[W:277] Florida's DeSantis moves to allow citizens to shoot looters, rioters targeting businesses

[Daddyo]

White guy kills an unarmed black guy. Yawn.

You do realize that unarmed doesn't mean unable to kill or seriously injured dont you?

You probably didn't even watch the trial did you? Just another sucker parroting the lefts talking points.

This world is filled with people like you. The grave yard is filled with people like you. The belief that unarmed equals not life threatening. In my studies i have seen people killed by a single punch. I have seen police have their facial bones crushed or skulls fractured by a single punch. Its comical to watch idiots toss out "unarmed" to make a point that it somehow means deadly force was unjustified lol.

Do some study on the subject and have your eyes opened. As mine were frankly. The human animal is very capable of causing death or great bodily injury without weapons. And they can do this with lightning speed. One or two quick punches and you become defenseless. If they don't stop you're dead or a vegetable. What weapon did the cop use on George Floyd to kill him? His knee! Thats the point. Recently a police officer had his face shattered with one punch. Unarmed doesn't equal no threat. I have seen it dozens of times in my life. I have felt it a couple times in the dojo.

Trayvon was beating George with such force that death was not only a possibility but more likely with every blow. Zimmermans head was on concrete amplifying the effect to boot. Wake up buddy.

 

[bongsaway]

And if you cant afford the extremely high premiums then what? You gonna pitch in? You wage earners always think that the business owner is rolling in cash. You only see the good parts. You never remember the slow downs that cause owners to pull from savings to keep the thing going or the months with little or no pay trying to stretch things till the money starts coming back in. Now its insurance for riots, 11 percent tax increases, and regulations from hell lol. Start a business and then talk your crap lol.

Didn't you just say not financially in your previous post? If business was so difficult for you there was nothing stopping you from going to work for someone else, no? So I guess in the long run it was worth it, no? So to me you fall into the business owners who whine about how hard they had to work to get where they are. Nobody forced you to own a business. You as an owner seem to only see the parts you don't like.

 

[Daddyo]

But one could be harmed by a trigger happy civilian who mistakes you for a looter. That's the problem. But I looked up the law and could find nothing that relates to what we are arguing about. Does anyone have text that frees a person from liability if he shoots a presumed looter?

I agree. You could also be murdered by a trigger happy civilian who mistakes you for anything. If it is proven that you were not rioting or looting then the law no longer protects you. Same as today if you misuse current law on the use of deadly force. Happens regularly actually. People falsely claim self defense all the time. Having to be sure should reduce the mistakes.

They will clean it up for sure before passing it if they are able to pass it.

 

[Daddyo]

Bullshit. Here are the thugs at the MI state house (not the ones who attempted to kidnap the governor, these were other right wing thugs).

View attachment 67305717

A man screaming is your idea of a riot? This is called reaching lol. You used this because you had trouble finding right wing rioters. Even with media who cover up leftwing violence and manufacture right wing anything and you can't find an example.

You might eventually but its rare which was my point. I can find 100's of examples of you guys rioting in seconds. I can find you guys attacking peaceful right wing protesters forcing them to fight but thats not rioting.

Nice try though.

 

[Daddyo]

Really? Commentary I have seen suggests the Gov was trying to imitate Trump for political reasons. I view it as similar to Trump's dick-waving when he suggested that we "take out the families" of terrorists. Of course that's a war crime, for which allies executed Nazis, and that presumably should get pro-lifers upset, since families might include pregnant women.

Nope doesn't upset me at all. Terrorists kill innocent Americans at every opportunity. They hide behind "innocent" family and civilians to prevent us from killing them like cowards.

As to the DeSantis proposed law, it needs refining but I like it and its needed since police have proven unwilling or unable to prevent death and destruction cause by illegal and violent rioters.

 

[Daddyo]

You may not see it that way, but when you take the law into your own hands, deciding who is guilty, who is not, and then shooting the guilty, you are, IMO, acting as a vigilante.

