Take my tractor and you're dead!

[Sprayber]

Originally posted by KrazyHorse
You're an ass.

He's Walter Mitty.

[David Floyd]

well duh! that's in the middle of the night! A cop will be coming during the day and if you know anything about police, it's that the street cops get orders from higher up. i've said this already in the thread but you chose to ignore it. If a street cop says "no" to any authority, they kick his arse to the curb and he'll be blacklisted. simple as that.

Cops should not follow illegal orders, just as soldiers shouldn't. Granted, he should not be prosecuted for following orders - thanks for agreeing with my position that the Nuremburg trials were immoral, by the way - but neither should he be protected from legitimate self-defense measures.

That puts a man, who most likely has a wife and kids, out of a job.

Boo-****ing-hoo. If one wants to support compromising morality in the name of money, they can go right ahead.

Therefore, say this cop IS coming illegally....like everyone else on the board has told you: it's wrong to take a life in the way you are depicting. you're not shooting a cop..you're killing a person.

What makes a cop special? Why is it wrong to use whatever force necessary to protect your private property from illegal search and seizure? That's primarily the purpose of the 2nd Amendment, for Chrissakes - protection from government abuses!

and i'm sorry, a person is more important than any property.

So you disagree with my right to kill someone who breaks into my house and tries to steal my VCR?

what you do is you get evidence of when the dude is there..like video tape him then sue the city. you do not kill him!

Videotape him?? What makes you think he won't just confiscate the tape? I mean, it's not like you're supporting the right to be secure from illegal search and seizure, so why should you support my right to resist if he takes my tape?

[Guynemer]

Floyd, yes, I totally and 100% disagree with your "right" to kill someone who is trying to take your VCR. Perhaps you're not aware of this, but some things are more important than your personal property, you self-centered narcissistic jackass.

[General Ludd]

It's kind of hypocritical to say you can't shoot a cop in such a situation, considering that the cops carry firearms.


EDIT: and the same goes to an armed robber.

[devilmunchkin]

guynemer : you hit the nail on the head but i would have phrased it differently.
what i'm saying is that it's illegal to kill any human being vs. loosing property UNLESS they are also threatening (which comes before actually doing it) your physical body with a weapon. If a cop busts in your home..some rogue guy cause i doubt this would ever happen now adays....holds up a gun and proceeds to ransack your house without a warrant, by all means also get your gun, if you think you can be faster than he is. I doubt you will be and you'll just get shot.
Where are constituional rights upheld? the court room, not by the way of guns.
Nuremburg trials? what has this got to do with this scenario? I do not even know anything but the basics, so i'm saying nothing on whether i agree or not.
i disagree with your right to kill someone who breaks into your home to steal a VCR when you KNOW HE"S NOT ARMED and willing to use it. No cop is going to just yank out a gun and kill you (esp. you..why? you're white). That's absurd.

[David Floyd]

what i'm saying is that it's illegal to kill any human being vs. loosing property UNLESS they are also threatening (which comes before actually doing it) your physical body with a weapon.

Wrong. In Texas, if someone breaks into my house, I don't have to determine if he's armed or not before I shoot him.

If a cop busts in your home..some rogue guy cause i doubt this would ever happen now adays....holds up a gun and proceeds to ransack your house without a warrant, by all means also get your gun, if you think you can be faster than he is. I doubt you will be and you'll just get shot.

If a 1 person can ransack my house AND keep my from pulling a gun, I'd be impressed.

Where are constituional rights upheld? the court room, not by the way of guns.

Ah, but the purpose of the 2nd was to ensure there would be a way to defend liberty if the government tried to take it away.

Nuremburg trials? what has this got to do with this scenario? I do not even know anything but the basics, so i'm saying nothing on whether i agree or not.

You're argument was basically that the cop would only be following orders. This was the Nuremburg defense, which I agree with, but following an illegal order should be no defense against getting shot.

i disagree with your right to kill someone who breaks into your home to steal a VCR when you KNOW HE"S NOT ARMED and willing to use it.

