24hourcampfire.com
24hourcampfire.com
Previous Thread
Next Thread
Print Thread
Hop To
Page 7 of 8 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
Joined: Nov 2003
Posts: 28,769
Campfire Ranger
Offline
Campfire Ranger
Joined: Nov 2003
Posts: 28,769
Quote
. I was addressing what I believe the law should be. From what others have said, that is in fact what the law is currently in Texas, under certain circumstances. I believe that I correctly place a high value on the right of property.


A few years ago a local college teacher ws trying to brain wash his students. He asked, "When is a TV worth a human life?"

Steve raised his hand and was called on. "When it's my TV."

That is my fealing exactly.


"Only Christ is the fullness of God's revelation."
Everyday Hunter
BP-B2

Joined: Dec 2008
Posts: 5,187
O
Campfire Tracker
Offline
Campfire Tracker
O
Joined: Dec 2008
Posts: 5,187
Originally Posted by Scott F
From the above link.

Better than Washington laws but no where near as good as Texas. I think this will cost Canul time.


whistle He will be out in time to vote Obama 2012. smile GW


If an injury has to be done to a man it should be so severe that his vengeance need not be feared. MACHIAVELLI
Joined: Jun 2004
Posts: 44,699
M
Campfire 'Bwana
Online Content
Campfire 'Bwana
M
Joined: Jun 2004
Posts: 44,699
A perp should ask himself:

"Is a getting a TV worth my life?"

Joined: Dec 2000
Posts: 39,301
S
Campfire 'Bwana
Offline
Campfire 'Bwana
S
Joined: Dec 2000
Posts: 39,301
All men should ask themselves, "Why in the flying hell would I want a TV anyway!" grin

My life is a lot better since the day we tossed the TV. In my opinion any man stealing your TV has done you and your family a great service.


The first time I shot myself in the head...

Meniere's Sucks Big Time!!!
Joined: Nov 2003
Posts: 28,769
Campfire Ranger
Offline
Campfire Ranger
Joined: Nov 2003
Posts: 28,769
Quote
the Bible is pretty clear on that subject.

Thou shalt not kill.

There are verses listing exemptions, like shooting a thief in your home and other self defense issues, but I haven't seem anything that seems to fit this situation.


You are presenting what I would consider a contradiction. I have never read where a Bible student is allowed to shoot a thief.

I have read in Exdus 20:13, "'You shall not murder.'" The reason for the double quotations is because The Passage quotes God. God also went on to instruct if a man or an animal kills someone they are to be killed. This is not contradictory at all. God's Word also teaches if someone is robbing you and you kill them, you are justified. If you don't do anything till the next day and kill them, you are then a murderer.


"Only Christ is the fullness of God's revelation."
Everyday Hunter
IC B2

Joined: Jun 2004
Posts: 44,699
M
Campfire 'Bwana
Online Content
Campfire 'Bwana
M
Joined: Jun 2004
Posts: 44,699
That's a different conversation. grin

Joined: Dec 2000
Posts: 39,301
S
Campfire 'Bwana
Offline
Campfire 'Bwana
S
Joined: Dec 2000
Posts: 39,301
grin


Now if you said my computer.... wink


The first time I shot myself in the head...

Meniere's Sucks Big Time!!!
Joined: Jun 2002
Posts: 130,941
T
Campfire Sage
Offline
Campfire Sage
T
Joined: Jun 2002
Posts: 130,941
Originally Posted by JBGQUICK
the Bible is pretty clear on that subject.

Thou shalt not kill.

There are verses listing exemptions, like shooting a thief in your home and other self defense issues, but I haven't seem anything that seems to fit this situation.

The correct translation is "Thou shalt not murder."

Joined: Jun 2002
Posts: 130,941
T
Campfire Sage
Offline
Campfire Sage
T
Joined: Jun 2002
Posts: 130,941
Originally Posted by Penguin
Hawk I hate to say it but I cannot see how you can hold those beliefs and call yourself a Christian. Seriously. It took me about 1 minute flat to go over to my library, pull out a concordance and bible, and find unequivocal statements by Jesus himself on this subject:

Gospel of Luke

6:29 - "Whoever hits you on the cheek, offer him the other also, and whoever takes away your coat, do not withhold your shirt from him either.

6:30 - "Give to everyone who asks of you, and whoever takes away what is yours do not demand it back."

Do not demand it back. Do not demand it back. Let alone pull a pistol and discharge it into the back of his head as he tries to flee the scene.

As I stated I no longer claim the title of Christian. And the brand of Christianity I grew up in was hard boiled, conservative as hell, and literalist to a fault. And even then I never knew a single preacher who would have held this up as Jesus like behavior.

Sorry but from my vantage point this in entirely inconsistent with any brand of Christianity I have yet to encounter.

Will
Those are well known verses, Will, and are certainly the path to spiritual perfection (be perfect as your Heavenly Father is perfect), however falling short of spiritual perfection is not the equivalent of sin (which was your claim regarding the stopping of a thief by whatever means is necessary). Jesus also recommended, for example, that those seeking spiritual perfection should sell all that they have and give it to the poor, yet it is not a sin to refrain from this recommendation. Your task is to show us where in the Bible Jesus says that it is morally wrong to stop a thief by whatever means necessary.