To your last point, yes, technically the law, if enacted, would be a deputization of a business owner to be investigator, prosecutor, judge, jury, and executioner. Thus it's not extra-legal in the way that actual vigilantes are, but it really isn't a meaningful distinction.

The definition of vigilante is a citizen who takes on enforcing the law without legal authority. Self defense is not taking on enforcing the law it saving your ass.

So I would have to go out and protect other peoples businesses before it becomes vigilante justice.

Self protection/defense without a doubt is absolutely NOT acting as a vigilante. It the most basic of human rights.

 

[Daddyo]

Broaden your perspective a bit and consider the full history of the human failing of racism. Do you really think it's limited to support of who owns what business?

I'm speaking of today? Historical racism was not good. Fast forward to today and being hispanic or black is actually a benefit. Affirmative action and other benefits give preferential treatment to minorities. Yes racism was a big problem back in time I would agree but not these days.

 

[Daddyo]

Hi Daddyo

I read back back a couple of your posts as well before just replying to this.

First of all; I applaud your self constraint! Well done mate!

I think you and I are much more alike than you realize. Yes I do not like violence. Neither do you. In your previous post you meticulously explained how you were prepared but did everything reasonably within your power to prevent the used of deadly force. And it worked out great for you. I wish more people were like that. And fortunately there are more people like that.

And like I described in a follow up post, but before your post, I would also defend myself. All I am saying s that we should always try to do everything we can to avoid the use of force and the use of violence. There is, however, a major difference in setting between you and me. It does not change the thinking behind it, but it changes the physical outcome.

Where I come from it is not allowed to have firearms other than in a very tightly controlled set of regulations. Nobody is allowed to carry a gun in the street full stop. If you own a gun you will be screened. You can only carry your gun in a locked case from and to the range. Bullets and weapon have to be physically separated and packed in different cases. Also inside your own house. You can not have guns on display in your own house. This has resulted in a low instance of use of guns in the streets.

Where you live it is fairly easy to buy a gun and a rather large proportion of the population has guns, owns guns, and would therefore use guns.

The bottom line is that you do not like violence as much as I do as you have shown in Florida.

All I am essentially saying is that we should try to avoid the use of violence as much as we can. And that the constitution in your country allows you to carry firearms and there is therefore a different baseline to start of from doesn't change the concept of what I tried to project.

And that is try not to use violence. And one of the reasons for doing so, is by taking away the reasons why people get angry and violent.

So the only part where I disagree with you is where you state that this is one of the most unrealistic posts you have ever read. Even though you admitted the comment is for debate purposes only. Lol.

Joey

Remember we are talking about riots and looting here. You were talking appeasement as a method of preventing this activity. Our local liberals have proven that appeasement doesn't work. In many reasons for riots the police were justified in the use of deadly force yet the community still riots. Liberal leaders even allowed them to "vent" to remove that pent up anger and I didn't work. So I believe possibly our disagreement simply revolves around riot response as I am all for trying to prevent it. Once a riot has begun it should be crushed immediately and all captured participants prosecuted immediately. Our liberal leaders were releasing them before the riot they got caught at was even over. That's the level of ignorance we are dealing with.

Your country has different mindsets than our. Here thugs dont care about life or killing. Means nothing to them. Thus we are a.more violent people because of them.

In reality if you removed the 10 worst cities crime stats from our country (all liberal run mind you) violent crime in America would all bit disappear. America would be one of if not the safest place in the world to live.

So yes MOST of us are good people. Even most of these dumb ass liberals on this board lol.

 

[NatMorton]

The definition of vigilante is a citizen who takes on enforcing the law without legal authority. Self defense is not taking on enforcing the law it saving your ass.

So I would have to go out and protect other peoples businesses before it becomes vigilante justice.

Self protection/defense without a doubt is absolutely NOT acting as a vigilante. It the most basic of human rights.

You're moving the goalposts here. We're talking about defending property, not one's self. In post #172 I give an example of the difference.

