Should the looters be shot site if caught in the act of looting?

cnredd · Oct 5, 2005

C.J. said:
No need to cry "technical." Your own source verifies that LA has no Marshal Law statute.

Or "Martial Law" either...that's twice now...:roll:

C.J. said:
You may however point out the relevant clause in LA's "state of public health emergency" law.

I'd love to...too bad I don't see one...I have no idea what trip you're attempting to take me on here...

If YOU see something relevant, it's YOUR job to point it out...not for you to make someone go find it...

C.J. said:
And BTW, since when can a statute trump rights or the Constitution?

When did I say it did or it didn't?

http://www.legis.state.la.us/lss/lss.asp?doc=207682[/QUOTE]

I do like this sentence from your source...

A state of public health emergency may be declared by executive order or proclamation of the governor, following consultation with the public health authority, if he finds a public health emergency as defined in R.S. 29:762 has occurred or the threat thereof is imminent.

Any reason why this document thinks Gov. Blanco grew a penis?:doh

jamesrage · Oct 5, 2005

What in God's name are you babbling about? Are you frickin insane? Are you comparing Hitler to people stealing stuff cause no one's looking?
We're not talking about the death penalty here, we're talking about shooting people for stealing. Do you have no grasp on reality?

Jesus christ, man, jesus christ. You might want to check yourself into a mental health facility.

The point is you are a anti-death penalty nut-job,so naturally you are against any form of executions.It proably because you are a closet scumbag.How many homes have you broken into?

Pacridge · Oct 5, 2005

cnredd said:
That is a wonderful statement....

Woulda been better if it was correct...:2wave:

Assuming you mean "martial law"...I give you the following examples...

In 1892, at Coeur d'Alene, Idaho, rebellious mine workers blew up a mill and shot at strike-breaking workers. The explosion leveled a four-story building and killed one person. Mine owners asked the governor to declare martial law, which he did. At the same time, a request was made for federal troops to back guardsmen. Over 600 people were arrested. The list was whittled down to two dozen ring leaders who were tried in civil court. While in prison, the mine workers formed a new union, the Western Federation of Miners.

In 1914, imposition of martial law climaxed the so-called Coal Field Wars in Colorado. Dating back decades, the conflicts came to a head in Ludlow in 1913. The Colorado National Guard was called in to quell the strikers. For a time, the peace was kept, but it is reported that the make-up of the Guard stationed at the mines began to shift from impartial normal troops to companies of loyal mine guards. Clashes increased and the proclamation of martial law was made by the governor. President Wilson sent in federal troops, eventually ending the violence.

In 1934, California Governor Frank Merriam placed the docks of San Francisco under martial law, citing "riots and tumult" resulting from a dock worker's strike. The Governor threatened to place the entire city under martial law. The National Guard was called in to open the docks, and a city-wide institution of martial law was averted when goods began to flow. The guardsmen were empowered to make arrests and to then try detainees or turn them over to the civil courts.

If you wanna cry "technical", you can...from the same source...

On 8/26/2005, in the wake of Hurricane Katrina, New Orleans was placed under martial law after widespread flooding rendered civil authority ineffective. The state of Louisiana does not have an actual legal construct called "martial law," but instead something quite like it: a state of public health emergency. The state of emergency allowed the governor can suspend laws, order evacuations, and limit the sales of items such as alcohol and firearms. The governor's order limited the state of emergency, to end on 9/25/2005, "unless terminated sooner."

http://www.usconstitution.net/consttop_mlaw.html

"Limited the state of emergency"...

I guess she was waiting for a larger catastophy to lift the limits?...:roll:

Martial law and a "state of public health emergency" don't sound all that simular to me.

galenrox · Oct 5, 2005

jamesrage said:
The point is you are a anti-death penalty nut-job,so naturally you are against any form of executions.It proably because you are a closet scumbag.How many homes have you broken into?

um, how about NONE.

You are a textbook example of what is wrong with the whole "black and white" view of the world, and the right has become so PC with telling people that their stupid ideas are OK, when in fact, no, you're ideas are not ok, they're ridiculous and stupid.
It's true, I believe in a much higher standard for killing another human being, because from what I can tell you'd have jaywalkers lined up and shot. Last time I checked the rage filled janitors who want to kill people are typically more often the nut jobs than the college student who thinks that the cycle of violence should be slowed as opposed to perpetuated.

