I love a story with a happy ending.

People need to stop defending criminals

I don't defend criminals. All I say is: To defend yourself from an attacker use only an adequate level of force. Killing someone is the ultimate reaction left if nothing else works to save your own life.

That's the law in Germany:
Mit Notwehrhandlung bezeichnet man die Handlung, die der Verteidiger zur Abwehr des Angriffs vornimmt. Notwehr berechtigt nur zur erforderlichen Verteidigung (Erforderlichkeit). Eine erforderliche Verteidigung ist die mildeste aller möglichen, die geeignet ist, den Angriff sicher und endgültig zu beenden.

A self-defense action is defined as an action of a defender to avert an attack. Self-defense is only entitled to a necessary defense (necessity). A necessary defense is the mildest form of all possible suitable actions to safely and finally stop the attack.
 
Last edited:
Joined
Oct 18, 2006
Messages
19,818
Location
Germany
More proportional response crap. What sounds good in a government counsel chamber and what works when a drunk and enraged thug is swinging a bottle at your face are very very different.

Listening to most people talk about violence and self defense makes me laugh. You don't know what you don't know.
 
Joined
May 3, 2008
Messages
615
More proportional response crap.

Okay - you know how to fight - let's get unproportional -
Simple question: What action have to happen before you produce your gun and kill someone and you feel absolutely right?
 
Last edited:
Joined
Oct 18, 2006
Messages
19,818
Location
Germany
Okay - you know how to fight - let's get unproportional -
Simply question: What action have to happen before you produce your gun and kill someone and you feel absolutely right?

If my life or that of my loved ones is threatened and exit/egress is not a good option. The level of threat I'm facing is less relavent as its very difficult to accurately gauge in the middle of a scenario. A situation involving people outside of me or my loved ones would have to shock me to my core - Something like brutal violence against a helpless victim. I am not, nor am I ever likely to be a hero. Nor do I have any desire to be.

And for the record, I wasn't at all referring to my ability to throw or take a punch. I'm talking about understanding the dynamics of a fight. How they start, how to avoid them, and how to win them if avoidance isn't the best option.

And god help me if some pinheads that would piss themselves if they were ever faced with a potentially lethal situation, decide to analyze and second guess my actions.
 
Joined
May 3, 2008
Messages
615
I'm not a natural born fighter, but I was in combat situations already, usually involving drunks at concerts, pubs etc.

I was always able to to de-escalate the situation
  • by talking
  • calling for help
  • running, outdancing the drunks

Only once I had to hit hard on a leader of 5 drunken soldiers that tried to bully me hard. It was in a train cabin on my way back home. I was a soldier, too back then, ironically on my very last day on military service.
After I gained respect, I told them that I was a soldier, too (I was not in uniform), a "Pionier"(*) to be exact. We drank a beer together and the situation was cleared. Could have been much worse.

(*) Pioneers are well respected in the German Army - at least in my days of duty.
 
Last edited:
Joined
Oct 18, 2006
Messages
19,818
Location
Germany
I not only voted for him but gave 1500 to his campaign. Most mispent money of my life, he's just as corrupted by big business as bush and twice as full of crap on social issues. And still at war....
 
Last edited:
Joined
Apr 10, 2011
Messages
777
More proportional response crap. What sounds good in a government counsel chamber and what works when a drunk and enraged thug is swinging a bottle at your face are very very different.

Listening to most people talk about violence and self defense makes me laugh. You don't know what you don't know.

So then you would agree that Trayvon Martin's response to Zimmerman hunting, stalking and getting out of the car to chase him down was acceptable?
 
Joined
Oct 18, 2006
Messages
14,932
I love this. It used to be that RPGWatch was pretty much full of liberal pansies, and anything that wasnt totally liberal, feminist, far-left, utopian, and quite frankly submissive was redneck and barbaric. Poor DTE would be there in the middle of a nerdstorm, surrounded by girlymen all flailing away at him with their purses. I didn't dare get involved, because I'm too busy quite frankly gaming and stuff to give a shit about trying to argue with people online.

It warms my heart to see men here who are not completely pussified, and actually fighting back against the purse-swingers.


Anyways, back to the subject-

In my opinion, if a human being is slamming another human being's head into the concrete, they are attempting murder. Whether they truly are intentionally trying to outright murder their victim or not, people die from having their head slammed into concrete. Maybe he was just trying to knock him out, or maybe then was gonna get up and stomp on his head once he was unconscious. GZ didnt know that.

If someone slams my head into the pavement, i take that as an attempt to murder me, and i will respond accordingly. Again, i dont fucking care what race they are or the history of their people in America. You can stick your history lesson
 
Last edited:
Joined
Oct 18, 2006
Messages
5,228
Location
San Diego, Ca
Poor DTE would be there in the middle of a nerdstorm, surrounded by girlymen all flailing away at him with their purses. I didn't dare get involved, because I'm too busy quite frankly gaming and stuff to give a shit about trying to argue with people online.

In other words … you are scared :sweatdrop: of girlymen? :lol:


If someone slams my head into the pavement, i take that as an attempt to murder me, and i will respond accordingly.

By this definition I survived at least 10 murder attempts ... lucky me.
 
Joined
Oct 18, 2006
Messages
19,818
Location
Germany
Absolutely.
In numbers they can chew an entire day up. I got better things to do than argue with the hopeless. I just get the ball rolling
 
Joined
Oct 18, 2006
Messages
5,228
Location
San Diego, Ca
Holy crap - I have no issue with ideological disagreements, I am a libertarian and therefore agree and disagree with many folks here on many things.

pansies, girlymen all flailing away at him with their purses.

