Firearms Talk banner
301 - 320 of 394 Posts

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
8,025 Posts
You purposely driving your car into water is your action causing the water to damage your car. That's on you, choosing to cause the damage.
He purposely went to a area where he knew their was violent rioting and looting, he also i said he was in Kenosha to protect a car dealership from being vandalized and to provide medical aid. If you had firearms carry insurance i would be sure to read the small print before doing similar.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
5,458 Posts
Discussion Starter · #302 ·
He purposely went to a area where he knew their was violent rioting and looting, he also i said he was in Kenosha to protect a car dealership from being vandalized and to provide medical aid. If you had firearms carry insurance i would be sure to read the small print before doing similar.
Your causing water to harm your car = your fault.

Being present when criminals decide to attempt your murder = their fault.

Pretty simple, really. Irrespective of him being in a town he cared about and had "roots" in.
 

·
Administrator
Joined
·
860 Posts
Folks - if this thread devolves into dead-horse beating, we'll close it. I don't want that.

Let's also remember to treat each other well in our disagreements.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
5,458 Posts
Discussion Starter · #304 ·
And the "protests" have begun. Right on schedule, when "they" don't get what they want, matching the narrative they want played out.

I'm sure rioting won't be far behind. (Actually, in Portland Oregon there was an attempt to burn down some facilities. I'll bet this weekend turns out to be a "hot time in the city" in Portland, the way things are going.)

Gotta love violent criminals. Hopefully towns and cities have learned from their lunatic mistakes of the past year. Hopefully they'll deal with outright instances of rioting, arson, looting and the like. I somehow doubt it, but they've seen how their towns are going to end up if they do little to nothing.
 

·
Supporting Member
Joined
·
13,317 Posts
I agree with Manta and most of you regarding Protests are fine! But as stated, when it turns to Looting, Burning and citizens rights being infringed on. Then IMO it is time to use what ever force is required to terminate the Riots. And I do mean any amount of force needed! It is time to trash the liberal political correct BS and start kicking Arsssss or what ever.(y)

03
 
  • Like
Reactions: CHenry

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
5,458 Posts
Discussion Starter · #307 ·
Protests are fine, if they turn violent the police / legal authorities should deal with them.
Indeed they are.

But if they turn riotous, if any upstanding person gets targeted then that person has every right and authority to put a halt to that crime being perpetrated. (IOW, the person has to last long enough to call for the cavalry, and that isn't going to occur by simply asking the violent criminal to behave nicely until the police arrive.)
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
8,025 Posts
Indeed they are.

But if they turn riotous, if any upstanding person gets targeted then that person has every right and authority to put a halt to that crime being perpetrated. (IOW, the person has to last long enough to call for the cavalry, and that isn't going to occur by simply asking the violent criminal to behave nicely until the police arrive.)
Yes people caught in that situation have every right to defend themselves, for self preservation you learnt quickly here to avoid them situations if possible.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
1,485 Posts
Protests are fine, if they turn violent the police / legal authorities should deal with them.
And THAT has been the crux for some time, when the police are not allowed to deal with them, when they're told to stand down or back off, THAT is when people show up, with guns, to protect their buildings and their livelyhoods because the police won't. And THAT is exactly what's going on and THAT is perfectly legal.

The police have no obligation to protect you (or your property). In the cases DeShaney vs. Winnebago and Town of Castle Rock vs. Gonzales, the supreme court has ruled that police agencies are not obligated to provide protection of citizens. In other words, police are well within their rights to pick and choose when to intervene to protect the lives and property of others — even when a threat is apparent. So, in the absence of police protection, who, then, is responsible?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,997 Posts
And THAT has been the crux for some time, when the police are not allowed to deal with them, when they're told to stand down or back off, THAT is when people show up, with guns, to protect their buildings and their livelyhoods because the police won't. And THAT is exactly what's going on and THAT is perfectly legal.

The police have no obligation to protect you (or your property). In the cases DeShaney vs. Winnebago and Town of Castle Rock vs. Gonzales, the supreme court has ruled that police agencies are not obligated to provide protection of citizens. In other words, police are well within their rights to pick and choose when to intervene to protect the lives and property of others — even when a threat is apparent. So, in the absence of police protection, who, then, is responsible?
And while we're at it what would happen if say these window licking idiots had got their wish and the Police were defunded?

So what happens now in regards to law and Order as I'd guess not being paid would be a huge incentive not to hang around and so with the breakdown of law and order now comes the vigilante groups either looking to run towns/counties etc for their own good OR groups of people protecting their towns etc meaning that the whole place is going to end up like the Wild West except with better guns to play with and a mounting death toll as people take the law into their own hands.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
5,458 Posts
Discussion Starter · #312 ·
And while we're at it what would happen if say these window licking idiots had got their wish and the Police were defunded?
For some years, there have been smaller towns that have had zero cash for funding a policing department. And so, they've done without. THEY THEMSELVES are their enforcement of what's right and just. If they do happen to catch a criminal, they submit him to the county sheriff for processing. They don't act like vigilantes, like the "OMG, it'll be the Wild West!" types fear. They simply guard their homes and communities like you'd expect. Not every place has sufficient funds (or preference to fund) for an all-encompassing police agency that has the resources and staffing to completely insulate a community from evil. Even so, nothing disallows people in the U.S. from standing up for their own communities, even if they've hired additional help in the form of a department of staff.

