the chutzpah to hang in there.
Having said all of that, I would allow lethal force to protect property. And I'm not comparing the value of things to human life, but the value of societal norms. It's difficult for me to articulate, but when I read the story, the thing I'm offended by is not so much the loss of the trailer, but the complete disregard for the sanctity someones home. It's a personal violation and the perpetrator is displaying sufficient agression and lack of respect for others that I'm concerned for my safety. They're going to do it again, and eventually some victim will be in the wrong place at the wrong time.

[Mickey Runie]

Now, whether you AGREE with the laws of the land, or not, they are STILL the laws of the land.

Just curious........

Are these some of the same "laws of the land" Pres Obama took an oath to uphold?   You know, like the immigration laws where it makes it ILLEGAL for someone to come into this country without proper, bonefied documentation?   The same laws where Pres Obama now refuses to uphold, dispite his earlier oath?  The same laws where Pres Obama publicly chastised the Governor of the State of Arizona for having passed into law to do what He, himself refuses to do?


It just seems, at times, (and this is just my opinion) Liberals are all for enforcing the letter of the law when it is to their advantage, yet at other times, they seem to advocate ignoring other laws.

Just curious......


Hummmmm...

[KW]

bigguy;
My ‘3 or 4 loon’ comment was directed at the extreme fringe left whose positions are contradictory, unsupportable, and/or lack a factual basis. They fail to understand that should their ‘political desires’ come to fruition and a socialist nation emerges; the first casualty will be free speech. The irony being the very ‘ranting’ they so love will be outlawed.   

I have the same distain – perhaps even more so – for the extreme right. Disagreement and passion has a place in any discussion, but you must have a factual basis for your argument and present it in a reasonable, civilized manner. Humor helps.

There are many people here who would disagree with some of my views and many who I would find too liberal, but I wouldn’t be offended.  About six years ago (under the handle 'bd')  I often used to ‘dip into political pool’ here and find myself at odds with several people. There were two in particular who I argued with. One was in California and the other was right here in Michigan. The one in Michigan still post and is well known, though I never see him making political comment any more (I guess we both got tired.) Both men presented reasonable points of view. We just happened to disagree. 

Your Post was excellent . . . and funny. I appreciated it and wasn’t offended at all. Your position of allowing the defense of property and rationale for it was well stated and regardless if you agree or not, it places you well outside the ‘loon’ range.

Finally; I’m sorry if my ‘loon’ post offended anyone in anyway . . . well, except the loons it was directed at (Hey, no ones perfect)

[Bobbo]

Just curious........

Are these some of the same "laws of the land" Pres Obama took an oath to uphold?   You know, like the immigration laws where it makes it ILLEGAL for someone to come into this country without proper, bonefied documentation?   The same laws where Pres Obama now refuses to uphold, dispite his earlier oath?  The same laws where Pres Obama publicly chastised the Governor of the State of Arizona for having passed into law to do what He, himself refuses to do?

I can’t wait for the next President to be a Republican.  Then we can all blame him or her personally for the same inaction that every President in the past 20 years has taken.

It just seems, at times, (and this is just my opinion) Liberals are all for enforcing the letter of the law when it is to their advantage, yet at other times, they seem to advocate ignoring other laws.

Just curious......


Hummmmm...

It looks like this is more of the Pot calling the Kettle black, or the splinter and plank Bible story.

[Varmintmist]

Having said all of that, I would allow lethal force to protect property. And I'm not comparing the value of things to human life, but the value of societal norms. It's difficult for me to articulate, but when I read the story, the thing I'm offended by is not so much the loss of the trailer, but the complete disregard for the sanctity someones home. It's a personal violation and the perpetrator is displaying sufficient agression and lack of respect for others that I'm concerned for my safety. They're going to do it again, and eventually some victim will be in the wrong place at the wrong time.

Its simple.