Joined: Jun 2002
Posts: 130,941
T
Campfire Sage
Offline
Campfire Sage
T
Joined: Jun 2002
Posts: 130,941
Originally Posted by Scott F
The Constitution give me the right to own guns
Actually, the Constitution does not give you that right. You're born with that right, which becomes functional the moment you reach adulthood (as prior to that you're under the authority of your parents). The Constitution only acknowledges this, but an acknowledgment has no force in law. The portion of the Second Amendment that has force in law is where it states that this right shall not be infringed.

IC B3

Joined: Jun 2002
Posts: 130,941
T
Campfire Sage
Offline
Campfire Sage
T
Joined: Jun 2002
Posts: 130,941
Originally Posted by Ringman
God's Word also teaches if someone is robbing you and you kill them, you are justified. If you don't do anything till the next day and kill them, you are then a murderer.
Which is why I stated that the act of lethal force, should it be necessary to stop the robber, needed to be within the heat of the act, precluding tracking him down later and shooting him. The latter would go beyond stopping the robber from completing his crime, entering into retribution after the fact.

Joined: Apr 2005
Posts: 30,812
J
Campfire 'Bwana
Online Sleepy
Campfire 'Bwana
J
Joined: Apr 2005
Posts: 30,812
Originally Posted by Scott F
My heart would be with him but if I had to serve on his jury in this state and the evidence came out just like in the story I would have to find him guilty. Not sure of the laws there but here it is an open and shut thing. It was a bad shoot.



Not me. I would not convict



I got banned on another web site for a debate that happened on this site. That's a first
Joined: Jun 2002
Posts: 130,941
T
Campfire Sage
Offline
Campfire Sage
T
Joined: Jun 2002
Posts: 130,941
Originally Posted by jwp475
Originally Posted by Scott F
My heart would be with him but if I had to serve on his jury in this state and the evidence came out just like in the story I would have to find him guilty. Not sure of the laws there but here it is an open and shut thing. It was a bad shoot.



Not me. I would not convict
Which is your duty should you conclude that the law applied literally to this defendant would result in injustice. This is jury nullification. The only reason defense attorneys don't make overt appeals for this to the jury is that they are barred by law from doing so. Those laws, however, are unlawful. Seems a contradiction, but it's not. An unlawful law is one which is in conflict with a higher law. Jury nullification goes to the very heart of the purpose of a jury in our legal system, and is therefore a higher order of law than any prohibiting references to it in court.

Joined: Apr 2005
Posts: 30,812
J
Campfire 'Bwana
Online Sleepy
Campfire 'Bwana
J
Joined: Apr 2005
Posts: 30,812
Originally Posted by The_Real_Hawkeye
Originally Posted by jwp475
Originally Posted by Scott F
My heart would be with him but if I had to serve on his jury in this state and the evidence came out just like in the story I would have to find him guilty. Not sure of the laws there but here it is an open and shut thing. It was a bad shoot.



Not me. I would not convict
Which is your duty should you conclude that the law applied literally to this defendant would result in injustice. This is jury nullification. The only reason defense attorneys don't make overt appeals for this to the jury is that they are barred by law from doing so. Those laws, however, are unlawful. Seems a contradiction, but it's not. An unlawful law is one which is in conflict with a higher law. Jury nullification goes to the very heart of the purpose of a jury in our legal system, and is therefore a higher order of law than any prohibiting references to it in court.


Agreed



I got banned on another web site for a debate that happened on this site. That's a first
Joined: Dec 2005
Posts: 13,760
Campfire Outfitter
Offline
Campfire Outfitter
Joined: Dec 2005
Posts: 13,760
Originally Posted by doubletap
The guy was so distraught from being robbed that he was shaking and accidentally gripped the gun too tight and it inadvertently discharged. The fact that the robber was hit in the head was just pure bad luck.


Actually, something along those lines, maybe little more logical, would be a good defense. I'd simply get an expert to testify to something like PTSD, or extreme emotional disturbance, or heat of passion, to lessen the "intent" angle, and maybe get a manslaughter, criminally negligent homicide, or even an acquittal. It was a bad shoot in most jurisdictions, but that doesn't mean the guy deserves a murder conviction or prison time. He was the victim of a robbery after all. All facts must be considered, but there's no way to call it a good shoot, at least not legally.


War Damn Eagle!


Joined: Dec 2005
Posts: 13,760
Campfire Outfitter
Offline
Campfire Outfitter
Joined: Dec 2005
Posts: 13,760
Originally Posted by jwp475
Originally Posted by Scott F
My heart would be with him but if I had to serve on his jury in this state and the evidence came out just like in the story I would have to find him guilty. Not sure of the laws there but here it is an open and shut thing. It was a bad shoot.