Of course, any instances of such so-called "Wild West" crap needs to get dealt with for the crimes they represent. Same as anything else.

Can work well enough. People don't have to act as though we've relinquished forever our right and ability to "police" our own. Despite most having been brainwashed into imagining just that.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
5,458 Posts
Discussion Starter · #313 ·
So what happens now in regards to law and Order as I'd guess not being paid would be a huge incentive not to hang around and so with the breakdown of law and order now comes the vigilante groups ...
In many communities, we've long since had a "breakdown in law and order" with the presence of gangs. They've effectively become a permanent feature in many communities, plying their trafficking and drug vocations, to the detriment of all. Even in some of the largest, best-funded places in the U.S., even with tens of thousands of police, there simply aren't enough to catch such criminals and eliminate them.

The concern over a disastrous rise of vigilantism is merely that. Hasn't happened in any community I've heard of, in the U.S.

The thing about doing the right thing ... the upstanding know basically what that is. Crime's easy to understand. "Vigilantism" that goes to the "Wild West" end of the scale is something nearly anyone would recognize as such: crime, taking what they've no right or authority to take, to the detriment of others. In a community with enough good people acting like it, it'd be dealt with like anything else.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
3,449 Posts
Being a small business owner whose place of business is in a town 5 miles from where I live I can relate to the victims of rioting. It’s bad enough when some scumbag does a smash and grab of a couple thousand dollars worth of stuff but purposeful destruction is another thing. All the pleasant thoughts of insurance companies paying for it or police will take care of me are out the window. I’ll be down there armed to the teeth and ready to fight if my property is threatened. Now someone may call that irresponsible or reckless by I would not. And some have called Kyle Rittenhouse irresponsible and reckless but I do not.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
2,892 Posts
And while we're at it what would happen if say these window licking idiots had got their wish and the Police were defunded?

So what happens now in regards to law and Order as I'd guess not being paid would be a huge incentive not to hang around and so with the breakdown of law and order now comes the vigilante groups either looking to run towns/counties etc for their own good OR groups of people protecting their towns etc meaning that the whole place is going to end up like the Wild West except with better guns to play with and a mounting death toll as people take the law into their own hands.
People haven't changed much in the last 100K years or so. Not at their center. What we want is pretty much the same. What we do is pretty much the same. Just on a different scale.
I suspect if the dopes got what they wanted and no state run law enforcement was present, you would see exactly what you would expect.
Initial chaos, then gangs and warlord type setups, then someone would bring in hired guns to clean the place up. Those people would stay and become the warlord tribe.
Fuedalism, then revolution, maybe socialism, and if we are lucky, down the road some sort of democratic state.
Orrrr.... the Fed just comes in and says enough of that $hit.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,796 Posts
People haven't changed much in the last 100K years or so. Not at their center. What we want is pretty much the same. What we do is pretty much the same. Just on a different scale.
I suspect if the dopes got what they wanted and no state run law enforcement was present, you would see exactly what you would expect.
Initial chaos, then gangs and warlord type setups, then someone would bring in hired guns to clean the place up. Those people would stay and become the warlord tribe.
Fuedalism, then revolution, maybe socialism, and if we are lucky, down the road some sort of democratic state.
Orrrr.... the Fed just comes in and says enough of that $hit.
Funny how so many people want others to protect them from real or imagined dangers .
Then the protectors take on new protections to serve there agenda . Then we get victimized by the protectors.
Strange cycle but seems to happen every day .
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
3,449 Posts
I don’t know if we were even standing on 2 feet 100,000 years ago but yea if we lose control of our society and have to take care of ourselves things would be challenging. Everything would be localized so laws would be made up on the fly. Some places would devolve into war zones and others might actually prosper. It would be an experiment we should never try.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
2,892 Posts
I don’t know if we were even standing on 2 feet 100,000 years ago but yea if we lose control of our society and have to take care of ourselves things would be challenging. Everything would be localized so laws would be made up on the fly. Some places would devolve into war zones and others might actually prosper. It would be an experiment we should never try.
Lol! I was just describing the general evolution of society in the last 100K years. From the African plains to New York skyscrapers its all the same stuff. Just might look a little different here and there.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,796 Posts
People tend to group up in numbers for safety .
Mobs form to take actions on others .
Some are workers & some think they should have what the workers have without working .
Funny how happy people can be to elect people to screw us more .
Just the way people are .
Most want to read the news ...... not be part of the news .
No action is an action .
:)
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
8,025 Posts
.
THEY THEMSELVES are their enforcement of what's right and just. If they do happen to catch a criminal, they submit him to the county sheriff for processing. They don't act like vigilantes, like the "OMG, it'll be the Wild West!" types fear.
Some here did and still do set themselves up as wannabe police / vigilantes when they think the police are not up to the job, not a road you want to go down. They hand out their form of justice. As for not acting like vigilantes catching criminals and handing them over to the police ( Mr. Arbery, a 25-year-old Black man, was chased by armed white residents of a South Georgia neighborhood. They are now facing trial on murder charges )

Shoe Vertebrate Leg Road surface Black
Comfort Human body Sleeve Thigh Finger
 
301 - 320 of 394 Posts
Top