Results 1 to 23 of 23

Thread: Toledo Blade editors wish recent robbery victims had been unarmed...

  1. #1
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Tucson, Arizona, USA
    Posts
    1,098

    Post imported post

    http://www.buckeyefirearms.org/node/7189

    "The Ohio media's opposition stance on changing laws to protect innocent people was inexplicable, until now. In the wake of two separate incidents recently where Toledo retail store workers used firearms to defend against armed robbers, The Toledo Blade has finally come right out and said that society would be a better place if criminals, not honest people, had the upper hand in an armed encounter."





    http://toledoblade.com/apps/pbcs.dll...NION02/3190305

    "Twice in just the past few days, seemingly bad guys were shot while allegedly attempting to rob Toledo stores. Although we're glad the robberies were thwarted and thankful no innocents were injured, we're not sure that store owners and employees defending themselves with deadly force is an absolute good."





    Wow. That is a newspaper that deserves to go out of business.

    Crossposted to Ohio.

  2. #2
    Founder's Club Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Fairfax Co., VA
    Posts
    18,766

    Post imported post

    PavePusher wrote:
    http://toledoblade.com/apps/pbcs.dll...NION02/3190305

    "Twice in just the past few days, seemingly bad guys were shot while allegedly attempting to rob Toledo stores. Although we're glad the robberies were thwarted and thankful no innocents were injured, we're not sure that store owners and employees defending themselves with deadly force is an absolute good."


    Wow. That is a newspaper that deserves to go out of business.

    Crossposted to Ohio.
    "We're not sure" is the operative phrase there. Meaning, they cannot come to decision, or incapable of making a decision, despite the rap sheets of the bad guys. You will meet people like this. No matter how convincing the evidence, they just cannotmake a decision that judges something or someone.

    Their problem is that millions of other people across history have figured it out and been able to come to a decision, namely that lethal force is justified during an armed robbery.

    In the editorial now posted, they even say that robbery is not a capital offense. As though the victim is supposed to wait until he is killedbefore he can use deadly force.
    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.

  3. #3
    Regular Member detroit_fan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Monroe, Michigan, USA
    Posts
    1,196

    Post imported post

    Newspapers are dying fast, and this is why. Who really believes that garbage other than the bradys'
    If guns cause crime, all mine are defective- Ted Nugent

  4. #4
    Regular Member Deanimator's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Rocky River, OH, U.S.A.
    Posts
    2,086

    Post imported post

    Citizen wrote:
    "We're not sure" is the operative phrase there. Meaning, they cannot come to decision, or incapable of making a decision, despite the rap sheets of the bad guys.
    However they CAN instantly come to a decision regarding the VICTIMS of these violent crimes. They're "wrong" for defending themselves and should allow themselves to be robbed, raped or murdered.

    They have a sick fascination with and envy for the profoundly evil. Robbers, rapists and serial killers do the things about which they can only fantasize. Their sympathies like with the victimizer, NEVER the victim, ESPECIALLY when the victim fights back.
    --- Gun control: The theory that 110lb. women have the "right" to fistfight with 210lb. rapists.

  5. #5
    Founder's Club Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Lynchburg, Virginia, USA
    Posts
    2,201

    Post imported post

    This type of story is not the least bit surprising to me as a former Ohioan and a University of Toledo graduate. While I realize that not all Ohioans have this mindset, it is pervasive enough that I'd rather not deal with the crummy firearm laws of Ohio and not have to think of raising kids in an environment where clear cut self defense including the use of deadly forceis a questionable action by many in the populace.

    I did note that the author couldn't be bothered with including their name for the story. Further, there is no place for comments to respond to this tripe.

  6. #6
    Regular Member Deanimator's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Rocky River, OH, U.S.A.
    Posts
    2,086

    Post imported post

    jmelvin wrote:
    This type of story is not the least bit surprising to me as a former Ohioan and a University of Toledo graduate. While I realize that not all Ohioans have this mindset, it is pervasive enough that I'd rather not deal with the crummy firearm laws of Ohio and not have to think of raising kids in an environment where clear cut self defense including the use of deadly forceis a questionable action by many in the populace.