Not me. I would not convict


If asked, would you give this answer in voir dire? And you would be asked if you could listen to the facts and apply the law to those facts? If "Not me, I would not convict" would be your preconceived stance, you'd be lying under oath to fail to disclose that.


War Damn Eagle!


Joined: Apr 2006
Posts: 5,687
Campfire Tracker
Offline
Campfire Tracker
Joined: Apr 2006
Posts: 5,687
Originally Posted by The_Real_Hawkeye
Those are well known verses, Will, and are certainly the path to spiritual perfection (be perfect as your Heavenly Father is perfect), however falling short of spiritual perfection is not the equivalent of sin (which was your claim regarding the stopping of a thief by whatever means is necessary). Jesus also recommended, for example, that those seeking spiritual perfection should sell all that they have and give it to the poor, yet it is not a sin to refrain from this recommendation. Your task is to show us where in the Bible Jesus says that it is morally wrong to stop a thief by whatever means necessary.



So all those really tough things that make a man look himself in the mirror with doubt aren't really necessary. Those are optional... extra credit for the advanced students? I guess you get a bigger crown of gold or a whiter robe in the ever after huh?

Bwahahahaha. :p

I want to know what denomination you belong to that teaches such spiritual quackery. In each and every denomination I have studied or been a part of in the past, to intentionally and willfully fall short of this example is sin. Period.

That man who came seeking guidance didn't ask "Good teacher what do I lack for spiritual perfection?" He came and asked "Good teacher what must I do to inherit eternal life?"

Man that stuff ain't optional!

What denomination teaches this? I'm going to spend some time running this down. I want to know what Christian denomination teaches that shooting a man in the back of the head when he is fleeing the scene of a robbery is righteous. I want to know which one teaches that a man forfeits his life if he steals.

And another thing, this guy who committed this crime is apparently a mentally disturbed individual who was a danger to himself and to others. I am not taking his side of it. He needed to be arrested, locked up, and put away for what happened. If the gun could have been gotten to when he was threatening the robbery victim with a knife he could have been justifiably shot. But in this nation at this time there is a line that was crossed when he was no longer a danger and was fleeing the scene. We define that line as murder.

And I have another little piece of inside info for you: It ain't the courts and the lawyers that have made it so, it is a reflection of the will of the majority of the country. And it ain't some recent development either. This kind of thing would have gotten you lynched in many areas of the country 125 years ago. If not you would have at the least been branded as a coward and a menace.

Will


Smellin' a lot of 'if' coming off this plan.
Joined: Jun 2002
Posts: 130,941
T
Campfire Sage
Offline
Campfire Sage
T
Joined: Jun 2002
Posts: 130,941
Originally Posted by Penguin
So all those really tough things that make a man look himself in the mirror with doubt aren't really necessary. Those are optional... extra credit for the advanced students? I guess you get a bigger crown of gold or a whiter robe in the ever after huh?

Bwahahahaha. :p
I'll answer that question after you've dispossessed yourself of everything you own and adopted an existence of strict asceticism. Let me know when that happens. wink

Joined: Aug 2007
Posts: 1,825
M
Campfire Regular
Offline
Campfire Regular
M
Joined: Aug 2007
Posts: 1,825
It is not thievery that should have caused the forfeit, it was the threat with a deadly weapon.

He held the weapon and made the threat, I don't care if he was 5 or 500 hundred feet away. He might be closer tomorrow.

I'm not watching videos and know none of the history of the shooter/victim. I don't care, the robber made the threat with a deadly weapon.

As said, at the very least the victim in this crime has a very good argument for acquittal or lessor charges. I'd hope.


Have a good day man. In honor of personal freedom and the open squirrel season, I think I'll go put a hole through dinner's head.
Joined: Feb 2005
Posts: 4,446
D
Campfire Tracker
Online Content
Campfire Tracker
D
Joined: Feb 2005
Posts: 4,446
Appears to be a bad shoot. Danger was passed. If he had drawn and shot when initially threatened, might be a different deal.

Page 7 of 8 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

Moderated by  RickBin 

Link Copied to Clipboard
YB23

Who's Online Now
716 members (16penny, 160user, 12344mag, 21, 12308300, 22250rem, 68 invisible), 2,714 guests, and 1,290 robots.
Key: Admin, Global Mod, Mod
Forum Statistics
Forums81
Topics1,187,621
Posts18,398,580
Members73,817
Most Online11,491
Jul 7th, 2023


 







Fish & Game Departments | Solunar Tables | Mission Statement | Privacy Policy | Contact Us | DMCA
Hunting | Fishing | Camping | Backpacking | Reloading | Campfire Forums | Gear Shop
Copyright © 2000-2024 24hourcampfire.com, Inc. All Rights Reserved.
Powered by UBB.threads™ PHP Forum Software 7.7.5
(Release build 20201027)
Responsive Width:

PHP: 7.3.33 Page Time: 0.184s Queries: 15 (0.006s) Memory: 0.9081 MB (Peak: 1.0836 MB) Data Comp: Zlib Server Time: 2024-03-28 15:05:57 UTC
Valid HTML 5 and Valid CSS