Coming from somone who routinely twists my words around to show them to mean something I never said in the first place and accuses me of killing girl scouts for selling cookies.

Classic case of the pot calling the kettle black.

This doesn't sound like you didnt support the action being taken. For god's sake Matt, stop accusing others of being dishonest and having no integrity without being able to back things up - it only makes you look foolish whether you believe it or not.

Did I or did I not expressly disapprove of the motorcycle incident?

Simple question. Dare you answer it?

Matt

They murdered a man with firearms while they were committing a crime Matt.

Why do you keep trying to blame the victim?

__________________
... ..................
We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.

Dare I?

I just quoted your OP, and it's pretty evident that you are saying the left would be jumping up and down about it. Basically, you agree with the action - you just dont say it in so many words. But then again, you don't decry it either ...

From post number 19 in that very thread:

Not sure about you, but I think that is a pretty clear statement of position. I guess we've settled that now.

Interesting that you bring that thread up. In that thread, you said:

So, an armed bank robber fleeing police should be caught and put in jail, but a trespasser should be killed for failing to leave when instructed?

Interesting set of positions, there.

Matt

It basically seems that you first support the action, then you say you don't (if you didnt support it, why post that stuff about how "mostly the left would be making noise" in the first place?)

Make your mind up, is what I'd say ...

If you notice, later on in that thread, I did say the police were justified in using force, since the suspect had grenades (or said he did??) and thus COULD have harmed the public. But if it was just a case of a bank robber fleeing, then no I wouldnt support what was being done.

Further, if the trespasser fleed from the scene, I wouldnt shoot. I'd only shoot if he didnt leave after being told to do so.

Answer this: Why doesnt the trespasser leave?? Obviously he's up to no good ...

By the way, the trespassers were obviously armed themselves.

So trespassing merits death, but bank robbery does not?

What if the police tell him to leave the bank. Should they then kill him if he does not comply?

Or does the right to kill anyone who refuses to obey reside only with you?

Matt

*groan* ... Your obviously not reading anything I'm saying ...

I'll try and explain once more, though I suspect it aint gonna do much good.

If person A comes on to my property without my permission, and refuses to tell me why he's there, and won't leave after he's been told to leave, well then if the only choice I have to make him leave is to shoot at him (assuming he's armed too), then he'll get shot at. Sorry, but there isn't any other way to protect oneself. If he shot at the cops who came to take him off my private property (if I did call the cops), they'd shoot back - I see no reason why I can't shoot if someone doenst leave my private property either.

Mere trespassing doesnt warrant death. The guy could trespass, then leave, and I wouldn't shoot. The point is him not leaving after he's being told to.

They can shoot at him if they think there is a need, sure. After all, HE is armed, and can potentially take hostages, can he not?

But they should NOT shoot merely because he's fleeing from them.

What you are saying is not true ... I never said I support killing anyone and everyone.

Now let's turn the tables so to speak.

What if the killers didn't have badges?

What if it was a just bunch of niggers smoking crack on some elderly citizen's lawn, he asks them to leave twice but instead of leaving they just gun him down?

"Shut up old man, suck my dick, go get your gun we ain't leavin'"

BOOM, BOOM BOOM!

Would you be so quick to defend them?

__________________
... ..................
We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.

I am trying to understand your position, but I just cannot agree with it.

You appear to be saying that if you confront a trespasser on your lawn, you will tell him to leave. If he fails to leave, but instead simply stands there, you'll shoot him.

Is this correct?

Matt

He had absolutely no lawful justification to go out and threaten deadly force to repel trespassers - even if he was a racist dipshit who only sees them as "niggers".

His actions were criminal. Had he merely brandished the gun, he'd be headed for prison. He chose to shoot (first, according to the witness).

Matt

He had every MORAL justification in the world. He had asked them to leave. They had no business there.

Further, it is arguable that as the cops knew they were cops and knew they were violating the law and getting away with it because they had badges, then they were acting under color of law, which may well be a felony in FL.

In TX, those officers did two things that LEGALLY would have supported the homeowner killing them: 1) Refusing to leave the mans property upon being ordered to do so, and 2) Acting under color of law (its a felony in TX and private citizens are legally permitted to use any means they feel necessary, up to and including lethal force in order to make the officer cease and desist.

We disagree completely here Matt. The cops were 100% wrong. Unfortunately, the homeowner is 100% dead, because the cops didnt believe the law applied to them.

__________________
In case you were wondering, yes, there really ARE more idiots these days....technology has made natural selection obsolete.

Silence is golden...Duct tape is silver.

Well, thats the gist of it ... let me add a bit more though.

You appear to be saying that if you confront a trespasser on your lawn, you will tell him to leave. I will also tell him if he doesn't, I might go get my gun and shoot him a new asshole.

If he fails to leave, but instead simply stands there, you'll shoot him. Well, I'd try wrestling him off my property first. But this wouldn't work if he was bigger and stronger, or otherwise better at combat/street fighting than me. Neither would it work if there were two people, and I was one, assuming all have the same fighting capabilities. If this failed, I'd pull my pants down and moon him and ask him to leave or stare at my ass for as long as he's there ...

Do you see what I am saying? I'd shoot if there was no other option, meaning if I had told him to leave, and I couldnt get him off my property by using physical force then I'd have to shoot. But call the cops? I'm sorry, but I dont see why I should call the cops in this case if I can deal with the situation myself on my own property.

Agree with everything, only thing I wanted to confirm was that I believe this concept of private property doesnt just apply to citizens (you said private citizens) - it applies to everyone lawfully residing in the US.

This seems a bit different from your prior posts.

Let's try a what if.

It's a weekday evening, around 6 pm. You've been home from work for a while, and you see a large man walk in to your front yard and sit down.

You yell at him to leave, but he does not respond.

He's a big dude.

You tell him to get lost or you'll "shoot him a new asshole".

He turns his head and stares for a moment, then looks back toward the street.

Are you going to kill this guy?

Matt