You paid with your life for your stuff. You gave up time that you could have spent with your family, or doing something you enjoy to get that stuff. You did so in order to make your life simpler or eaiser in the future, or make your work more efficient so that you could have more time or resources to use on yourself and family. When a thief takes your stuff, he is taking the part of your life that you traded for the stuff. He is taking time away from your family and you. You cant re-live the time it took to aquire the stuff, and you have to take more of your life to replace it, he is taking away a portion of your life.

As far as I am concerned, shoot the dirtbags. The rest will figure out that it isnt cost effective after you plant 3 or 4. I have no use for theives and trespassers. They are people who want what you have and are to lazy to get their own.

[Mickey Runie]

Just curious........

Are these some of the same "laws of the land" Pres Obama took an oath to uphold?   You know, like the immigration laws where it makes it ILLEGAL for someone to come into this country without proper, bonefied documentation?   The same laws where Pres Obama now refuses to uphold, dispite his earlier oath?  The same laws where Pres Obama publicly chastised the Governor of the State of Arizona for having passed into law to do what He, himself refuses to do?

I can’t wait for the next President to be a Republican.  Then we can all blame him or her personally for the same inaction that every President in the past 20 years has taken.

It just seems, at times, (and this is just my opinion) Liberals are all for enforcing the letter of the law when it is to their advantage, yet at other times, they seem to advocate ignoring other laws.

Just curious......


Hummmmm...

It looks like this is more of the Pot calling the Kettle black, or the splinter and plank Bible story.

Hark!!!    What's that I hear?   ??????   Is it a Loon? ??????   Is it a Troll? ??????   
It's both - a Loony Troll. 

Oh, and the next President WILL be a Republican, and you're not alone - there are MILLIONS of Americans, including myself, that can't wait until the current Presidency expires.  It can't happen fast enough.   I can't take any more of this flippin' CHANGE. 


JAN BREWER FOR PRESIDENT!

[Bobbo]

Hark!!!    What's that I hear?   ??????   Is it a Loon? ??????   Is it a Troll? ??????   
It's both - a Loony Troll. 

It’s very telling of your personality when you can’t think of a mature and rational response to a post, and have to resort to childish name-calling.  Go ahead…  Name call all you want, you won’t offend or insult me.  You will only make yourself look even sillier and less credible!

[Mickey Runie]

125 posts and still trolling.  Go ahead, deflect.   It is what it is, and I don't bash anyone - BUT OBVIOUS TROLLS.  If that makes me childish, so be it.   You pop out from under your proverbial bridge on a daily basis and bash, trash and ridicule - that's ok, but have a little thrown back at you, and you .............deflect?  Nice strategy.

Just sayin..

[RoadKill]

125 posts and still trolling.  Go ahead, deflect.   It is what it is, and I don't bash anyone - BUT OBVIOUS TROLLS.  If that makes me childish, so be it.   You pop out from under your proverbial bridge on a daily basis and bash, trash and ridicule - that's ok, but have a little thrown back at you, and you .............deflect?  Nice strategy.

Just sayin..

Really?  Did I miss Bobbo's personal attack on you? What is so obvious?    " BUT OBVIOUS TROLLS."

These Libs are poor confused souls and all you want to do is antagonize? We will have a use for them when society falls apart.....BAIT !    But seriously what did any of 'em do directly? 

[3fan4life]

Walküre is  correct.  In most states you cannot legally use deadly force to protect property.  Texas  however one exception of which I'm aware.  See the excerpt from the Texas law:


"A person is justified in using deadly force against another to protect his property to the degree he reasonably believes the force is immediately necessary to prevent the other's imminent commission of arson, burglary, robbery, theft during the nighttime or criminal mischief during the nighttime, and he reasonably believes that the property cannot be protected by any other means."

 "A person is justified in using deadly force against another to pervent the other who is fleeing after committing burglary, robbery, or theft during the nighttime, from escaping with the property and he reasonable believes that the property cannot be recovered by any other means; or, the use of force other than deadly force to protect or recover the property would expose him or another to a substantial risk of death or serious bodily injury. (Nighttime is defined as the period 30 minutes after sunset until 30 minutes before sunrise.)"