    I did note that the author couldn't be bothered with including their name for the story. Further, there is no place for comments to respond to this tripe.
    Actually, that attitude is quite rare here these days. A while ago, a little moron named Arthur Buford tried to rob a guy on his own front lawn and got shot to death for it. His mutant family and "posse" got in a high dudgeon about it, damaging the property. Much to their shock and horror, the overwhelming reaction in the community was "If you don't want to get shot, don't try to rob people." Not only that, but off duty Cleveland cops and the NAACP took turns guarding the property.

    There is vanishingly little sympathy in Ohio for violent criminals these days. In fact, we're quite prone to shooting them.
    --- Gun control: The theory that 110lb. women have the "right" to fistfight with 210lb. rapists.

  7. #7
    Regular Member SouthernBoy's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Western Prince William County, Virginia, USA
    Posts
    5,849

    Post imported post

    One more reason to live in Virginia where common sense takes a front seat to such ignorance.

    In the final seconds of your life, just before your killer is about to dispatch you to that great eternal darkness, what would you rather have in your hand? A cell phone or a gun?

    Si vis pacem, para bellum.

    America First!

  8. #8
    Moderator / Administrator Grapeshot's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    North Chesterfield, Va.
    Posts
    34,623

    Post imported post

    mark edward marchiafava wrote:
    It's not this type of criminal the 2nd amendment alludes to, but the class of criminal who would act under the color of law.
    So you are saying that the 2nd Amendment does NOT confirm the individual right to self-defense from other than the government?

    There are many here that understand/believe the 2A does confirm (not allude to) the RKBA in more than that singular aspect.

    Yata hey
    You will not rise to the occasion; you will fall back on your level of training.” Archilochus, 650 BC

    Old and treacherous will beat young and skilled every time. Yata hey.

  9. #9
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    Orlando, FL, ,
    Posts
    412

    Post imported post

    Grapeshot wrote:
    mark edward marchiafava wrote:
    It's not this type of criminal the 2nd amendment alludes to, but the class of criminal who would act under the color of law.
    So you are saying that the 2nd Amendment does NOT confirm the individual right to self-defense from other than the government?

    There are many here that understand/believe the 2A does confirm (not allude to) the RKBA in more than that singular aspect.

    Yata hey
    NOW, you're just tying to talk logic to him. Good luck with that.

  10. #10
    Moderator / Administrator Grapeshot's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    North Chesterfield, Va.
    Posts
    34,623

    Post imported post

    JeepSeller wrote:
    Grapeshot wrote:
    mark edward marchiafava wrote:
    It's not this type of criminal the 2nd amendment alludes to, but the class of criminal who would act under the color of law.
    So you are saying that the 2nd Amendment does NOT confirm the individual right to self-defense from other than the government?

    There are many here that understand/believe the 2A does confirm (not allude to) the RKBA in more than that singular aspect.

    Yata hey
    NOW, you're just tying to talk logic to him. Good luck with that.
    Its like trying to get a greased pig to speak the truth.



    If you can catch him, there is still the language barrier thing.

    Yata hey
    You will not rise to the occasion; you will fall back on your level of training.” Archilochus, 650 BC

    Old and treacherous will beat young and skilled every time. Yata hey.

  11. #11
    Founder's Club Member ixtow's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Suwannee County, FL
    Posts
    5,069

    Post imported post

    Grapeshot wrote:
    JeepSeller wrote:
    Grapeshot wrote:
    mark edward marchiafava wrote:
    It's not this type of criminal the 2nd amendment alludes to, but the class of criminal who would act under the color of law.
    So you are saying that the 2nd Amendment does NOT confirm the individual right to self-defense from other than the government?

    There are many here that understand/believe the 2A does confirm (not allude to) the RKBA in more than that singular aspect.

    Yata hey
    NOW, you're just tying to talk logic to him. Good luck with that.
    Its like trying to get a greased pig to speak the truth.

    If you can catch him, there is still the language barrier thing.

    Yata hey
    MEM has a group of hecklers that follow him around pretending not to know the meaning of his words....

    In much the same way that Hunting is not mentioned in the 2A, neither is self-defense. It's not there. It just isn't. This is a simple fact.

