View Single Post
Old 2012-08-29, 13:45   Link #263
kyp275
Meh
 
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Quote:
Originally Posted by DonQuigleone View Post
I am sorry that my ignorance offends.
I don't need an apology, I would rather you stick to facts and do your homework first when you participate in a debate.

Quote:
Originally Posted by DonQuigleone View Post
In a real war, no one gives a shit about the Geneva convention. Hell, just look at the Bush presidency.
The Geneva Convention as it exists today was negotiated and signed AFTER THE END of WW2.

On your second allegation, I have much less polite word I would like to use here with your not-so-thinly-veiled implications, but as someone who's actually spent time on the ground in those war zones, the Allied/US military very much followed the Geneva Convention most of the time, with some unfortunate exceptions. The insurgents however, indeed did not give a shit about the Geneva Convention

Quote:
Originally Posted by DonQuigleone View Post
Things like Rape happen exclusively at short range. Last time I checked, you can't have sex remotely. Same goes for assault.
You completely missed the point here, which is not a surprise considering you've more than demonstrated you have zero knowledge pertaining to how any of these things work in real life.

In extreme close quarters, the defender have much less time to make his/her move, and if the countermeasure failed or was ineffective, they are extremely unlikely to get another chance before being overpowered or for the engagement to turn into a melee fight. In the case of pepper spray, if the defender was unable to properly spray the correct area, he/she is unlikely to have the chance to aim and spray again. In the case of someone who's resistant to pepper spray, they simply would not have the chance to seek out alternative methods of defense.

Quote:
Originally Posted by DonQuigleone View Post
As for other motives for crime, give up your money. Killing another man just to save a few shekels is what I call misplaced priorities.
The issue isn't about money vs. life, it is about your life vs. the criminals. Last time I checked there was no mind-reading device that will tell you what exactly the criminal is planning or a time machine that shows you what would happen later. You're literally basing your entire argument on the assumption that every criminal will ever only want your money and would never hurt or kill you if you give them the money, which is not only patently false, but is also so far into the realm of fantasy even magic ponies would think you're nuts.


Quote:
Originally Posted by DonQuigleone View Post
What do you know about Ireland? Don't assume things about other people's countries. The people here are no different from America, we just enjoy eating potatoes more.
I couldn't care less about Ireland, but I make my statement based on the assumption that even in Ireland, police officers would prefer not to die, which they certainly will if they try to work while being unarmed in the scenario i laid out before.

Also, you more than anyone else in this thread have been assuming the most
about "other people's countries", hypocrite much?

edit:
Well, another buddy of mine from Ireland has this to say about your claim that Ireland police "almost never have to carry guns":

"Down south yea, it's mostly rural communities you see. Up north and near the bigger cities no way", and "...Rose tinted glasses there. Dublin's just like any other capital city in a first world country".


Quote:
Originally Posted by DonQuigleone View Post
Who are you to judge the worth of another man's life? Who are you to judge whether or not another man deserves death? Who are you to mete out justice?
Again, you've missed the point here. Nowhere in any of my post would you ever see me "judging" the worth of another's life, or whether they deserve to die. The only thing I've been advocating for is people's right to defend THEIR OWN PERSON and THEIR OWN LIFE.

The only person here that's doing any "judging" here is actually you, by placing the value of the criminal's life on a pedestal, while relegating the value of the victim's life to the second tier.

Quote:
Originally Posted by DonQuigleone View Post
Let me tell you, just like me, you are nothing, you know nothing and you can judge nothing. Your perception is limited to what is front in you. We are not fit to have the privilege of meting out the ultimate retribution that is death. We cannot be trusted with it.
Oh ffs, get off your philosophical soap box, and then maybe you can actually start to read and comprehend what others are saying. Ideally I would agree with you that it'd be best if there is no need for weapons, no war, and no one would ever get killed, but that's not the debate here, which is about gun policy in the real world.

In the real world, humans aren't angels. We have wars, famine, the have and the have not, and yes, criminals who WOULD kill their victims, regardless of whether they complied with their demand or not.


Quote:
Originally Posted by DonQuigleone View Post
And if we talk about defense, the blood of the man you kill just to keep your paws on a bit of money, will be on your hands, not mine.
Yes, because ALL cases of self-defense is ALWAYS about the "bit of money" you have on your person


Quote:
Originally Posted by DonQuigleone View Post
Will you feel guilt knowing you could have killed someone's father, brother or son? Knowing that maybe he had just fallen on bad times, and could have maybe reformed himself if given the chance, knowing that you killed him, just so he wouldn't take the measly hundred dollars in your wallet?
Not one bit, because if I had drew my weapon and fired at someone, it would've been because I were protecting myself, my family, or another person from imminent threat of death or severe bodily harm.

Quote:
Originally Posted by DonQuigleone View Post
Same to you. All I know, is my police, well versed in matters of self defence can carry out their jobs quite well with only 4 things: A baton, pepper spray, tasers and a knife proof vest. If it's good enough for them, why isn't good enough for you? Why do you need to have the ability to kill other people?

Tell me, are you sure civilians would do so well in a gunfight, when even the police (who train extensively for this kind of thing) have poor accuracy?
police, train extensively for "this kind of thing"? lololol

you know even less about how police departments operate They're not exactly special force operators and gets to spend however much time training and shooting whenever they want (same in the military). Actual department required training/qualification is pitifully little, your typical civilian gun enthusiasts are likely to have FAR MORE range time than what normal police department's mandated training dictates.

Quote:
Originally Posted by DonQuigleone View Post
The ultimate sin to kill. When a man mugs you, he takes a week of your earnings. When you kill, you are taking decadesfrom him. You are stealing his life.

Tell me, how can it be right to kill another in retaliation for such crimes as stealing or robbery?
Sorry for the error.
I'm not gonna keep repeating myself, I've already address these points earlier in this post.

Last edited by Daniel E.; 2012-08-29 at 15:01. Reason: Stop doing that.
kyp275 is offline   Reply With Quote