now he doesn't need those silly little bullet hole decals!
"Newcomer" shot 3x in WalMart parking lot after...
- Thread starter Audi Junkie
- Start date
- Status
- Joined
- Sep 28, 2002
- Messages
- 39,799
Originally Posted By: tropic
Originally Posted By: Gary Allan
...a very savvy state trooper demonstrated to me how difficult a situation you're in if someone has the drop on you ..even if someone's just coming up to club you.....
I have a tiny Kel-Tec P-11 9mm for concealed carry, and I actually allowed a punk to take my watch and wallet while I was armed. It had nothing to do with courage, mercy, fear or morals--there was simply no opportunity to bring the weapon to bear during the encounter. He easily would have had the chance to put 2-3 rounds in me before I fired my first shot. I could have plinked away as he retreated; by that point my life wasn't in danger, so I just sucked it up. No one's life is worth less than the $40 in my wallet.
Yep, unless you're either in a situation where you've got the opportunity to disengage from the perp' (like being stalked on foot) and be at the ready ...or walk around 24/7 at tactical readiness ..there's not much you can do. Even that can have its liabilities if you end up exchanging fire from cover ..and he has two 15 round clips and you only have 1 smaller magazine (or a revolver). Not too many walk around in full tactical battle regalia 24/7. My friends who were LOE's were always carrying ..even shorts and a tee shirt meant a 2 shot derringer (probably replaced now with the 4 shot revolving bore type) and they were always observant of ..well, just about everything ... especially where robbery was at high potential (convenience stores ..etc.).
Now while I personally think that the world would be a better place without such anti-social creatures infesting it, I hardly want to make the wages of all sin ..death. I would have surely exchanged any involvement with the justice system if I could have had a leisurely 10 minutes with the guy who stole my minivan. A righteous stomping would have quenched my rage and included all repayment for my "pain and suffering". That, and my minivan back in good shape, would have negated the need to send him to jail. He would have had a lifetime of shear horror to reflect upon in his future leanings toward such activities.
Originally Posted By: Gary Allan
...a very savvy state trooper demonstrated to me how difficult a situation you're in if someone has the drop on you ..even if someone's just coming up to club you.....
I have a tiny Kel-Tec P-11 9mm for concealed carry, and I actually allowed a punk to take my watch and wallet while I was armed. It had nothing to do with courage, mercy, fear or morals--there was simply no opportunity to bring the weapon to bear during the encounter. He easily would have had the chance to put 2-3 rounds in me before I fired my first shot. I could have plinked away as he retreated; by that point my life wasn't in danger, so I just sucked it up. No one's life is worth less than the $40 in my wallet.
Yep, unless you're either in a situation where you've got the opportunity to disengage from the perp' (like being stalked on foot) and be at the ready ...or walk around 24/7 at tactical readiness ..there's not much you can do. Even that can have its liabilities if you end up exchanging fire from cover ..and he has two 15 round clips and you only have 1 smaller magazine (or a revolver). Not too many walk around in full tactical battle regalia 24/7. My friends who were LOE's were always carrying ..even shorts and a tee shirt meant a 2 shot derringer (probably replaced now with the 4 shot revolving bore type) and they were always observant of ..well, just about everything ... especially where robbery was at high potential (convenience stores ..etc.).
Now while I personally think that the world would be a better place without such anti-social creatures infesting it, I hardly want to make the wages of all sin ..death. I would have surely exchanged any involvement with the justice system if I could have had a leisurely 10 minutes with the guy who stole my minivan. A righteous stomping would have quenched my rage and included all repayment for my "pain and suffering". That, and my minivan back in good shape, would have negated the need to send him to jail. He would have had a lifetime of shear horror to reflect upon in his future leanings toward such activities.
Quote:
...shear horror...
http://visualstreak.com/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/2008/04/scissor-spiders2.jpg
...shear horror...
http://visualstreak.com/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/2008/04/scissor-spiders2.jpg
Don't open the bottle if you don't want to deal with the genie.
- Joined
- Sep 28, 2002
- Messages
- 39,799
Originally Posted By: Julian
I actually have nothing to say, I'm just stepping in to cuddle up where it's warm. Please continue.