And you've drawn the wrong line of logic. I am not opposed to executing looters just because I'm opposed to the death penalty in general, I'm opposed to executing people for theft because I'M NOT INSANE, I'M NOT AN IDIOT, AND I UNDERSTAND THE CONCEPT OF PROPORTIONALITY.

They should be punished, they broke the law, but the only people who actually support killing them are insane people who need to get laid a little more often to relieve some of that stress that eggs on their lust for blood.

Have you ever heard the saying "Let the punishment fit the crime"?
Thus killing is not a justifiable punishment for stealing, it's just not, and if you disagree, then I'm really indifferent to your opinion because you're insane, and should be checked into a mental health facility.

So forget what the PC bastards on the right tell you, no, it's not OK to be a little hate filled man screaming for blood at any opportunity. You are insane and need help. And I'm being dead serious.

jamesrage · Oct 5, 2005

um, how about NONE.

You are a textbook example of what is wrong with the whole "black and white" view of the world, and the right has become so PC with telling people that their stupid ideas are OK, when in fact, no, you're ideas are not ok, they're ridiculous and stupid.
It's true, I believe in a much higher standard for killing another human being, because from what I can tell you'd have jaywalkers lined up and shot. Last time I checked the rage filled janitors who want to kill people are typically more often the nut jobs than the college student who thinks that the cycle of violence should be slowed as opposed to perpetuated.

And you've drawn the wrong line of logic. I am not opposed to executing looters just because I'm opposed to the death penalty in general, I'm opposed to executing people for theft because I'M NOT INSANE, I'M NOT AN IDIOT, AND I UNDERSTAND THE CONCEPT OF PROPORTIONALITY.

They should be punished, they broke the law, but the only people who actually support killing them are insane people who need to get laid a little more often to relieve some of that stress that eggs on their lust for blood.

Have you ever heard the saying "Let the punishment fit the crime"?
Thus killing is not a justifiable punishment for stealing, it's just not, and if you disagree, then I'm really indifferent to your opinion because you're insane, and should be checked into a mental health facility.

So forget what the PC bastards on the right tell you, no, it's not OK to be a little hate filled man screaming for blood at any opportunity. You are insane and need help. And I'm being dead serious.

Tell your self what ever you want you closet scumbag.I know that deep down inside you are only defending some of the criminal acts that you or one of your friends have commited.

galenrox · Oct 5, 2005

jamesrage said:
Tell your self what ever you want you closet scumbag.I know that deep down inside you are only defending some of the criminal acts that you or one of your friends have commited.

And tell your hallucinations that tell you to kill whatever you need to convince yourself that you're not crazy, but in fact we're crazy for not seeing them too.

C.J. · Oct 5, 2005

cnredd said:
Or "Martial Law" either...that's twice now...:roll:

My mistakes.Sometimes when I use my spell checker, I just blindly assume it is correct and punch fix.

cnredd said:
I'd love to...too bad I don't see one...I have no idea what trip you're attempting to take me on here...

You may be attempting to go on a trip, but not at my encouragement.

cnredd said:
If YOU see something relevant, it's YOUR job to point it out...not for you to make someone go find it...

The old bait and switch, huh. You stated; That is a wonderful statement....

Woulda been better if it was correct

So it's up to you to point out the incorrect statement, not keep us guessing.

cnredd said:
When did I say it did or it didn't?

When or where did I say you did? I just asked a question, you assumed and took it full circle. I guess the question was possibly a little suggestive though.

cnredd said:
I do like this sentence from your source...

A state of public health emergency may be declared by executive order or proclamation of the governor, following consultation with the public health authority, if he finds a public health emergency as defined in R.S. 29:762 has occurred or the threat thereof is imminent.

Any reason why this document thinks Gov. Blanco grew a penis?:doh

Actually it doesn't. It is perfectly acceptable to use the word he to refer to a person whose gender is unknown. You may look it up if need be.

From your previous post, I have more time now

cnredd said:
Assuming you mean "martial law"...I give you the following examples...

cnredd said:
In 1892, at Coeur d'Alene, Idaho, rebellious mine workers blew up a mill and shot at strike-breaking workers. The explosion leveled a four-story building and killed one person. Mine owners asked the governor to declare martial law, which he did. At the same time, a request was made for federal troops to back guardsmen. Over 600 people were arrested. The list was whittled down to two dozen ring leaders who were tried in civil court. While in prison, the mine workers formed a new union, the Western Federation of Miners.

