• We are now running on a new, and hopefully much-improved, server. In addition we are also on new forum software. Any move entails a lot of technical details and I suspect we will encounter a few issues as the new server goes live. Please be patient with us. It will be worth it! :) Please help by posting all issues here.
  • The forum will be down for about an hour this weekend for maintenance. I apologize for the inconvenience.
  • If you are having trouble seeing the forum then you may need to clear your browser's DNS cache. Click here for instructions on how to do that
  • Please review the Forum Rules frequently as we are constantly trying to improve the forum for our members and visitors.

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

P

PavePusher

Regular Member
Joined
Apr 26, 2007
Messages
1,096
Location
Tucson, Arizona, USA
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/article?AID=/20100319/OPINION02/3190305

"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.
 
C

Citizen

Founder's Club Member
Joined
Nov 15, 2006
Messages
18,269
Location
Fairfax Co., VA
imported post

PavePusher wrote:
http://toledoblade.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20100319/OPINION02/3190305

"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.
Click to expand...

"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.
 
Deanimator

Deanimator

Regular Member
Joined
Sep 21, 2007
Messages
2,083
Location
Rocky River, OH, U.S.A.
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.
Click to expand...
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.
 
J

jmelvin

Founder's Club Member
Joined
Jun 12, 2008
Messages
2,195
Location
Lynchburg, Virginia, USA
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.
 
Deanimator

Deanimator

Regular Member
Joined
Sep 21, 2007
Messages
2,083
Location
Rocky River, OH, U.S.A.
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.
Click to expand...
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.
 
Grapeshot

Grapeshot

Legendary Warrior
Joined
May 21, 2006
Messages
35,317
Location
Valhalla
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.
Click to expand...
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
 
J

JeepSeller

Regular Member
Joined
Apr 21, 2009
Messages
412
Location
Orlando, FL, ,
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.
Click to expand...
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
Click to expand...
NOW, you're just tying to talk logic to him. Good luck with that. :banghead::lol:
 
Grapeshot

Grapeshot

Legendary Warrior
Joined
May 21, 2006
Messages
35,317
Location
Valhalla
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.
Click to expand...
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
Click to expand...
NOW, you're just tying to talk logic to him. Good luck with that. :banghead::lol:
Click to expand...
Its like trying to get a greased pig to speak the truth. :lol:



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

Yata hey
 
ixtow

ixtow

Founder's Club Member
Joined
Nov 25, 2006
Messages
5,038
Location
Suwannee County, FL
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.
Click to expand...
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
Click to expand...
NOW, you're just tying to talk logic to him. Good luck with that. :banghead::lol:
Click to expand...
Its like trying to get a greased pig to speak the truth. :lol:

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

Yata hey
Click to expand...
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...
 
Grapeshot

Grapeshot

Legendary Warrior
Joined
May 21, 2006
Messages
35,317
Location
Valhalla
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
 
T

Task Force 16

Campaign Veteran
Joined
Jul 20, 2008
Messages
2,615
Location
Lobelville, Tennessee, USA
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.
Click to expand...
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.
 
ixtow

ixtow

Founder's Club Member
Joined
Nov 25, 2006
Messages
5,038
Location
Suwannee County, FL
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.
Click to expand...
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.
Click to expand...
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...
 
eye95

eye95

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 6, 2010
Messages
13,524
Location
Fairborn, Ohio, USA
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.
Click to expand...
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.
Click to expand...
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."
 
Grapeshot

Grapeshot

Legendary Warrior
Joined
May 21, 2006
Messages
35,317
Location
Valhalla
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.
Click to expand...
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.
Click to expand...
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."
Click to expand...
It is the empirical form - the queen mum would understand that. :)

Yata hey
 
Alexcabbie

Alexcabbie

Regular Member
Joined
Jul 21, 2008
Messages
2,288
Location
Alexandria, Virginia, United States
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":uhoh:

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......
 
T

Task Force 16

Campaign Veteran
Joined
Jul 20, 2008
Messages
2,615
Location
Lobelville, Tennessee, USA
imported post

since9 wrote:
I'll bet the robbery victims wish the Toledo Blade editors had been the victims, instead.
Click to expand...
The criminals (ones that survived) are probably wishing that they had targeted the Toledo Blade editors, too. :lol:Would have been safer.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top