Re: Chaos in New Orleans
 

[ QUOTE ]


mur·der (mûrdr)
n.
The unlawful killing of one human by another, especially with premeditated malice.

[/ QUOTE ]

From the same site you will find the definition I quoted under "murder" when used as a verb. It's an accepted definition. We'll just have to agree to disagree about our own particular usage of the word.

What am I doing in the politics forum anyway? I've always avoided having serious discussions with the likes of most of the people (as far as I can tell, not you sheet) who post in here, yet found a way to get myself involved this time.

Shame on me!

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v4...a/billplas.jpg

<font color="white">We now return you to your regularly scheduled BS and proaganda. </font>

Re: Chaos in New Orleans
 

In your last post directed toward me you wrote...

&gt;&gt;Well, it doesn't tell me everything about you, but it does tell me that you aren't really worth more of my valuable thought.&lt;&lt;

So why do you continue to address me?

BTW - "valuable thought"... ROTFLMAO

Re: Chaos in New Orleans
 

[ QUOTE ]

BTW - "valuable thought"... ROTFLMAO

[/ QUOTE ]

I included that just for you. [img]/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img]

Have a nice day, guys. Honestly, I know that almost everyone here, regardless of our disagreements, wants nothing but the best for the people of NO.

Re: Chaos in New Orleans
 

[ QUOTE ]
... yet found a way to get myself involved this time.

[/ QUOTE ]

Probably because it's a good group. We all go over the top now and then, and we probably all keep on beating a little too long after the horse has died.

[img]/images/graemlins/wink.gif[/img]

Re: Chaos in New Orleans
 

[ QUOTE ]
Have a nice day, guys. Honestly, I know that almost everyone here, regardless of our disagreements, wants nothing but the best for the people of NO.

[/ QUOTE ]

Concensus.

Re: Chaos in New Orleans
 

&gt;&gt;Have a nice day, guys. Honestly, I know that almost everyone here, regardless of our disagreements, wants nothing but the best for the people of NO. &lt;&lt;

Ditto.

nh.

Re: Chaos in New Orleans
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
... but his bloodlust is blinding him here.

[/ QUOTE ]

No bloodlust. I believe shoot-on-sight should be a stated policy. To make the policy work, you need to be willing to carry it out. No reasonable person would expect an officer to shoot before asking an offender to halt -- and no reasonable looter would not jhalt if he believed the officer would shoot. It's simply publicly declaring that the city will not put up with the crap we're seeing now. Eventually, I believe, they will make this policy.

[/ QUOTE ]

First off, the bloodlust comment was a joke, hence the smiley. I noticed that you ignored the substance of my post.
Shooting people for looting is a gross violation of their fundamental right to life. Im not sure what is so hard to grasp about that.

Re: Chaos in New Orleans
 

[ QUOTE ]
Shooting people for looting is a gross violation of their fundamental right to life. Im not sure what is so hard to grasp about that.

[/ QUOTE ]
This is about law and order. Here's a hypothetical-

An officer walks into a room where there is a dead body. He doesn't know if a crime has been committed, or if any of the 10 people in the room did it -- but they all look guilty. He draws his weapon and says "Don't anybody move." You reach into your pocket for a cigarette, and he shoots you. He didn't shoot you for smoking -- he shot you for moving. He's one against ten, and he's trying to control the situation. You get shot for not cooperating.

N.O. is a situation where there are bodies everywhere. The police have requested everyone cooperate in evacuating the city. People who are not attempting to evacuate look guity. Shots are being fired, people are being killed, and looting is taking place. The police want to control the situation ...

Re: Chaos in New Orleans
 

[ QUOTE ]
He didn't shoot you for smoking -- he shot you for moving. He's one against ten, and he's trying to control the situation. You get shot for not cooperating.

[/ QUOTE ]
Actually this is wrong. He shoots you for making what he perceives as a threatening (possibly life-threatening) move. The act of looting is not life-threatening to the police or public at large. You know, I always heard that theives in places like Saudi Arabia had their hands cut off. Interesting that some here are advocating an even higher punishment...

Re: Chaos in New Orleans
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]


mur•der (mûrdr)
n.
The unlawful killing of one human by another, especially with premeditated malice.

[/ QUOTE ]

From the same site you will find the definition I quoted under "murder" when used as a verb. It's an accepted definition. We'll just have to agree to disagree about our own particular usage of the word.

What am I doing in the politics forum anyway? I've always avoided having serious discussions with the likes of most of the people (as far as I can tell, not you sheet) who post in here, yet found a way to get myself involved this time.

Shame on me!

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v4...a/billplas.jpg

<font color="white">We now return you to your regularly scheduled BS and proaganda. </font>

[/ QUOTE ]

.....Why "shame on you"?

You got involved in this discussion because you have strong beliefs about the subject and you are passionate about those beliefs.

In todays' PC world, it appears that many cannot differentiate between passion and emotion. I don’t want to turn this into some sort of intellectual discussion, but it’s a point that I feel should be made regarding your thoughts in this string.

IMO, any opinion worth having should have been arrived at after some serious thought, Opinions formulated in this fashion should be passionately held. Opinions formed via some sort of a knee-jerk emotional reaction are not worth the powder to blow them to hell.

I don’t see your responses as ‘emotional’....I do see them as ‘passionate’. I do believe that I can differentiate between the two. Your below post in an earlier string makes this perfectly clear to me.

[ QUOTE ]

Am I emotional about people advocating more violence which won't solve anything?
Yes.

Am I emotional about people advocating the death of others?
Yes.

Can I still remain objective about my own opinions and the topic at hand?
Yes

[/ QUOTE ].

FWIW......get used to being attacked when you hold opinions passionately....It’s part of the price that you pay. There should be no shame in that.......except to those who rush to judgment too quickly.........