• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Don’t defend the cowards who abuse the Second Amendment[W:58:339]

Re: Don’t defend the cowards who abuse the Second Amendment[W:58]

danielpalos said:
Your side claims the "family guy" had Bad Intentions, yet cannot show any other than defense of self and family.
Click to expand...

Felonious assault, is not defense. Verbal discussions do not rise to requiring felonious assault to end the conversation, when walking away is still available. That foundation is the fault in your entire argument.

What you are trying to argue is the very circumstances of Stand Your Ground. Yet your argument fails to recognize that there was no assault by the man that was assaulted. Your entire argument is reversed - and ironic.

PS - My side is the one with the law, the facts, and the truth. Nothing else, nothing less.
 
Re: Don’t defend the cowards who abuse the Second Amendment[W:58]

danielpalos said:
defend himself from what? the shooter was not an authorized parking enforcement posse member or parking regulator.
Click to expand...

Defend himself from physical violence.
 
Re: Don’t defend the cowards who abuse the Second Amendment[W:58]

Beaudreaux said:
Felonious assault, is not defense. Verbal discussions do not rise to requiring felonious assault to end the conversation, when walking away is still available. That foundation is the fault in your entire argument.

What you are trying to argue is the very circumstances of Stand Your Ground. Yet your argument fails to recognize that there was no assault by the man that was assaulted. Your entire argument is reversed - and ironic.

PS - My side is the one with the law, the facts, and the truth. Nothing else, nothing less.
Click to expand...

He was "standing his ground for self and family", and unarmed at the time.

He was shot by an Armed person, while "standing His ground" if not Ceding Ground, due to a lack of Bad intentions.
 
Re: Don’t defend the cowards who abuse the Second Amendment[W:58]

danielpalos said:
He was "standing his ground for self and family", and unarmed at the time.

He was shot by an Armed person, while "standing His ground" if not Ceding Ground, due to a lack of Bad intentions.
Click to expand...

My last attempt: he had nothing to stand his ground against. Neither he nor his wife were being physically harmed or even threatened with physical harm.

He was the aggressor. He paid the price for the choice he made to physically assault the man.

Read my sig.
 
Re: Don’t defend the cowards who abuse the Second Amendment[W:58]

danielpalos said:
He had a Gun; simply brandishing the Gun was enough. There was no need to fire the weapon.
Click to expand...

isn't that a determination the DA or the grand jury should make?
 
Re: Don’t defend the cowards who abuse the Second Amendment[W:58]

danielpalos said:
He had a Gun; simply brandishing the Gun was enough. There was no need to fire the weapon.
Click to expand...

Nonsense. "Brandishing" a weapon is a stupid invitation for a physically more powerful attacker (as in this case) to take it. Never draw your weapon unless you intend to use it. The shooter's action was entirely appropriate.
 
Re: Don’t defend the cowards who abuse the Second Amendment[W:58]

OlNate said:
Holy ****, dude, that is some wild ****. Random question, but if you had to guess, how common an occurrence is that down there?

I mean, I've got into a couple of road rage instances in my life...one guy messed with me so bad I chased his ass down for a few blocks before realizing I had turned into a crazy person and went home...so I know how it can get out of hand. I got into another altercation where a guy did the stop in front of me thing, and I had my seatbelt off, and was getting ready to defend myself, but maybe the guy had the same moment that I did when I was chasing that other jackass down, as he turned around, got back in his car, and drove off... (Side note, both guys I got into it with were driving BMW's...wtf is it with BMW drivers???) But I've never seen the kind of stuff in this video up here...
Click to expand...

Hehe, you should see other video's I've seen, particularly Russian drivers (they don't mess around!). That video was actually tame. But to answer your question, it is a fairly common occurrence. Personally I've never had it happen to me but I don't think that there is a day that goes by that it doesn't happen. At least I see it in news reports quite often anyways.
 
Re: Don’t defend the cowards who abuse the Second Amendment[W:58]

lurchadams said:
Yes, and if in Florida, if one person has a gun instead of just yelling at each other in a road range, the other would be dead.
Click to expand...

I could provide a video with some road rages where a gun was displayed. Never seen anyone actually shoot another person in a road rage. Usually as soon as the gun is displayed the other party backs off and the altercation is done.
 
Re: Don’t defend the cowards who abuse the Second Amendment[W:58]

Kal'Stang said:
I could provide a video with some road rages where a gun was displayed. Never seen anyone actually shoot another person in a road rage. Usually as soon as the gun is displayed the other party backs off and the altercation is done.
Click to expand...


Google “Road Rage Shooting.” Too many examples to post links.......:doh
 
Re: Don’t defend the cowards who abuse the Second Amendment[W:58]

Rexedgar said:
Google “Road Rage Shooting.” Too many examples to post links.......:doh
Click to expand...

I'm not saying that it wouldn't or doesn't happen. But in road rage it is rather easy to tell what happened and who was/wasn't the aggressor as there's usually a lot of witnesses.
 
Re: Don’t defend the cowards who abuse the Second Amendment[W:58]

Howard the Duck said:
I don't talk with people who look like trumpites. I operate under the assumption that they are stupid, scared to death, and armed.
Click to expand...

I can only imagine your shock when you find out millions of well dressed, mild mannered, successful white, black, Asian, and Hispanic people also voted for Trump.
Kinda blows your "trumpite" theory all to hell, doesn't it?

You will never find a person more disillusioned than a hard-core liberal who has just been mugged and beaten up by an inner city black thug who voted Democrat.

Their world just got turned Topsy-turvy.
 
Last edited:
Re: Don’t defend the cowards who abuse the Second Amendment[W:58]

Kal'Stang said:
I could provide a video with some road rages where a gun was displayed. Never seen anyone actually shoot another person in a road rage. Usually as soon as the gun is displayed the other party backs off and the altercation is done.
Click to expand...

Go to Youtube and enter "Road Rage Shooting" and watch what happens.
 
Re: Don’t defend the cowards who abuse the Second Amendment[W:58]

Beaudreaux said:
My last attempt: he had nothing to stand his ground against. Neither he nor his wife were being physically harmed or even threatened with physical harm.

He was the aggressor. He paid the price for the choice he made to physically assault the man.

Read my sig.
Click to expand...

Yes, he did. He had family being harassed by an Armed gunman.
 
Re: Don’t defend the cowards who abuse the Second Amendment[W:58]

Jack Hays said:
Nonsense. "Brandishing" a weapon is a stupid invitation for a physically more powerful attacker (as in this case) to take it. Never draw your weapon unless you intend to use it. The shooter's action was entirely appropriate.
Click to expand...

No, it isn't. Why claim it is. Any gun lover will gainsay Your contention.
 
Re: Don’t defend the cowards who abuse the Second Amendment[W:58]

jet57 said:
Go to Youtube and enter "Road Rage Shooting" and watch what happens.
Click to expand...

lots of "good shoots" on youtube

one of the best comes from south of the border where a gun brandishing robber gets wasted

warning, if you feel sorry for armed robbers don't watch



Bank guard whacks mope



off duty lady cop whacks asshole

 
Re: Don’t defend the cowards who abuse the Second Amendment[W:58]

danielpalos said:
The Jury.
Click to expand...

are you aware of the fact that if the GJ refuses to indict or the DA refuses to take the case to the GJ a petit jury will never hear the case?
 
Re: Don’t defend the cowards who abuse the Second Amendment[W:58]

danielpalos said:
No, it isn't. Why claim it is. Any gun lover will gainsay Your contention.
Click to expand...

I don't know what you mean by "gun lover" or why you think that's important. My statement stands.
 
Re: Don’t defend the cowards who abuse the Second Amendment[W:58]

lots of "good shoots" on youtube
Click to expand...

Yeah, he thinks people shooting people is a good thing.
 
Re: Don’t defend the cowards who abuse the Second Amendment[W:58]

jet57 said:
Yeah, he thinks people shooting people is a good thing.
Click to expand...

its often the best alternative in a bad situation. Gun banners tend to excuse or even enable criminals and thus are upset when good people with guns kill violent criminals who attack them,
 
Re: Don’t defend the cowards who abuse the Second Amendment[W:58]

TurtleDude said:
its often the best alternative in a bad situation. Gun banners tend to excuse or even enable criminals and thus are upset when good people with guns kill violent criminals who attack them,
Click to expand...

To be fair, did they even try just letting the violent criminal stomp them to death?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom