Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Doomblade187]

What I'm saying is that since ICE policy was designed by fascists by in large, and fascism is inherently malicious due to being a bad faith ideology, ICE policy is malicious.

[RedKing]

Out here where most homeowners are armed, housebreakers are much, much rarer but much, much less inhibited.

Begs the question of why people would live out in rural areas, if you're under siege by hardened cannibal marauders all the time.

You usually only get, like, one of those a generation.

ETA: Actually, probably not even that. As far as I know, the last time someone's actual house got broken into in my community was before I was born. (It was drugs.) When we have to defend our property, it's virtually always outside the home (eg, outside and in outbuildings)... so it shouldn't surprise you that I don't hold this belief that defense of property is only legitimate against housebreakers.

So you're going on about the need to shoot trespassers and other property criminals because "ZOMG I AM THE LAST BEST HOPE FOR MY NEIGHBORS" and then admit this is a scenario that virtually never occurs outside your power-trip wet dreams. Nice.

What if somebody broke into your outbuilding because they're homeless and are looking for a place to not die in the elements? What if they stole a blanket off a clothesline? Is that a shooting offence?

Sounds like you'd have been right at home as a railway bull, beating up the hobos because they're desecrating the sanctity of an empty train car.

[Dunamisdeos]

The question I'm indirectly snarking around is: at what level of a "credible threat of suffering in order to prevent people from doing something" does the question of actual malice no longer matter?

I haven't said anything about that. I just said that it isn't malice when someone has neutral intentions but is really stupid about implementing them, because somebody called it malice. Whether it matters that it is or isn't malice is an uninteresting question to me because honestly I do not care.

Yeah, we know you haven't said anything about that, because faffing about with the webster-legal definition of some concept or other is how you've avoiding answer the question of whether or not it's worth killing people to protect your ego. Because frankly you've already established (despite lofty claims to the contrary) that absolutely nobody has ever threatened your life or the life of anyone near you, but even if they never did you'd shoot them once to disable them, and then another time in the head to end their life (because you were trying to kill them the first time), with the reason being you don't need one. You've chosen to put yourself and your own selfish interests above human life, and you clearly  don't even have the "moral foundation" required to so much as state your beliefs outright.
 
So thanks for establishing that the correlation between letting children die on the other side of an invisible line rather than expend the barest effort in helping them is you've chosen that both killing people and human suffering is a neutral topic to you, unless someone took shit from your shed.

In Short: https://youtu.be/fTItsm9meX8?t=1

[Cthulhu]

I have guns because they're cool.

[Rolan7]

Eating 1d6 investigators per round isn't enough, huh?!

[MrRoboto75]

Eating 1d6 investigators per round isn't enough, huh?!

There's always that one investigator that really thinks having a gun is going to save them or something

[Starver]

Investigator vs. Eldritch Abomination/Great Old One/Elder God Incarnate...
...foregone conclusion.

Investigator with a gun vs. Eldritch Abomination/Great Old One/Elder God Incarnate also with a gun..!
...do we really need to think about this?

[anewaname]

When a person operates outside of social expectations and inflicts stressful situations on others, they lose their own rights to social expectations.

Theft is a wrong solution to "I need to survive".

The gun can be the right solution or the wrong solution to theft, but it gives the choice to the gun-holder.

[Vector]

So, would you say that the police have lost their rights to social expectations? Because I hear that they've been inflicting stressful situations on others for a while now.

[Maximum Spin]

So you're going on about the need to shoot trespassers and other property criminals because "ZOMG I AM THE LAST BEST HOPE FOR MY NEIGHBORS" and then admit this is a scenario that virtually never occurs outside your power-trip wet dreams. Nice.

Uh, no, I'm not going on about that at all. I specifically said I don't expect or want this to ever happen. The very first time I brought it up. Subsequently, I argued that, in the unlikely event that it did happen, it's completely ethical. I'm not the last best hope for my neighbors anyway: we're all the last and only hope for each other. That's what a community is.

What if somebody broke into your outbuilding because they're homeless and are looking for a place to not die in the elements? What if they stole a blanket off a clothesline? Is that a shooting offence?

You want my honest answer? Yes. Being homeless doesn't give you the right to take from others. Of course I know other people will disagree. This is fine with me. I don't expend emotional effort caring about things outside my control; it's a waste of time and just makes people unhappy.

So, would you say that the police have lost their rights to social expectations? Because I hear that they've been inflicting stressful situations on others for a while now.

I feel like it's completely obvious that the answer to this is yes. Police, in fact, don't even have an inherent right to "social expectations" because they've chosen to put themselves in a position of pretended authority.
I'm quite glad to live in a world where the police don't give a shit about us and took six hours to show up the only time I've ever witnessed them being called in. Outside authority can go fuck itself, as can law.

[KittyTac]

I would probably shoot a home intruder, looking at it realistically.

Panic is hell of a drug. I would at least try to aim at the legs so they're immobilized and then call the police. If they die, then "play stupid games win stupid prizes".

[George_Chickens]

If somebody walks within an 800 meter radius of my property, I will backflip off the roof of my house, dual wielding M60s and blow them away.

[Kagus]

If somebody walks within an 800 meter radius of my property, I will backflip off the roof of my house, dual wielding M60s and blow them away.

I, too, enjoy the M60 as my self-defense weapon of choice.

[Maximum Spin]

If somebody walks within an 800 meter radius of my property, I will backflip off the roof of my house, dual wielding M60s and blow them away.

I, too, enjoy the M60 as my self-defense weapon of choice.

Soviet tanks are much cheaper. I know a guy who can get you into a T-34.
(Well, can, probably not would. But you could ask.)

[Starver]

That's just not cricket!

(But a T20 is...)