In 1914, imposition of martial law climaxed the so-called Coal Field Wars in Colorado. Dating back decades, the conflicts came to a head in Ludlow in 1913. The Colorado National Guard was called in to quell the strikers. For a time, the peace was kept, but it is reported that the make-up of the Guard stationed at the mines began to shift from impartial normal troops to companies of loyal mine guards. Clashes increased and the proclamation of martial law was made by the governor. President Wilson sent in federal troops, eventually ending the violence.

In 1934, California Governor Frank Merriam placed the docks of San Francisco under martial law, citing "riots and tumult" resulting from a dock worker's strike. The Governor threatened to place the entire city under martial law. The National Guard was called in to open the docks, and a city-wide institution of martial law was averted when goods began to flow. The guardsmen were empowered to make arrests and to then try detainees or turn them over to the civil courts.

Nothing you stated contradicts anything I stated concerning LA or the Governor. So your point was what?

jallman · Oct 6, 2005

Personally I feel that if it were a time of Marshal Law...and for a while it should have been, then any crime we already have the death penalty for (such as murder and rape) where the perp is caught in the act, then yes, they should be shot on sight. However, looting is not on the same tier and we do not impose a death penalty for stealing for the same reasons we dont cut hands off for the same offense. Its barbaric and I think it would serve to perpetuate general uprising (and for good reason) if that were to be done. The situation in new orleans called for order and the shooting of general criminal mischief and opportunistic theft is not going to instill order, nor is it commensurate with the crime in general. However, being that a murderer or rapist is a strong threat to order, the immediate and expediant elimination of that threat falls well within the rights and duties of the governing authority in times of disorder.

Canuck · Oct 6, 2005

bush looted americas crown jewels wealth and its youth
what are the consequences for that
and sunny retirement in crawdad texas er crawford

Scardy · Oct 6, 2005

canuck, Bush has nothing to do with this.
There is no way looters should be shot on sight for taking non-essentials.
Getting itchy fingers over a television or computer nobody needs or is gonna use is hardly responsible. whatever you think of these people, shooting them is extreme for the crime, and a waste of bullets.
there are more important things to take care of down there than chasing down idiots with no sense of priorities.

jamesrage · Oct 6, 2005

bush looted americas crown jewels wealth and its youth
what are the consequences for that
and sunny retirement in crawdad texas er crawford

I beleave you posted in this thread section by mistake.

Here is the correct forum section for you to post in.
http://www.debatepolitics.com/forumdisplay.php?f=64

robin · Oct 6, 2005

"Should the Looters be shot ?"
You don't have the death penalty in the States for theft do you ?
Question answered yes... no?

Fantasea · Oct 6, 2005

So the looters emptied sporting goods stores of all kinds of guns and quantities of ammunition. They settled old scores, robbed people, shot at those who were trying to bring aid and comfort. That's just the current situation. The guns will be used to cause much misery in the future.

Nice guys, these looters.

Now, Texas has an alternate view of things. Click on the thumbnail to see what it is.

Pacridge · Oct 6, 2005

jamesrage said:
Tell your self what ever you want you closet scumbag.I know that deep down inside you are only defending some of the criminal acts that you or one of your friends have commited.

Let's not refer to other members as "scumbags."

galenrox · Oct 6, 2005

Pacridge said:
Let's not refer to other members as "scumbags."

yeah, but to a degree, that's his honest opinion, I think, as scary as that may be. I think he honestly believes that believing that theft does not warrant the death penalty is really just a cover for those who want to steal.
It ticks me off a tad, but then again I don't think he said it for the purpose of being uncivil, I think he was making an argument (I know, it's hard to tell)

C.J. · Oct 6, 2005

Fantasea said:
They settled old scores, robbed people, shot at those who were trying to bring aid and comfort.

If they are acting in such a manner as to threaten serious injury or death to others, then certainly, shoot them. But then again, in Louisiana that is the normal standard for using deadly force, so no shoot to kill order was needed by the governor.

jamesrage · Oct 6, 2005

yeah, but to a degree, that's his honest opinion, I think, as scary as that may be. I think he honestly believes that believing that theft does not warrant the death penalty is really just a cover for those who want to steal.
It ticks me off a tad, but then again I don't think he said it for the purpose of being uncivil, I think he was making an argument (I know, it's hard to tell)

You are correct.Most of the people I know who think burglers should not be shot,looters should be spared are thieves or former thieves themselves.Also I look at it as having sympathy for theives,looter,burglers and ect instead of having respect for order or sympathy for the victim.

galenrox · Oct 6, 2005

jamesrage said:
You are correct.Most of the people I know who think burglers should not be shot,looters should be spared are thieves or former thieves themselves.Also I look at it as having sympathy for theives,looter,burglers and ect instead of having respect for order or sympathy for the victim.