One already has the right to self-defense without this bill becoming law, so self-defense is not a credible argument in favor of it.

 

[NatMorton]

I'm speaking of today? Historical racism was not good. Fast forward to today and being hispanic or black is actually a benefit. Affirmative action and other benefits give preferential treatment to minorities. Yes racism was a big problem back in time I would agree but not these days.

I agree racism is far less of an issue -- by that I mean an impediment to achievement -- than it was even 50 years ago. I still wouldn't call minority status a "benefit," however. If nothing else, in many parts of the country you're subject to a constant drumbeat of cultural messages that tell you why you can't accomplish something.

 

[JoeyJoystick]

Your country has different mindsets than our. Here thugs dont care about life or killing. Means nothing to them. Thus we are a.more violent people because of them.

Hi Daddyo,

I think that is true. I'll give you a few examples of things as I see them in The Netherlands. Sure there are exceptions, but as a rule of thumb, I think I am pretty close.

- Most killings are inside the world of criminals. Killing each other. (I kinda like this concept. They solve their own problems for us...)
- Mass shootings are virtually unheard of.
- Owning a gun is frowned upon by most. And as I pointed out in an earlier post, owning a gun is just not easy in Holland. Very strict rules regarding getting a gun, choosing a gun, keeping a gun and using a gun.
- I remember years ago (about 20 I guess) there was a money delivery truck heist in broad daylight. This was done on a road parallel to the busiest highway in Holland. But separated by a small canal. They explained the drivers it was safer to get out. They than blew up the rear door with an RPG. This was (and still is I think) unheard of in Holland.

Having said that, a few years back I came back from France, driving through Belgium and nearly in Holland. It was very busy and there was one of those guys behind me that did not keep his distance and tried to drive through me and my car. So I gently pressed the brake to show him the braking lights indicating to keep some distance. All this of course without actually activating the brake and slowing down, because this would have been very dangerous. Anyway, when I had a change, I pulled aside to let him pass and he was fuming. He pulled a gun and aimed it at my head. I was cool at the time, quickly contemplating what to do, but it was too busy to drive him of the road, so I let it go. When he was gone, it hit me that this could have ended slightly different... And in the heat of the moment I forgot to take his license plate number. Stupid me. Anyways, I went home and I took a few glasses of whisky and a good joint and I felt great again. LMHO

Joey

 

[bluesmoke]

2A freeks would complain if they were required to obtain and display protester tags and were limited to bucks only, one max, field dressed.

 

[lurchadams]

A man screaming is your idea of a riot? This is called reaching lol. You used this because you had trouble finding right wing rioters. Even with media who cover up leftwing violence and manufacture right wing anything and you can't find an example.

You might eventually but its rare which was my point. I can find 100's of examples of you guys rioting in seconds. I can find you guys attacking peaceful right wing protesters forcing them to fight but thats not rioting.

Nice try though.

Repeating lies repeatedly works with trump cultists, but not with me.

Nice try, tho.

 

[Phys251]

Explain the spikes also being reported in lock down state einstein? In anti trump or desantis libtard states. Selective ignorance lol.

Thats what good people do. We try to avoid trouble and always do the right thing.

You are not capable of comprehending intelligent speech. Get back to your bridge.

 

[Nickyjo]

Nope doesn't upset me at all. Terrorists kill innocent Americans at every opportunity. They hide behind "innocent" family and civilians to prevent us from killing them like cowards.

As to the DeSantis proposed law, it needs refining but I like it and its needed since police have proven unwilling or unable to prevent death and destruction cause by illegal and violent rioters.

Let me get this straight: Nazis occupy parts of Europe; a Pole for example, upset with German troops in his country, assassinates a Nazi colonel, so the Nazis hang the suspect and 10 people from the neighborhood. A Muslim, upset at US troops in his country, kills a few, so the US should not only kill him, but kill his family as well -- wife, little kids, grandma. You are ok with both those practices? (Should US soldiers kill them slowly to send a clearer message? And Trump pardoned members of US armed forces who killed innocents for no reason, who were turned in by their fellow soldiers. Bad fellow soldiers!) See you both at Nurenberg. You can argue you were just following orders. Trump would be out of luck.

