thepixiesrock

I think a lot of people (Tarna) have been distracted away from what the argument was, and my point, which was that the cops shouldn't be soley to blaim in this case, as Hades was saying. To you it might have been irrelevant, but it would help me see what you meant when you said a kid deserved death for breaking into your home.

Judge Hades strikes again

Lets ask a different question then: How is the owner whose house is being broken into supposed to know whether the intruders intends to harm him or not? Should he call out to them and ask if they intend to harm him? And if they say "Yes!" (very unlikely as they would probably harm him first and then answer questions afterwards) what then? And if they say "No!", are they to be believed, considering that they are already in the progress of harming somebody by violating their home? (no, I am not in favour of shooting people on sight, just curious about your answers) You missed the point of what I was saying. I was asking if the kid deserved to die for breaking into a home with out the intention to do harm. I was never asking Hades what the kid deserved if there was a possibility that the kid was going to do harm with him. I was specifically asking if the kid deserved death for just breaking into the home. It wasn't going to go anywhere beyond that question.

Those kids violated the owner's property. I consider that causing harm. Harm worthy of death? That's ridiculous. Ok really, now I'm done.

That's not true at all. I know kids who have borken into house and they didn't have the intention of harming the owners of the house. Whatever, you're a waste of time

It doesn't work that way unless you suddenly become one of the nonexistent voices in my head. If these teenagers have no intention of harm then they wouldn't be breaking into my home. The fact they are doing so shows that they do indeed intend to cause harm. That's fine, but you questioned why I called your reaction to my statements ridiculous. Lets recap. You said you'd kill anyone on site I offered the scenerio where they are teenaged kids You said you'd ill them because they deserved it I said it'd be ridiculous for them to deserve to be shot if the teenaged kids weren't trying to harm you You questioned that and said it wasn't ridiculous, it's just protecting youself from what you perceive to be a threat Do you understand my reaction yet? I had said that they weren't going to harm you, and you responded to that as if they were. I wanted to know if they deserved to be shot if they weren't intending on harming you.

I take issue with the actual cops being blamed, not the system.

Yeah, so I still haven't hooked up my live yet. I need to transfer my account from my X-Box live account. Does anyone know how payment works with that?

You know that they have no intention of harming you because I told you they didn't. That was the scinerio I set up.

I'm watching TBS right now. It's relevent because it's true!

It's ridiculous to me that you think teenage kids breaking into your house with no intention of harming you deserve death. And you must be scratched or something, because you're skipping.

The second post is a correction of the first. Because with the information Nick gave, your first statement is no longer relevent.

They didn't bother to verify if the tip was correct or not. In situations where gunfire can be the result YOU DO NOT MAKE ASSUMPTIONS. Do you know anything about how tips are recieved and then acted on? I mean, I'm pretty sure the people who recieve the tips are not the same people who act on them. The people who act on them act on them on the assumption that they are true, otherwise the tip seemingly wouldn't make it this far. Obviously that didn't happen, and my entire point is that neither the swat team, nor the family is soley responsible. If they are police officers then they need to announce themselves first. If the are old friends then they know how I react to things and they would know better. If they are teenaged kids who think breaking into someone's home to steal stuff or to harass then they will get what they deserve. Ok, for the first one, they obviously don't need to. I'll buy the second one for you specifically, although you've got a habbit of switching from talking about you personally to the you collectively. The third I find ridiculous.

That's true, in this situation, I just don't think you could hold either two parties soley responsible for what happened.

If someone is breaking into my home then they have only up to two objectives. To steal my stuff and/or do me bodily harm. In both those cases I will seek to use lethal force to deter such actions. Or they're police officers, or old friends playing a joke on you, or some teenaged kids just causing trouble.

The reason they didn't was because it would put them in danger if the tip was correct. They were acting on the assumption that the tip was correct. Like I have said many times before, they weren't expecting to be fired on by innocent people. The guy fired his weapon before seeing who he was firing at. He just shot three times out his bedroom door. If anyne was putting children in danger it was him.

No, it's ridiculous for you to shoot to kill anyone who is breaking into your home on sight. That's fine, my point is that it isn't out of the question for the police officer to assume that they wouldn't get shot at by an innocent person.

I'd imagine it'd be hard to hear a lot of things over the sound of your shotgun firing into the hallway.

First of all, I think that's a ridiculous stance. It's also dodging the point I was making.

It would seem silly to mention that you knew only after it was already mentioned, and then change your statement accordingly. One would think that one would have made the initial statement if indeed one knew what they claim to know. Just a little food for thought.

Nobody would be hurt? For godsakes, man, there was gunfire involved and children in the house. It could have easily turned into a bloody massacre. I don't care if they have a warrant or not, you don't go bust someone's door down with guns firing. If they are unsure of the situation they shouldn't have weapons drawn. Is it their fault they got bad information? No, but it is their bloody fault for acting on that bad information. The cops were lucky, that is all. Next time they pull this sort of crap, the next innocent house they shoot up may have deaths involved. I said, "under normal circumstances" where the owner of the house doesn't just pull out a gun and start shooting before seeing who it is he's shooting at. It isn't too far of a stretch for the officers to assume that an innocent person wouldn't shoot at police officers. They didn't "bust someone's door down with guns firing." They only fired AFTER they were fired on. Stop twisting things.

Yeah, except when galaxies collide, the stuff in the galaxy RARELY ever hits the stuff in the other galaxy. And I mean EXTREMELY RARELY because there is so much space in between things.

They did check out if the tip was accurate, or did you miss the part where they went to the house? I mean, if it was a correct tip, and they just knocked on the door, then they would give themselves away, and put themselves into potential danger. If the tip was incorrect, under normal circumstances, then the worst they could do was bust into a house with innocent people and nobody would be hurt. They can't just predict everything that is going to happen. The best they can do is operate under what a normal condition would be. Also, you calling the cops stupid is ridiculous. It isn't their fault that they got bad information. Stop being such a freaking Hades.

If these are such nice things, why do you want us to cut them in half?

I'd bet he'd be all over it if it was out for 360.