50+ year-old woman kills attacker in self-defense

[shortylickens]

Oh sweet fucking jesus, now we're arguing over the definition of logic?
This place is fail sauce in solid form.

 

[hdfxst]

http://www.startribune.com/local/minneapolis/121637649.html to bad he only winged him

 

[shortylickens]

I heard the StarTrib gave up print, is that true?

 

[soulcougher73]

The problem is you don't know that is on the table, you don't know the guy is planning to kill your family, you assume he is, that could be a faulty assumption, it could be right, but you don't know.

You are right it could be a faulty assumption. But its a chance im willing to take while im still alive and able to make that decision. The problem with your thinking is by the time you conclude he may want to kill you it could be too late to make that decision as he has already killed you.

Its a choice criminals make when breaking into a home that they may be killed. He took that gamble and lost.

 

[mcurphy]

I've not admitted insecurities or paranoia, so I don't know where you're getting that from.

Your entire argument falls apart on this basis.

Orly?

Quote = Neckbeard:
"I would love to just be me, but my personality is paranoid, as well as that (haven't mentioned this yet) I have borderline personality disorder and believe me if I let that part of me show, people would not be interested for very long, it's all very well wanting to be yourself all the time, but when part of that is a mental health condition, you have to calm it down and cut it back in order for other people to accept you."

Quote = Neckbeard
"Insecurity is definitely a problem in my life, which mainly stems from not feeling like I fit in anywhere particularly.
Guess again. I forgot to add BPD to the list of reasons I believe your opinions are not valid."


Guess again. I forgot to add BPD to the list of reasons I believe your opinions are not valid.

And here I thought it took six days for him to forget his stupid comments😵

lmao, pure awesomeness. 😎

 

[AMDZen]

Personally I have no problem with the amount he posts or even the controversial topics he comes up with. Nothing wrong with a good debate. But in this case there is no question. The woman did the right thing. The only thing she could do with the options the criminal gave her. She's lucky to be alive.

And see, you're a canadian.

What kind of brain washing do those English do across the pond that could possibly make them believe this wasn't the right thing to do?

 

[Avalon]

Guy got what he deserved.

 

[imnothardcore]

my 2 friends and I at work have enjoyed the trolls of this thread.

 

[Numenorean]

orly?





Guess again. I forgot to add bpd to the list of reasons i believe your opinions are not valid.

bahahahaha.

Owned!

 

[PrinceofWands]

He got what he deserved IMO.

And in our opinion you're a worthless pile of useless steaming dogshit for believing so.

 

[PrinceofWands]

Of course, but there's a difference between someone breaking into your home and someone threatening you with deadly force.

No, there isn't. At least, not here, not to some of us.

 

[edro]

And who says .22 isn't a defense round!

Exactly! Stopping power not needed!
I hate when people say anything <.45 is not a self defense round.

 

[corwin]

Exactly! Stopping power not needed!
I hate when people say anything <.45 is not a self defense round.

Because the guy lived for way too long after he was shot multiple times, had he been strung out on drugs he could have done some serious damage in the time he had left before finally kicking it, luckily this dope just ran, with a larger caliber that wouldn't have been the case...yes a .22 can still be lethal, but I would rather be sure than sorry.

 

[HAL9000]

Orly?





Guess again. I forgot to add BPD to the list of reasons I believe your opinions are not valid.

So a quote without a source is valid now is it? Also I don't have borderline personality disorder.

 

[nick1985]

So a quote without a source is valid now is it?

Just shut up

 

[Nintendesert]

Just shut up

:thumbsup:

 

[HAL9000]

Just shut up

No.

 

[HAL9000]

Just for grins I want to define logic for good 'ole Neckbeard...

Logic (from the Greek &#955;&#959;&#947;&#953;&#954;&#942; logik&#275😉[1] is the formal systematic study of the principles of valid inference and correct reasoning.

Let's see here, valid inference and correct reasoning...how can someone not validy infer and correctly reason that someone breaking into their home was there to do harm rather than say borrow a cup of sugar? How could they logically do that? I would have to assume a mental defect by deductive logic...

I've not said the guy wasn't there to do harm.

You are correct. So what he did was wrong. What she did was right. So, in the end, you're left with *drum roll* right!

I disagree.

I think this is his proposition:

Rape is less evil than taking a life. Therefore, it is better for someone to be raped than for someone to be killed.

This is fine and it is (generally speaking) an accurate statement. However, there is more than comes into play with this that he is not considering, such as the inclusion of someone who is FORCING another person to make the decision. This where the logic breaks down and it is no longer a binary choice and a third option should be put into play, which is "do no harm to me." So now our options are "I do no harm to you, I rape you, or you defend yourself against me." The assailant has taken "I do no harm to you" off the table as it is clear that he is there to do some sort of harm... the assailant has FORCED the victim to choose to defend themselves by whatever means necessary. Would it be better to disable the assailant? Yes, I believe MOST of us would try to do that...but when faced with the basic biology of flight or fight it would be difficult to make the critical judgment to simply disable someone. Shooting them in the foot with a .22 will not stop someone. If they are high on PCP, a shot to the face would barely stop them.

In short, HAL9000 is fallaciously making this into a binary choice: kill someone or rape someone - which is worse? And that isn't really the scenario. The correct choice is to not put someone in the position where they have to defend themselves.

I completely agree with this post, that is what I'm trying to say, and I only inferred a binary choice, as it was put to me sometime ago that there were two options, 1) Be raped 2) Kill the man. I was responding to that, the binary nature of the situation was made by the person asking the question not me.

 

[HAL9000]

It is better for a victim to be raped vs. killed. That is correct.

What is ALSO correct is that it is better for a criminal be killed than a victim be raped.

I disagree, life is more valuable.

 

[Numenorean]

I disagree, life is more valuable.

You're right, the victims life is more valuable than the criminals.

 

[HAL9000]

You're right, the victims life is more valuable than the criminals.

Very true, so if the choice is definitely between the two, then choose the victim, if not it's a different conversation.

 

[Numenorean]

Very true, so if the choice is definitely between the two, then choose the victim, if not it's a different conversation.

But that was the choice, and the victim chose to save herself, yet you want her arrested.

 

[HAL9000]

But that was the choice, and the victim chose to save herself, yet you want her arrested.

So she knew for a fact that the attacker intended to kill her?

 

[werepossum]

Do you know the difference between Switzerland and Poland?

😀 +1 The Germans and the Soviets sure did.

Thankfully there are only a few here who would deny this woman her G_d-given right to self defense. Personally I'm glad to hear the perp was pronounced DRT. If your business is breaking and entering (and likely rape), lead poisoning is a legitimate occupational hazard.

 

[Numenorean]

So she knew for a fact that the attacker intended to kill her?

She knew for a fact that he threatened her with deadly force, and responded in kind.