And you're wrong. I'm not a thief or a former thief, it's really as simple as that. And it's not sympathy for someone to believe that they shouldn't be shot, and it takes a twisted mind to think otherwise. I'm still baffled at your lack of respect of human life that you think that people should be killed for stealing.
And how exactly does shooting a thief make life any better for the victim, unless their thirst for blood is as insatiable as yours?

Fantasea · Oct 7, 2005

Looting has occurred sufficiently frequently in the past that everyone knows that little, if anything will be done to prevent it. So, opportunists take advantage of the opportunity knowing, full well, that no one is going to stop them.

And, if by some fluke, they should happen to be arrested, the odds are that nothing untoward will happen anyway.

Law enforcement personnel have been known to participate.

After a fire truck was dug out of the rubble of the collapsed World Trade Center, a load of new merchandise from a Gap store was found inside the cab. (As featured by William Langewiesche in his book, "American Ground: Unbuilding the World Trade Center".)

So why not help yourself? :lol:

Fantasea · Oct 7, 2005

jamesrage said:
You are correct.Most of the people I know who think burglers should not be shot,looters should be spared are thieves or former thieves themselves.Also I look at it as having sympathy for theives,looter,burglers and ect instead of having respect for order or sympathy for the victim.

It's a rare individual who will not make the most of an opportunity to enrich himself unjustly if he thinks he can get away with it.

Temptation is just too hard to resist.

cnredd · Oct 7, 2005

Fantasea said:
It's a rare individual who will not make the most of an opportunity to enrich himself unjustly if he thinks he can get away with it.

Temptation is just too hard to resist.

Remember last month when a plane went down in a field in South America and the locals were going through the dead people's pockets, looking for wallets and valuables?

Canuck · Oct 7, 2005

JOHNYJ said:
Allowing criminal looting like usualy happens in cities like NYC, L A, or Newark N.J. would be better controled and do less damage if the authorities took a more severe hand.
Newark is still a mess from the Criminal riots of the 60's. New York was saved because of ts size.

hahaha

wait untill America wakes up ,and sees how they are now apart of the third world.
and how the elite reemed you all,newark will be looking real fine then ,wait and see.
and in 10 -15 years time a terrorist finally makes it through to american soil and sets off a 200 megaton device.newark will be remembered as the good old days
i am from those good old days what is coming is shock and awe and when the hammer drops you will know what I mean.
The american dream is going the way of the dodo bird ! noone is imune to
a thief in the night not even NY
My heart goes out to americans ,get your duct tape ,and duck and cover directive booklets out ,your going to need them

cnredd · Oct 7, 2005

Canuck said:
hahaha

wait untill America wakes up ,and sees how they are now apart of the third world.
and how the elite reemed you all,newark will be looking real fine then ,wait and see.
and in 10 -15 years time a terrorist finally makes it through to american soil and sets off a 200 megaton device.newark will be remembered as the good old days
i am from those good old days what is coming is shock and awe and when the hammer drops you will know what I mean.
The america dream is going the way of the dodo bird !

Ya know...Heaven's Gate might be still looking for new members...

Canuck · Oct 7, 2005

ya I know
they mentioned you
My heart goes out to americans ,get your duct tape ,and duck and cover directive booklets out ,your going to need them

dragonslayer · Oct 7, 2005

Good lord, this is America, We encourage lawlessnes. Didn't we elect Bush?

No Soldier and police should not killl people unless they somehow represent an immediate danger. Looters need to be arrested and put to work at decent wages cleaning up flood damage. Most looters are probably hungry. and the rest are stupid.

Looters are not automatically dangerous. No Blanket right to kill should be given the police and Troops..

Should the looters be shot site if caught in the act of looting?

SHould looters be shot for looting non-essential items?

Yes

no

Major General Big Lug

ROCK AND ROLL MASTER

ROCK AND ROLL MASTER

Active member

Well-known member

New member

Attachments

ROCK AND ROLL MASTER

Active member

ROCK AND ROLL MASTER

Major General Big Lug

Well-known member

Major General Big Lug

Well-known member

Counselor

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency