werepossum
Elite Member
- Jul 10, 2006
- 29,873
- 463
- 126
Well said. In theory I agree that being shot dead should be a reasonable workplace risk for a thief. In practice, assuming he did set him up and shot him dead, that seems to me to be a bit more cold-blooded than society is willing to accept today.I'm saying he probably COULD have killed us...and he DID shoot us both, just with rock salt, not lead. If he'd have caught us breaking into his house, or burglarizing his garage, killing us would have been very justified.(and it was my cousin's neighbor...not mine.)
It DID make a strong point with me. I never stole watermelons again. :whiste:
No one has the right to steal from anyone else. If you've ever been robbed or had your house burgled, there's much more to the loss than just the loss of your possessions. You also lose your sense of privacy and security. You usually feel.......violated.
Thieves should be lined up and shot...or publicly executed. (hold it in the town square, sell tickets or Pay-per-View programming.
Hell, it was just a bit more than 100 years ago that horse thieves were hung for their crimes...
Maybe he saw The Hunt for Red October...
and felt like he just HAD to go...
lol Preferring a toaster does not necessarily equate to not being able to tell the difference. In fact, preferring the toaster pretty much requires being able to tell the difference.As you cannot tell the difference between a vagina and a toaster, I don't think you're qualified to know the difference between a human being and an animal.