But please take your small-minded pathetic misogyny elsewhere.

In my opinion, if a human being is slamming another human being's head into the concrete, they are attempting murder.

The whole thing is we don't know HOW that conflict started - and that is critical. Look at the *reality* - who started the entire thing? Zimmerman. Who was the pursuer? Zimmerman. Who continued pursuit even getting out of his car to chase the other one? Again, Zimmerman.

So up to this point Zimmerman is entirely 100% the aggressor. These are objective truths, and are documented. What we do NOT know is what happened next - did Zimmerman touch Martin to force him to talk and identify? Or did Martin initiate contact? We don't know ... but it DOES matter.

Why? Because based on the events thus far - and remembering that Zimmerman has NO special standing legally - Zimmerman is the aggressor and if he also initiated contact then Martin has every reason to feel that HIS life is in danger and certainly you would then be fully supportive of him taking whatever means are necessary to DEFEND himself against someone who has chased him by car and on foot across an entire development and then initiates a physical confrontation.

Why do I think you'd support it? Because it is the entire basis of 'stand your ground' laws and particularly self-defense, which is the entirety of the Zimmerman defense.

Of course, if Martin was the initiator of physical attacks that is a very different thing, because in that case Zimmerman would be in his rights to defend himself. My point in that case is it is a reminder of why we need sensible gun control - because a taser would have stopped Martin and had he attacked Zimmerman he would have been arrested for assault and so on.

My entire problem has little to do with THAT situation - partly because we don't know and never will know exactly what happened.

However, I have a bigger issue with the fantasy land notion that race played no role in all of this - of COURSE it did. A white kid wearing a hoodie from the local football team wouldn't be pursued - hell, he could have shoplifted his soda and skittles from the 7-11 and the local sheriff would have convinced the owner that 'there was a misunderstanding'.

You don't have to believe in rampant racism and 'white privilege' ... be denying it is just a stark reminder of how pervasive it is ... and your language around these items makes it starkly obvious where you stand - racist, homophobic, and misogynist.
 
Joined
Oct 18, 2006
Messages
14,932
:lol:

I don't mind the pacifist hippy stance, I think a lot of unnecessary bloodshed can be avoided that way.

But at some point everyone suddenly became a racist homophobic misogynist by default and this nonsense has to go. You can't spend your life being guilty for existing, problems don't get solved by money or guilt they only get solved by hard work and not hard work that comes from outside but from inside.
 
Joined
Apr 10, 2011
Messages
777
Oprah would be proud of you, Mikey

And why the heck would I care what *she* thought? I never watched her shows nor have I met her, so her opinions have no bearing in my life. I think celebrity worship is a plague upon our culture.
 
Joined
Oct 18, 2006
Messages
14,932
But please take your small-minded pathetic misogyny elsewhere.
Indeed, let's be reasonable and avoid silly name-calling.
a completely reasonable guy said:
But such is the way of the white privilege, talk radio fed modern tea party racist … probably also go around saying you should be able to use the N word, that reverse racism is a thing, and wondering when it will be WHITE history month.
Oh. Well, do as I say and all…
However, I have a bigger issue with the fantasy land notion that race played no role in all of this - of COURSE it did. A white kid wearing a hoodie from the local football team wouldn't be pursued - hell, he could have shoplifted his soda and skittles from the 7-11 and the local sheriff would have convinced the owner that 'there was a misunderstanding'.
You keep spouting this nonsense. Please offer any sliver of objective proof that Zimmerman was racially motivated. There's only one guy that can truly answer that, and he's not talking a whole lot. But, by all means, join Thrasher in the mind readers' club and ejimakate us racists.
You don't have to believe in rampant racism and 'white privilege' … be denying it is just a stark reminder of how pervasive it is … and your language around these items makes it starkly obvious where you stand - racist, homophobic, and misogynist.
There's a fairly significant logical error in there. I'm sure JemyM can supply the fancy Latin if he swings by.
 
Joined
Oct 18, 2006
Messages
13,535
Location
Illinois, USA
He's racist, and thrasher is racist, so they assume everyone is. Not everyone has to struggle with these mental deformities.
 
Joined
Apr 10, 2011
Messages
777
So then you would agree that Trayvon Martin's response to Zimmerman hunting, stalking and getting out of the car to chase him down was acceptable?

Certainly not. I don't try and change a tire with my bare hands, and responding to a completely unknown threat when you are unarmed AND have the chance to leave is tactically unsound - and as Trayvon discovered, a good way to die. You talk as though Zimmerman was walking around with an AK and a "Kill Darky" tshirt on. And it obviously taints your opinion on everything related to this case.

Also, your use of the terms hunting & stalking is a little shaky. Feel free to come out to the NC woods if you would like a demonstration in what they actually mean :)
 
Joined
May 3, 2008
Messages
615
It's funny to see the take of an irish guy and german on the same subject. Irish guy is never going to back down under any circumstance, german guy has complicated rules of engagement in place for speaking to someone on the street which must be followed to the letter even if failing to deviate will lead to death. If only everyone followed the exact rules all the time there'd be no problems! Who could object to this system?
 
Joined
Apr 10, 2011
Messages
777
Honest question:

Talking about "whites" and "non-whites" - how is crime divided between the two in the US? Do "whites" have similar crime rates?

Seems to me that racism having been so rampant in the past, it would have created a very hard environment for non-whites to break out of. As such, their rate of crime would be much higher - which would only serve to perpetuate the racial issue. Which, in turn, would make a higher level of suspicion against non-whites, when it comes to crime, both rational and natural.

If crime rates are similar, which would surprise me, then racism can be talked about as the issue, rather than logical deduction.
 
Back
Top Bottom