So what should I do if some 6'8", 340 lb behemoth breaks in? Just say "Here you go, have my property", or blow his ass away? I'll go for the second option.

No cop is going to just yank out a gun and kill you (esp. you..why? you're white). That's absurd.

You mean no cop SHOULD yank out a gun and kill me, just as no cop SHOULD conduct an illegal search and seizure. If a cop does one, what guarantee do I have that he won't do the other?

[devilmunchkin]

In Texas, if someone breaks into my house, I don't have to determine if he's armed or not before I shoot him.

well, perhaps that is a character flaw.

If a 1 person can ransack my house AND keep my from pulling a gun, I'd be impressed.

since when do cops come to do such things without back up?

Ah, but the purpose of the 2nd was to ensure there would be a way to defend liberty if the government tried to take it away.

the 2nd amendment says you have a right to not have that happen, but it doesn't not say what YOU can do. it just says that cops coming in and illegally searching is illegal and wrong.

So what should I do if some 6'8", 340 lb behemoth breaks in? Just say "Here you go, have my property", or blow his ass away? I'll go for the second option.

if he's not armed, it will be easier to restrain him. i never said you couldn't shoot him in the leg..i just said you shouldn't kill him. and this is if you know...if it dark etc etc you're in a whole nother ball game. and then again, what cop would do this at night?

You mean no cop SHOULD yank out a gun and kill me, just as no cop SHOULD conduct an illegal search and seizure. If a cop does one, what guarantee do I have that he won't do the other?

david...people stopped replying to this thread because you've taken it to a whole nother level of silly. use your head a bit and realize this situation you're describing isn't only hypothetical but abolutely assinine. You completely threadjacked the thread from what it was about..
the fact that a man snipped off cops who were completely legit in their search without even waiting for them to say anything.

[Logical Realist]

People's lives are worth more than tractors. And I condemn any twisted dogma that says otherwise.

a guy breaking into your house late at nite is different, one doesn't know if they are out to kill you or harm your family. And asking them may not be practical.

But killing someone for not having a piece of paper? That's @#$%ed and I think all the extremists on this board know it. If your father was a cop shot by some red neck for not having a "sieze tractor" warrant, you'd feel the same way I bet.

[Jac de Molay]

If your father was a cop shot by some red neck for not having a "sieze tractor" warrant, you'd feel the same way I bet.

A. I strongly resent your use of the racist term "redneck"

B. Where can anybody draw the line between just an illegal search and the over-zealous use of police power? Dont people have some right to be secure on their property without police interference? If your father was one ofthese guys you might think differently. DF has a point. There are many instances where people die needlessly because of brute force by the police, especially because of the "war" of drugs. Sadly, it almost always has to end in tragedy to bring it into the spotlight.

Dave

[Boris Godunov]

If a cop is abusing his power to such an extent you feel your safety and life are unduly threatened, would anyone here NOT defend themselves, using lethal force if necessary?

This is hypothetical, assuming the cop is clearly in the wrong and you are innocent/being nonviolent.

If Rondey King had had the means to protect himself while being beaten by that, would he have been wrong to do so, even if it meant shooting the cops?

[David Floyd]

DD, Boris,

The issue is not whether I value property more than life. The issue is defending myself from government excesses and illegal activity on the part of those supposed to prevent such activity.

[Boris Godunov]

DD? don't follow...

I really wish Abner Louima had had the means to defend himself. Ditto for Amadou Diallo. Clear instances where police officers where in the wrong. That the Diallo cops got off is an outrage.

[David Floyd]

The Diallo case is interesting...in one sense the police were doing their job by being suspicious, but they definitely went way too far. You are certainly correct in that he would have been right to defend himself.

[Boris Godunov]

40 bullet holes in a man armed only with a wallet, with bullet holes piercing the soles of his feet...

What does DD mean?

[Az]

exactly.

If a theif/policeman would come in the middle of the night , alone , and sneakily start taking things out of my apartment, I would like to have the right to break a brick on his head . but not to shoot him.

For some reason , respecting the authorities is something unimaginable. You can sue the police dept. , but shoot him?