 

[Daddyo]

Didn't you just say not financially in your previous post? If business was so difficult for you there was nothing stopping you from going to work for someone else, no? So I guess in the long run it was worth it, no? So to me you fall into the business owners who whine about how hard they had to work to get where they are. Nobody forced you to own a business. You as an owner seem to only see the parts you don't like.

And you as a wage earner haven't a clue. The ups and downs the worry the unpredictability of the future. You punch your time clock and cash your paycheck. When you punch out your worry is over. Your money safe in a bank the business owners money at risk from everything from mother nature to fire to the title of this thread......rioting looting garbage.

My business is fine NOW however in the beginning days I could not afford insurance. I speak with many business owners in the same boat. We have operational costs, employee costs, and finally our own paycheck. Each added burden pushing the business closer to closure. So while your worries end when you punch out ours never end.

Instead of teaching us how to run our businesses and what products we should purchase to protect ourselves perhaps you might start by spending some of that effort teaching the rioting thug scumbags not to riot and loot. Seems the place to start is with the law breakers not the law abiding productive members of society.

As with most liberal positions you have crap back assward.

 

[Daddyo]

You're moving the goalposts here. We're talking about defending property, not one's self. In post #172 I give an example of the difference.

One already has the right to self-defense without this bill becoming law, so self-defense is not a credible argument in favor of it.

Not moving anything just pointing out that the definition of vigilante is the enforcement of law by civilians without legal authority to do so. Defending my business or home or person is self defense and therefore cannot be vigilante justice.

Now should people go out and enforce this law without being the owner then its vigilante justice.

I already have the right to protect my business. This law will insure that I am protected under the law from those gray areas that will arise from time to time and from different prosecutors. One might deem your actions as justified and another not. Have the backing of law just keeps use covered. Its a deterrent and it makes great sense. Good guys first for once!

 

[Daddyo]

I agree racism is far less of an issue -- by that I mean an impediment to achievement -- than it was even 50 years ago. I still wouldn't call minority status a "benefit," however. If nothing else, in many parts of the country you're subject to a constant drumbeat of cultural messages that tell you why you can't accomplish something.

Cultural messages coming from other minorities. Not racists imo.

I'm hispanic and I have never had a problem. In my life I have only personally seen racist behavior in blacks and my own family mostly toward blacks.
White people have been wonderful. Don't know whats in their minds or hearts but toward me they have been wonderful.

 

[Daddyo]

Hi Daddyo,

I think that is true. I'll give you a few examples of things as I see them in The Netherlands. Sure there are exceptions, but as a rule of thumb, I think I am pretty close.

- Most killings are inside the world of criminals. Killing each other. (I kinda like this concept. They solve their own problems for us...)
- Mass shootings are virtually unheard of.
- Owning a gun is frowned upon by most. And as I pointed out in an earlier post, owning a gun is just not easy in Holland. Very strict rules regarding getting a gun, choosing a gun, keeping a gun and using a gun.
- I remember years ago (about 20 I guess) there was a money delivery truck heist in broad daylight. This was done on a road parallel to the busiest highway in Holland. But separated by a small canal. They explained the drivers it was safer to get out. They than blew up the rear door with an RPG. This was (and still is I think) unheard of in Holland.

Having said that, a few years back I came back from France, driving through Belgium and nearly in Holland. It was very busy and there was one of those guys behind me that did not keep his distance and tried to drive through me and my car. So I gently pressed the brake to show him the braking lights indicating to keep some distance. All this of course without actually activating the brake and slowing down, because this would have been very dangerous. Anyway, when I had a change, I pulled aside to let him pass and he was fuming. He pulled a gun and aimed it at my head. I was cool at the time, quickly contemplating what to do, but it was too busy to drive him of the road, so I let it go. When he was gone, it hit me that this could have ended slightly different... And in the heat of the moment I forgot to take his license plate number. Stupid me. Anyways, I went home and I took a few glasses of whisky and a good joint and I felt great again. LMHO

Joey

Violence here is mostly gang, drug, or criminal enterprise related as well.

Guns are a sport here for many. My son and I shoot competitively. Have a blast pun intended lol.

 

[Daddyo]

2A freeks would complain if they were required to obtain and display protester tags and were limited to bucks only, one max, field dressed.

I'm a 2nd amendment freak and I find your post disgusting. So what now?

Just wonder why you have to take the most disgusting angle simply because people want to protect life and livelihood from lawless violent thugs? Why does your mind believe that murder is in the hearts of others? Pretty sad.

 

[Daddyo]

Repeating lies repeatedly works with trump cultists, but not with me.

Nice try, tho.

Whatever you say TDS sufferer.

Thanks for pointing out the lie and for posting a right wing rioter. You got me lol.

 

[Daddyo]

 

[Daddyo]

Let me get this straight: Nazis occupy parts of Europe; a Pole for example, upset with German troops in his country, assassinates a Nazi colonel, so the Nazis hang the suspect and 10 people from the neighborhood. A Muslim, upset at US troops in his country, kills a few, so the US should not only kill him, but kill his family as well -- wife, little kids, grandma. You are ok with both those practices? (Should US soldiers kill them slowly to send a clearer message? And Trump pardoned members of US armed forces who killed innocents for no reason, who were turned in by their fellow soldiers. Bad fellow soldiers!) See you both at Nurenberg. You can argue you were just following orders. Trump would be out of luck.

Nope I'm saying that if a terrorist hides amongst innocents to prevent from being killed and he is killed along with others from the collateral damage that its acceptable.

In ww2 we bombed civilians to end the war as did our enemy. In fact we killed more Japanese civilians in a few fire bomb attacks on major cities than were killed by Fatman and little boy. War is hell.

 

[Nickyjo]

Nope I'm saying that if a terrorist hides amongst innocents to prevent from being killed and he is killed along with others from the collateral damage that its acceptable.

In ww2 we bombed civilians to end the war as did our enemy. In fact we killed more Japanese civilians in a few fire bomb attacks on major cities than were killed by Fatman and little boy. War is hell.

Agreed. But needlessly killing civilians does no good. We are not in total war as we were in the 1940s. And Dresden was a disgrace, no matter how you justify it. We are attempting to counter the terrorist narrative. Carpet bombing Northern Ireland, for example, would not have been a wise or humane way to counter IRA terrorism.

 

[JoeyJoystick]

Agreed. But needlessly killing civilians does no good. We are not in total war as we were in the 1940s. And Dresden was a disgrace, no matter how you justify it. We are attempting to counter the terrorist narrative. Carpet bombing Northern Ireland, for example, would not have been a wise or humane way to counter IRA terrorism.

Hi Nickyjo,

Dresden always has been and still is cause for much heated debate.

What I often find when discussing this subject is that people try to project todays standards onto a 75 year old situation. At the same time, there is also a lot of misinformation regarding the Dresden bombing. I think the Dresden bombing was horrible, but not worse than any other bombing in Germany. They were not giving signs to surrender and ultimately, Hitler never did surrendered, he just committed suicide, the coward.

But that is all hind side. When the decision was made to bomb Dresden we did not know that yet, did we.

But when the decision was made to bomb Dresden, the situation with Russia was also take into account. And the often used argument that it was just a cultural city is not true. Well, it was a cultural city, but there was also a lot of industry and there were many German refugees from the Russian front. It was a legitimate target I believe.

And besides that, after all they had done... Yes, I think it is ok to just keep bombing them until they surrender. Regardless of how horrible the results were.

Joey