    It IS, however, a fringe benefit of the primary purpose. If you have arms to combat government, you can ALSO use them to hunt or defend yourself from smaller-scale criminals. In the same way that you have Eyes on the front of your head to see stuff so you don't run into it. You can ALSO use them to stare at boobies... That's not THE reason you have them, but A reason.

    Why everyone has to jump down his throat? He's only the troll you pretend he is... I find him more agreeable and rational than most of the rest of the LA posters...
    "The fourth man's dark, accusing song had scratched our comfort hard and long..."
    http://edhelper.com/poetry/The_Hangm...rice_Ogden.htm

    https://gunthreadadapters.com

    "Be not intimidated ... nor suffer yourselves to be wheedled out of your Liberties by any pretense of Politeness, Delicacy, or Decency. These, as they are often used, are but three different names for Hypocrisy, Chicanery, and Cowardice." - John Adams

    Tyranny with Manners is still Tyranny.

  12. #12
    Moderator / Administrator Grapeshot's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    North Chesterfield, Va.
    Posts
    34,623

    Post imported post

    It is also a simple fact that having the right to bear arms is pretty much an exercise in futility unless you have the right to use them for their designed purpose.

    MEM is a debate I will not enter into here.

    Yata hey
    You will not rise to the occasion; you will fall back on your level of training.” Archilochus, 650 BC

    Old and treacherous will beat young and skilled every time. Yata hey.

  13. #13
    Campaign Veteran
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Lobelville, Tennessee, USA
    Posts
    2,615

    Post imported post

    This sounds like something Paul Helmke would write.

    snip:
    Instead, it seems to us that when deadly force is used as a first response rather than a last resort, civil society suffers.
    Is it just me or does anyone else wonder who "us" is, the author is referring too? Could it be the publishers of the paper? Or may the author has an imaginary friend.

  14. #14
    Founder's Club Member ixtow's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Suwannee County, FL
    Posts
    5,069

    Post imported post

    Task Force 16 wrote:
    This sounds like something Paul Helmke would write.

    snip:
    Instead, it seems to us that when deadly force is used as a first response rather than a last resort, civil society suffers.
    Is it just me or does anyone else wonder who "us" is, the author is referring too? Could it be the publishers of the paper? Or may the author has an imaginary friend.
    I'm still wondering where they get the 'information' that deadly force is used as a primary response? When? Where? Were there a bunch of unicorns and pixies there too? I'm still trying to locate this wonderful, mythical, fairy-tale incident...
    "The fourth man's dark, accusing song had scratched our comfort hard and long..."
    http://edhelper.com/poetry/The_Hangm...rice_Ogden.htm

    https://gunthreadadapters.com

    "Be not intimidated ... nor suffer yourselves to be wheedled out of your Liberties by any pretense of Politeness, Delicacy, or Decency. These, as they are often used, are but three different names for Hypocrisy, Chicanery, and Cowardice." - John Adams

    Tyranny with Manners is still Tyranny.

  15. #15
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Fairborn, Ohio, USA
    Posts
    13,063

    Post imported post

    Task Force 16 wrote:
    This sounds like something Paul Helmke would write.

    snip:
    Instead, it seems to us that when deadly force is used as a first response rather than a last resort, civil society suffers.
    Is it just me or does anyone else wonder who "us" is, the author is referring too? Could it be the publishers of the paper? Or may the author has an imaginary friend.
    It's the "editorial we." Some style books call for editorial writers to say "we" when they mean "I" and "us" when they mean "me."

  16. #16
    Moderator / Administrator Grapeshot's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    North Chesterfield, Va.
    Posts
    34,623

    Post imported post

    eye95 wrote:
    Task Force 16 wrote:
    This sounds like something Paul Helmke would write.

    snip:
    Instead, it seems to us that when deadly force is used as a first response rather than a last resort, civil society suffers.
    Is it just me or does anyone else wonder who "us" is, the author is referring too? Could it be the publishers of the paper? Or may the author has an imaginary friend.
    It's the "editorial we." Some style books call for editorial writers to say "we" when they mean "I" and "us" when they mean "me."
    It is the empirical form - the queen mum would understand that.

    Yata hey
    You will not rise to the occasion; you will fall back on your level of training.” Archilochus, 650 BC

    Old and treacherous will beat young and skilled every time. Yata hey.

  17. #17
    Regular Member Alexcabbie's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Alexandria, Virginia, United States
    Posts
    2,290

    Post imported post

    Anybody catch how the article referred to the robbers as "seemingly bad guys"?

    "Oh, hes a nice guy to talk to, except when he needs some money. Then he can really seem like a bad guy when he sticks a gun in your face"

    I knew a guy who was as honest as the day is long. Come sundown, however, and you needed to lock everything up and nail it down......

  18. #18
    Campaign Veteran since9's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Colorado Springs, Colorado, USA
    Posts
    6,787

    Post imported post

    I'll bet the robbery victims wish the Toledo Blade editors had been the victims, instead.
    The First protects the Second, and the Second protects the First. Together, they protect the rest of our Bill of Rights and our United States Constitution, and help We the People protect ourselves in the spirit of our Declaration of Independence.

  19. #19
    Campaign Veteran
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Lobelville, Tennessee, USA
    Posts
    2,615

    Post imported post

    since9 wrote:
    I'll bet the robbery victims wish the Toledo Blade editors had been the victims, instead.
    The criminals (ones that survived) are probably wishing that they had targeted the Toledo Blade editors, too. Would have been safer.

  20. #20
    Regular Member KansasMustang's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Herington, Kansas, USA
    Posts
    1,005

    Post imported post

    ixtow wrote:
    Grapeshot wrote:
    JeepSeller wrote:
    Grapeshot wrote:
    mark edward marchiafava wrote:
    It's not this type of criminal the 2nd amendment alludes to, but the class of criminal who would act under the color of law.
    So you are saying that the 2nd Amendment does NOT confirm the individual right to self-defense from other than the government?

    There are many here that understand/believe the 2A does confirm (not allude to) the RKBA in more than that singular aspect.

    Yata hey
    NOW, you're just tying to talk logic to him. Good luck with that.
    Its like trying to get a greased pig to speak the truth.

    If you can catch him, there is still the language barrier thing.

    Yata hey
    MEM has a group of hecklers that follow him around pretending not to know the meaning of his words....

    In much the same way that Hunting is not mentioned in the 2A, neither is self-defense. It's not there. It just isn't. This is a simple fact.

    It IS, however, a fringe benefit of the primary purpose. If you have arms to combat government, you can ALSO use them to hunt or defend yourself from smaller-scale criminals. In the same way that you have Eyes on the front of your head to see stuff so you don't run into it. You can ALSO use them to stare at boobies... That's not THE reason you have them, but A reason.

    Why everyone has to jump down his throat? He's only the troll you pretend he is... I find him more agreeable and rational than most of the rest of the LA posters...
    It's like wrestling with a pig in the mud, and arguing with a truck driver, you eventually give up when you figure out they both enjoy it.
    ‘‘Laws that forbid the carrying of arms... disarm only those who are neither inclined nor determined to commit crimes... Such laws make things worse for the assaulted and better for the assailants; they serve rather to encourage than to prevent homicides, for an unarmed man may be attacked with greater confidence than an armed man.’’ Thomas Jefferson

  21. #21
    Campaign Veteran since9's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Colorado Springs, Colorado, USA
    Posts
    6,787

    Post imported post

    KansasMustang wrote:
    It's like wrestling with a pig in the mud, and arguing with a truck driver, you eventually give up when you figure out they both enjoy it.
    Easy solution: Ignore the pig, shove the truck driver in the mud, and be done with it. Don't think either would enjoy it.
    The First protects the Second, and the Second protects the First. Together, they protect the rest of our Bill of Rights and our United States Constitution, and help We the People protect ourselves in the spirit of our Declaration of Independence.

  22. #22
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    Yorktown VA
    Posts
    110

    Post imported post

    since9 wrote:
    KansasMustang wrote:
    It's like wrestling with a pig in the mud, and arguing with a truck driver, you eventually give up when you figure out they both enjoy it.
    Easy solution: Ignore the pig, shove the truck driver in the mud, and be done with it. Don't think either would enjoy it.
    Thanks! I just blew coffee all over my keyboard...

Posting Permissions

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