Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 25 of 47

Thread: Another +1 for the homeowner!

  1. #1
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Cary, North Carolina, , USA
    Posts
    129

    Post imported post

    Unfortunately the injuries weren't life threatening. Sounds like the homeowner gave him a break...

    Fayetteville police: Resident shot suspect during burglary


    Posted: Today at 3:46 p.m

    Fayetteville, N.C. — Fayetteville police said that a resident shot and wounded a suspect during a home break-in Thursday afternoon.

    Two people forced their way into a residence in the 400 block of Acacia Circle around 2:30 p.m., officers said. The victim was at home and heard the burglars as they tried to take several items.

    Investigators said that the resident confronted the burglars with a firearm. The resident shot one person in the lower leg and detained him until police arrived.
    The second burglar fled the scene by unknown means, police said.

    The suspect was transported to Cape Fear Valley Hospital to be treated for non-life-threatening injuries.

    Police said they plan to charge him with felony breaking-and-entering and felony larceny. Investigators have not been able to determine the man's identity.
    Detectives remained at the crime scene late Thursday afternoon.

  2. #2
    Regular Member SPRINGFIELD_45_ACP's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Richlands, North Carolina, United States
    Posts
    124

    Post imported post

    Chalk up another 1 for the good guys:celebrate

  3. #3
    State Researcher
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Minnesota
    Posts
    2,350

    Post imported post

    ItsMyRight2Carry wrote:
    Unfortunately the injuries weren't life threatening. Sounds like the homeowner gave him a break...
    It is never, EVER fortunate when a person dies. That statement is disgusting, and it makes us all look bad. If you feel joy when someone dies, criminal or not, I'd suggest you find professional help.

  4. #4
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Cary, North Carolina, , USA
    Posts
    129

    Post imported post

    Get a life dude...I'm sure when someone breaks into your house and threatens your wife and children that you'll be thinking "hmmmm, maybe I should aim for his leg because I don't won't to fatally wound this guy and give him further opportunity to attack and possibly kill me, my wife, and my child. I'm not sure which world you're living, but I'm living in the one that makes sure I'm safe. If you're disgusted by my statement, ignore it and don't respond. Better yet, if it disgusts you when a BG is fatally wounded for violating someone's home and family, then you should go trade your guns in for a bottle of mace...Poor little criminals.

  5. #5
    Campaign Veteran
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Hanover County, Virginia, ,
    Posts
    93

    Post imported post

    DreQo wrote:
    ItsMyRight2Carry wrote:
    Unfortunately the injuries weren't life threatening. Sounds like the homeowner gave him a break...
    It is never, EVER fortunate when a person dies. That statement is disgusting, and it makes us all look bad. If you feel joy when someone dies, criminal or not, I'd suggest you find professional help.
    The world is better off when scumbags likethis are killed. I don't feel joy when it happens, but I certainly don't feel anything resembling sympathy.

  6. #6
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Cary, North Carolina, , USA
    Posts
    129

    Post imported post

    My sentiments exactly...I'm sure once he recovers from his non- life threatening GSW, he'll be out robbing someone else. Only difference is, next time he'll have an illegal gun to protect himself, and likely kill some innocent homeowner or their child...He got what he deserved!

  7. #7
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Durham, North Carolina, USA
    Posts
    64

    Post imported post

    ItsMyRight2Carry wrote:
    My sentiments exactly...I'm sure once he recovers from his non- life threatening GSW, he'll be out robbing someone else. Only difference is, next time he'll have an illegal gun to protect himself, and likely kill some innocent homeowner or their child...He got what he deserved!
    I shall quote my CCWP instructor, "Hey diddle diddle, hit em in the middle." Nuff said.

  8. #8
    Founder's Club Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Fairfax Co., VA
    Posts
    18,766

    Post imported post

    DreQo wrote:
    ItsMyRight2Carry wrote:
    Unfortunately the injuries weren't life threatening. Sounds like the homeowner gave him a break...
    It is never, EVER fortunate when a person dies. That statement is disgusting, and it makes us all look bad. If you feel joy when someone dies, criminal or not, I'd suggest you find professional help.
    +1

    Its over the top, IRM2C.