Walkure will have to determine whether that would include an ear of corn. 

All I have to say is:

GOD BLESS TEXAS

[Bobbo]

125 posts and still trolling.  Go ahead, deflect.   It is what it is, and I don't bash anyone - BUT OBVIOUS TROLLS.  If that makes me childish, so be it.   You pop out from under your proverbial bridge on a daily basis and bash, trash and ridicule - that's ok, but have a little thrown back at you, and you .............deflect?  Nice strategy.

Just sayin..

Really?  Did I miss Bobbo's personal attack on you? What is so obvious?    " BUT OBVIOUS TROLLS."

These Libs are poor confused souls and all you want to do is antagonize? We will have a use for them when society falls apart.....BAIT !    But seriously what did any of 'em do directly? 

I’ve never considered myself a “liberal” in the context you are using, although it is defined as the antonym of narrow-minded.

Since I generally dispute easily debunked right-wing propaganda when it’s posted here, it seems that is your criteria for labeling me as a “liberal”.

I appreciate you separating me from those who attack people versus attacking their remarks.

[fudgie]

The thing is tho, people value their property over their own life. I see it all the time as a FF & medic.
Around here, farms are very rarely broken into. You know why? Farmers are armed and will use it. But yes, I will shoot to protect my property. If it takes me to go to jail over someone stealing my/ our farm stuff, then so be it. Maybe they will think twice about it next time. I wont.
Walkurie, I'll still ride with ya.   Very few I wont. Alot wont ride with me.   Those that really know me know it takes alot for me to get mad. The next morning its forgoten. But hey, we all have different beliefs but come together over the Valk, thats whats important.

[RoadKill]

125 posts and still trolling.  Go ahead, deflect.   It is what it is, and I don't bash anyone - BUT OBVIOUS TROLLS.  If that makes me childish, so be it.   You pop out from under your proverbial bridge on a daily basis and bash, trash and ridicule - that's ok, but have a little thrown back at you, and you .............deflect?  Nice strategy.

Just sayin..

Really?  Did I miss Bobbo's personal attack on you? What is so obvious?    " BUT OBVIOUS TROLLS."

These Libs are poor confused souls and all you want to do is antagonize? We will have a use for them when society falls apart.....BAIT !    But seriously what did any of 'em do directly? 

I’ve never considered myself a “liberal” in the context you are using, although it is defined as the antonym of narrow-minded.

Since I generally dispute easily debunked right-wing propaganda when it’s posted here, it seems that is your criteria for labeling me as a “liberal”.

I appreciate you separating me from those who attack people versus attacking their remarks.

I will apologize for the "label" and that is all it really is,just a label  (I have been accused of being republican more than a few times)   How would you characterize yourself? Left of center? And I have to add that it should be appreciated that you debunk the erroneous propaganda as most of it is unnecessary because the truth speaks for it's self , but it appears that some are oblivious to the SIMPLE truths....Politicians will destroy this country!  And we have the best of the best politicians in office right now!

We just need to figure out how to get them out and get real leaders,not politicians.  How can a 3rd party (of ANY kind) get a foot hold with out causing another Ross Perot type disbursement of votes ?

It is easy to vote AGAINST evil when you always vote for the lesser of 2 evils..but how do we vote FOR someone any more? I believe that is the 2nd biggest reason for poor voter turn out,just below the electoral college "my vote doesnt count" mentality.

[Bobbo]

How would you characterize yourself? Left of center?

We just need to figure out how to get them out and get real leaders,not politicians.  How can a 3rd party (of ANY kind) get a foot hold with out causing another Ross Perot type disbursement of votes ?

Since this is getting off-topic, I’ll keep it brief.  I consider myself fiscally conservative and socially central.  I don’t agree with any political party, but I share a lot of views with the Libertarian Party.  I share your views on most politicians these days.