What do you think, Julian ..can we get a more draconian version of The People's Court?? One where both parties agree to settle it outside the criminal justice system ..on live television???
This could be a prelude to The Running Man type of entertainment. We can start it as an alternative to the "cop'in a plea to a lesser charge" modality of clearing the court quicker.
Choose one of the following:
A: Cop a plea to a fixed prenegotiated sentence
B: Take a good dose of major whooparse from the victim
C: Whatever is behind door #3 (jury trial).
I actually have nothing to say, I'm just stepping in to cuddle up where it's warm. Please continue.
What do you think, Julian ..can we get a more draconian version of The People's Court?? One where both parties agree to settle it outside the criminal justice system ..on live television???
This could be a prelude to The Running Man type of entertainment. We can start it as an alternative to the "cop'in a plea to a lesser charge" modality of clearing the court quicker.
Choose one of the following:
A: Cop a plea to a fixed prenegotiated sentence
B: Take a good dose of major whooparse from the victim
C: Whatever is behind door #3 (jury trial).
I think it's important to take note of the fact that there are many, many "criminal justice systems" operating within any given kind of society. It happens any time people enact judgment on another person, in a sense. The real question is about legitimacy in my mind, which is more specifically to say how well the system of justice is matched with the society it serves (I vaguely remember some maniac raving about this at length in a few of the more aged "ethics" threads on here). "The People's Court" is exactly that. You are trying to endorse the values of the majority of the society (with force hopefully taking a back seat in that endeavor). That is the real meaning a "justice" system carries for me. The Salem witch trials were a legitimate expression of that society's values as far as I can understand them (even though the solidity of their reasoning might have been questionable from my point of view), and so were "just" in that arena. I truly don't believe altruism exists, so to start breathing fire about how one person takes advantage of another and how this or that situation is unfair seems kind of pointless to me, or is at least belaboring the obvious (which is probably a better way to state it). Justice is not a "personal" or "forensic" concept to me. Vox populi, vox Dei. [You are acquitted, Captain Crocker.]
One thing I've noticed is that formal affairs are often generated out of informal ones through what I would consider a completely natural process. I'm probably not the person you want to talk with about the history of law, but I'm sure the judicial system we have now didn't just spring out of the ground. Necessity is the mother of invention, as they say. The thing some people don't seem to realize is that... it's a completely natural process. It doesn't stop. The real "Charles Bronson" (or some literary equivalent) situations aren't coming out of nowhere; those circumstances are (often admittedly) an informal reflection of a developing failure (and a need) within a system like any other, which is perhaps simply a failure of the system to adapt rapidly enough to the demands of the society (for whatever reason, and perhaps a large part of that responsibility lies with the criminals themselves) or much more seriously, as a disregard for the demands of the society. What I see that bothers me, and have gotten better at seeing, is when people try to use those realizations as a vehicle for notarizing their conduct in "personal matters". It's the same kind of mechanism as "we're doing it for the children", and a bold variety of hypocrisy.
One thing I've noticed is that formal affairs are often generated out of informal ones through what I would consider a completely natural process. I'm probably not the person you want to talk with about the history of law, but I'm sure the judicial system we have now didn't just spring out of the ground. Necessity is the mother of invention, as they say. The thing some people don't seem to realize is that... it's a completely natural process. It doesn't stop. The real "Charles Bronson" (or some literary equivalent) situations aren't coming out of nowhere; those circumstances are (often admittedly) an informal reflection of a developing failure (and a need) within a system like any other, which is perhaps simply a failure of the system to adapt rapidly enough to the demands of the society (for whatever reason, and perhaps a large part of that responsibility lies with the criminals themselves) or much more seriously, as a disregard for the demands of the society. What I see that bothers me, and have gotten better at seeing, is when people try to use those realizations as a vehicle for notarizing their conduct in "personal matters". It's the same kind of mechanism as "we're doing it for the children", and a bold variety of hypocrisy.
- Joined
- Sep 28, 2002
- Messages
- 39,799
I agree ..and claim no exclusive exemption. (for once being able to comprehend the entire post without losing the forest view due to all the trees in the way).
- Status
Similar threads