    Breaking and enteringand burglaryare notcapital offenses.

    While entitled to your own opinions, we'd appreciate it if you kept these to yourself rather than posting them on an open forum for all our enemies to see.

    I see above you've already back-lipped DreQo when he called you on it. I'm not interested in debating it. I'm not interested in educating you on public relations or image. Whether youtry to justify your post further will tellus all we need to know about your strength of character.
    I'll make you an offer: I will argue and fight for all of your rights, if you will do the same for me. That is the only way freedom can work. We have to respect all rights, all the time--and strive to win the rights of the other guy as much as for ourselves.

    If I am equal to another, how can I legitimately govern him without his express individual consent?

    There is no human being on earth I hate so much I would actually vote to inflict government upon him.

  9. #9
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Cary, North Carolina, , USA
    Posts
    129

    Post imported post

    I'm not trying to justify anything. He stated his opinion, in a derogatory manner, and stated mine, in a derogatory manner, if that's how you choose to perceive it. I enjoy these forums. I post frequently in these forums. I'm not here to prove my strength or character. If someone needs to prove their strength and character on a website, hiding behind a computer, then they obviously lack both. I'm not that person. Neither am I here for education on public relations or image. I'm all for getting out, having open-carry meet and greets and getting to know each other. I think my strength and character will speak for itself.

    DreQo is very opinionated, and comes across that way, which is fine. I'm the same way. I don't have a problem with him. I respect his opinion, as I do everyone on here. Freedom of speech is nice! If he can't respect my opinion, then he shouldn't open himself up for debate. I'll leave it at that. I believe all of the posts I've made in these forums are contributory and informative to an extent. I try to stay active in the forums, as I would like to see the site grow and our fellow gun owners stand up for what they think is right, within the boundries of the law. Anyway, I find it funny how my opinion was echoed by the other members, and you're calling me out. But, if you would like, I will remove my membership, or you can remove it for me, and I will move on.

  10. #10
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Alabama, ,
    Posts
    1,338

    Post imported post

    But a live bg can disclose the other perp. This will allow both to be
    off the street. And hopefully meet a nice boyfriend to move in with.

    Just hope he has a perminate limp to remind him not to b+e.

  11. #11
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Cary, North Carolina, , USA
    Posts
    129

    Post imported post

    True! Bubba will have a good time with the one that was shot. He'll have a hard time getting away with that bum leg...:celebrate

  12. #12
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Pisgah Forest, North Carolina, USA
    Posts
    23

    Post imported post

    i would like to think that most on this site do not defend or rationalize the actions of criminals. the man that was shot, by entering someone else's home without authorization, took full responsibility for his actions. the fact that his life was spared is God's Grace. if he was fatally injured and died then he payed a hefty price for his decision to brake the law and a commonality law at that, "thou shalt not steal". the problem with out society is that the punnishment for stealing is not great enough to deture the decision making for most criminals. We , as a nation, give criminals rights, however neglecting to relise that the criminals do not give the victoms the same rights. the lesson here is that if you are going to brake the law then you forfit the right to deturmine the concequences or outcome.

    because i defend what is mine and carry a weapon, i know that i must be careful what i do because others are aforded the same right i have to defend what is theres. i am willing to bet that if you broke into the burgulars home he would have shot you dead without batting an eye. i realy have very little simpathy for those whom would rather take mine than earn (work justly) there own. do i think a man shoul be shot for ivation of my home, apsolutely!, unless he surrenders. (i'm not inhumain) criminals be for warned, " If you invade my home you give up the right to deturmine what i do, to stop you"

    jim

  13. #13
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    , North Carolina, USA
    Posts
    98

    Post imported post

    It is true that breaking and entering are not Capital offenses. So, in that context, does that mean you do not support any Castle Doctrines? Are you going to ask the intruder if he is only there to take a few things and be on his way? Or are you going to shoot center mass? I, for one will not take the time to ask an intruder if he is armed and if he plans on hurting or killing me. Like they say, " better judged by twelve..."

  14. #14
    State Researcher
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Minnesota
    Posts
    2,350

    Post imported post

    The point that I was making, that most of you understood, is that it is never fortunate when a person dies, criminal or not. I never said anything about sympathy or rights or anything else. Death is not fortunate.

    Does a criminal deserve the consequences of his poor decision? Of course. Do I support the idea that, by violating someone else's rights, you forfeit your own? Yep! Would I shoot a person that criminally forced their way into my home? Absolutely. Would I be glad that someone died? Hell no.

  15. #15
    Founder's Club Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Fairfax Co., VA
    Posts
    18,766

    Post imported post

    DreQo wrote:
    SNIP Would I be glad that someone died? Hell no.

    To regret a criminal did not diealso violates the underlying basis for defensive lethal force.

    Shoot to stop; not to kill.

    This is not airy-fairy political correctness. It may make the difference between being no-billed by a grand jury and aguilty verdict.
    I'll make you an offer: I will argue and fight for all of your rights, if you will do the same for me. That is the only way freedom can work. We have to respect all rights, all the time--and strive to win the rights of the other guy as much as for ourselves.

    If I am equal to another, how can I legitimately govern him without his express individual consent?

    There is no human being on earth I hate so much I would actually vote to inflict government upon him.

  16. #16
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Cary, North Carolina, , USA
    Posts
    129

    Post imported post

    I'm still confused as to where I said I wish the BG would have been killed. Read my statement very carefully. There's a difference between having a life threatening wound, a non-life threatening wound and a fatal wound.

    My post clearly states "Unfortunately the injuries weren't life threatening." I've worked in Emergency and Critical Care Medicine for over 10 years, and there's a big difference between those three determinations.

    For example, the story states that he was shot in the leg and suffered a non-life threatening injury. This guy probably had a few xrays, an some diagnostic radiologic exams and was eventually patched up and sent go to jail. He'll serve a little time, and brag that he got shot. He'll be back on the streets again some day, most likely committing the same crime. I would be willing to bet this isn't his first offense.

    Now, let's say the story stated that he was shot in the leg, and suffered a life-threatening injury. Now, this would probably indicate that had severed a major artery such as the femoral artery and had to be rushed to the operating room to have his life saved before he bled to death. Had they saved his life, he would wake up the next day knowing he almost lost his life. Maybe his view on breaking and entering would be different. I doubt it, but I bet it would be in the back of his mind.

    I never once stated that "too bad this guy wasn't killed, or I hope he dies in the hospital" or anything like that. I think you guys have blown my statement way out of proportion. As I stated in the above posts, the guy got what he deserved. Now hopefully he'll get what he deserves in prison..BIG BUBBA

  17. #17
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    , North Carolina, USA
    Posts
    98

    Post imported post

    I agree with Dreqo. Would I be "Glad" someone died ? NO! Would I have any sympathy for the criminal that died ? NO!





    I still don't understand CITIZENS comment that "Breaking and entering and burglary are not capital offenses". Does that mean that you would not shoot them ? Does that mean you would shoot someone who WAS trying to commit a capital offense against you?

    Not trying to argue....just don't undertsand.

  18. #18
    Founder's Club Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Fairfax Co., VA
    Posts
    18,766

    Post imported post

    ItsMyRight2Carry wrote:
    I'm still confused as to where I said I wish the BG would have been killed. Read my statement very carefully. There's a difference between having a life threatening wound, a non-life threatening wound and a fatal wound.
    True, the distinctions do exist.

    The distinction is often only one of timing. Before he dies its"life-threatening" (might kill him). After he dies its "fatal" (did kill him.)

    In that the distinction between life-threatening and fatal is not something particularly used in a vindictive sense, you'll be hard pressed to convince me you meant that you wanted him to have a life-threatening injury but not a fatal one.

    I'm going to call this a creative evasion. Somewhat sophisticated, too. +1 on that.

    Look, its not a big deal that requires lots of defensiveness or evasion. We just want you to stop making us look like savages, giving ammunition to ourenemies, the anti-gunners. Please, keep your baser instincts to yourself.
    I'll make you an offer: I will argue and fight for all of your rights, if you will do the same for me. That is the only way freedom can work. We have to respect all rights, all the time--and strive to win the rights of the other guy as much as for ourselves.

    If I am equal to another, how can I legitimately govern him without his express individual consent?

    There is no human being on earth I hate so much I would actually vote to inflict government upon him.

  19. #19
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Cary, North Carolina, , USA
    Posts
    129

    Post imported post

    As tfed12 states: "Would I be "Glad" someone died ? NO! Would I have any sympathy for the criminal that died ? NO!" I totally agree with that statement.

    There again, I never once said "I hope this guys dies," or "too bad he isn't dead" or "it's unfortunate that he's still alive" or "isn't it fortunate when a BG breaks into someones house and gets killed" or anything like that...I think if you thoroughly read my posts you'll see where I stand. My words were twisted around, and aren't representative of dreqo's first response to my post.

    I'm not going to debate this anymore, as I feel I have proven where I stand. It's time for some cocktails!! Have a nice evening everyone!


    "My baser instincts?" Thanks for the insult..




  20. #20
    State Researcher
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Minnesota
    Posts
    2,350

    Post imported post

    Citizen wrote:
    ItsMyRight2Carry wrote:
    I'm still confused as to where I said I wish the BG would have been killed. Read my statement very carefully. There's a difference between having a life threatening wound, a non-life threatening wound and a fatal wound.
    True, the distinctions do exist.

    The distinction is often only one of timing. Before he dies its"life-threatening" (might kill him).

    In that the distinction between life-threatening and fatal is not something particularly used in a vindictive sense, you'll be hard pressed to convince me you meant that you wanted him to have a life-threatening injury but not a fatal one.

    I'm going to call this a creative evasion. Somewhat sophisticated, too. +1 on that.

    Look, its not a big deal that requires lots of defensiveness or evasion. We just want you to stop making us look like savages, giving ammunition to ourenemies, the anti-gunners. Please, keep your baser instincts to yourself.
    +1000. One should not wish harm upon another no more thanone should wish death, ergo his semantic argument is irrelevant.

  21. #21
    Founder's Club Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Fairfax Co., VA
    Posts
    18,766

    Post imported post

    TFED12 wrote:
    SNIP I still don't understand CITIZENS comment that "Breaking and entering and burglary are not capital offenses". Does that mean that you would not shoot them ? Does that mean you would shoot someone who WAS trying to commit a capital offense against you?

    Not trying to argue....just don't undertsand.
    My comment about breaking and entering not being a capital offense was to give perspective that itdoes not rate death as an official penalty. Thus wanting someone to die for it is extreme. Shaky ground to rely on society's opinion as expressed in the law, true. But it starts to fill in the picture.

    As to personally shooting a B & E or burglar, not in a million years.

    First, I don't know that the burglar is evil and dangerous to a degree that warrants death. There is no way I can know that, if all he is doing is breaking and entering or burgling. I'm not willing to use lethal force on another human being who may be undertaking his first or second felony. Maybe he's a career criminal who includes rape and murder on his resume. But, I have no way to know as long as it remains aB & E or burglary.

    Second, the legal jeopardy of using lethal force on another person is huge. The books are full of people unjustly or incorrectly prosecuted for defensive lethal force. Massad Ayoob has practically made a career of defending such people as an expert witness. Even if found not guilty, the costs of a criminal defense can bestaggering. Then there is the civil lawsuit by the surviving criminal or the deceased criminal's family.More money. And stress. Lots and lots of stress while one wonders if he is going to jail for ten years, or whether he will spend the rest of his life digging out from under it financially.

    The burglarcan have the damned television and the stereo.They're not worth$20-50K in legal fees.

    I've even installed a laser on my primary defensive handgun. Two reasons. One, help me hit the target. Two, there are reports that thelittle red dot snaps some bad guys back to reality and makes them stop. Getting him to stop without having to shoot is an ideal outcome if you ask me.

    No thank you. I will not pull the trigger on another human being unless it is completely, absolutely, unavoidablynecessary to prevent grave bodily injury or death. If heoffersme anotherwise unavoidable threat ofgrave bodily injury or death, and I can see my target and what is beyond, I will perform the indicated response.
    I'll make you an offer: I will argue and fight for all of your rights, if you will do the same for me. That is the only way freedom can work. We have to respect all rights, all the time--and strive to win the rights of the other guy as much as for ourselves.

    If I am equal to another, how can I legitimately govern him without his express individual consent?

    There is no human being on earth I hate so much I would actually vote to inflict government upon him.

  22. #22
    Founder's Club Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Fairfax Co., VA
    Posts
    18,766

    Post imported post

    ItsMyRight2Carry wrote:
    SNIP Now hopefully he'll get what he deserves in prison..BIG BUBBA
    Over the top. No one deserves this.

    If that's his style and he wants it, its one thing. But to say its deserved implies its punishing and necessarily undesirable.

    Please refrain.

    I'll make you an offer: I will argue and fight for all of your rights, if you will do the same for me. That is the only way freedom can work. We have to respect all rights, all the time--and strive to win the rights of the other guy as much as for ourselves.

    If I am equal to another, how can I legitimately govern him without his express individual consent?

    There is no human being on earth I hate so much I would actually vote to inflict government upon him.

  23. #23
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    , North Carolina, USA
    Posts
    98

    Post imported post

    CITIZEN,

    Thanks for clarifying your opinion. I got it through my thick head now.

    But, I do have one question. If you are in an areawith a Castle Doctrine, are you going to ask the intruder if he is there to just pick up a few things? Or is he there to pick up a few things and if you catch him in the act he will shoot to kill you in that split second that you are trying to determine his intentions?



    Like I said, I understand your opinion. But it seems to me in the situation, you may be dead before you can determine the intruders actions.

    Although, I am sure as a well trained home defense guy, you would slip around the corner with gun drawn and Laser on and see what his next move would be.

    Good luck and Peace be with you.

  24. #24
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Pisgah Forest, North Carolina, USA
    Posts
    23

    Post imported post

    sounds as if some of you don't understand that when you shoot some one, the intent is to seriously injure that person, rendering the person incapacitated (dead). by shooting you are saying by inference that you want that person dead.. or you would not us a weapon like a pistol, you might use a broom or stick or maybe a wiffle ball bat.

    shooting some one and not wanting them harmed seriously, does not equal each other. this is why carring is a serious thing, not to be taken lightly. i fully expect that if i have to de-holster my weapon and use it, the results will be death on the receiving end. i wander how many hunters shot deer and expected the deer to be unharmed or slightly harmed..or a soldier to the enemy. i was allways tought that what ever i pointed a weapon at, i was meaning to destory it, so becareful what you point at.

    i was tought in my concealed handgun class that if you did not fear for you life or your familys', you could not use your weapon. you never shoot to wound, (unless you a sniper engaging in war). so by intent you wanted the person dead!

    also, if you can be shot and killed for occupied home invation this is a capital crime, maybe not to the courts if tryed but the robber is still dead.

    jim

  25. #25
    Founder's Club Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Fairfax Co., VA
    Posts
    18,766

    Post imported post

    TFED12 wrote:
    CITIZEN,

    Thanks for clarifying your opinion. I got it through my thick head now.

    But, I do have one question. If you are in an areawith a Castle Doctrine, are you going to ask the intruder if he is there to just pick up a few things? Or is he there to pick up a few things and if you catch him in the act he will shoot to kill you in that split second that you are trying to determine his intentions?

    Like I said, I understand your opinion. But it seems to me in the situation, you may be dead before you can determine the intruders actions.

    Although, I am sure as a well trained home defense guy, you would slip around the corner with gun drawn and Laser on and see what his next move would be.

    Good luck and Peace be with you.

    I'm glad you asked. I was thinking you might. Not that exact question, but something that exposed the cracks between well-established law and the state of defensive doctrine which has evolved, it seems to me,faster than the law can keep up.

    It comes down to tactical knowledge, I think.Also, there are far too many possible scenarios.But lets hit a few to illustrate tactical knowledge weighed against the state of the law, which means primarily"how much will I haveto explain to an investigator or jury for them to understand and agree Ireally was in danger?"

    In one situation,all the elements of AOJ are clearly present such that if it were recorded in video and audio, the only explaining would be to point out on the video screen, "See his gun pointing at me."

    In another situation, say the burglar has a knife and is 20' away when he starts walking towards me making verbal threats.Maybe one has to explain a little more, for example, the 21-foot rule, to show the degree of danger that actually existed.

    Then there might be the situation where the danger wasnot at all clearto a third party:Say a bad guyin the upper hall, at the other end of the hall, with his back to me, with a gun in his hand. Why didI shoot him in the back? Now, since it is not common knowledge or nearly asobvious, I have toexplain to the third parties that the gun shows the bad guyhas already decided what he is going to do if he encounters the homeowner--me. And,if I first give a verbal challenge, I can so startle him thathe canspin around and loose a shot before I can react and shoot him mid-spin. Action beats reaction.

    Separately, Castle Doctrine does not necessarily change the on-the-scene dynamics of defensive lethal force in the home. Its intended to prevent unjust or incorrect prosecutions and frivolous lawsuits against the defender. The ones I've read included words like "reasonably feared for..." whichhas always been a component of the common law anyway, as I understand it. For example, in Virginia we essentially already have Castle Doctrine based on the common law, even though there is no Castle Doctrine statute. The only thing we need it for is to close the door to unjust prosecutions and frivolous lawsuits. These are very important in their own right; but it wouldn't change that we can shoot when we need to. Even in states with must-retreat laws, you can defend if it is unsafe to retreat, or so I understand.

    As to what I woulddo, Castle Doctrine would not change my approach.Back to tactics. I would not pre-emptively shootabsent AOJ andjust because he's breaking a window or jimmying a door or I've encountered himto our mutual surprise when I walk into my living room. Assuming I did not havethe elements of AOJ present, I'd at least move to cover.If no cover, I'd at least moveto put distance and obstacles between us.Then adjust my handling to the exact situation in front of me as it develops. I'd call police if time permitted.

    Also, remember "reasonable fear."Just being fearful something might happen might not be enough, depending on the case law or how the Castle Doctrine statute is worded in any given state.

    IfI was awakened at night. Say I heard a window breaking, I may not even poke my head out of the bedroom door. I might yell through the locked door, "I've got a gun! Get the (rhymes with pluck) out! Police are on the way!" Here is where tactical knowledge comes into play. I have read the datum I am about to give. It is therefore available to me to use tactically.Itis a statistic around the gun world somewhere. Here it is: inencounters between armed citizens and criminals, the armed citizens only pull the trigger in something like roughly one out of thirteen encounters. The rest of the time, the citizen only displays or refers to his gun. Ah ha! So, criminals are scared for their skin. Good! I can use that. I have a 12 out of 13 chance the bad guy will run if I just yell that I have a gun. Or rack the slide on the shotgun, etc. Judgement applies, though. If stealth and surprise seemed advisable to maintain a tactical advantage or safety in a certain situation, I might not announcemy gun.

    I would do anything I safely could to avoid having to shoot. Including, if I amthe only one home,running out the front door while he is breaking in the back door. For example, he ignored me yelling I was armed and had called police. Yep. Out the front door I go. If I was in the country, I might even jump in the truck and start driving. He can stay awhile and enjoy leftovers from the fridge for all I care.

    The possible consequences of shooting are just toosteepmorally,legally, and financiallyto shoot without it being absolutely necessary.

    So, what this really boils down to is knowledge of the possibilities. The more you know, the better you can judge what to do. Otherwise you're just scared and maybe assume more danger than there is and possibly get prosecuted, sued or both. Or, you miss danger signals or miss grasping that a situation is as dangerous as it really is and get hurt or dead.

    So, the lesson is to read, study, watch videos, take classes. Gun handling is one thing, an important thing. Learning when to use it and defensive tacticsis a broader subject and just as important if not more so.

    I'll make you an offer: I will argue and fight for all of your rights, if you will do the same for me. That is the only way freedom can work. We have to respect all rights, all the time--and strive to win the rights of the other guy as much as for ourselves.

    If I am equal to another, how can I legitimately govern him without his express individual consent?

    There is no human being on earth I hate so much I would actually vote to inflict government upon him.

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •