Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
They are there but no real strength or know-how against men. So it's still a man's world and always will be because of physical strength and protection of each other.
One thing for sure: if enough looters were shot and killed while in the act of looting, it would cut way down on looting. Right now there are no consequences at all. No arrest, no criminal charges, and the looter gets to keep whatever he took.
If there was a solid possibility of being killed instead of enjoying a free big screen, a lot of those looters would reconsider the benefits vs costs.
Arson ( except during rioting) is more of a mental illness so isn't going to have a rational response.
One thing for sure: if enough looters were shot and killed while in the act of looting, it would cut way down on looting. Right now there are no consequences at all. No arrest, no criminal charges, and the looter gets to keep whatever he took.
If there was a solid possibility of being killed instead of enjoying a free big screen, a lot of those looters would reconsider the benefits vs costs.
Arson ( except during rioting) is more of a mental illness so isn't going to have a rational response.
Most criminals are mentally ill in some way (not the other way around) and of low basic comprehension, including looters.
it's come up in minneapolis, but it seems to be a trouble spot whenever there's an evacuation for a hurricane or key event. Curious what the cd thinks.
They are there but no real strength or know-how against men. So it's still a man's world and always will be because of physical strength and protection of each other.
You don’t always need physical strength. Certainly in some respects it is helpful, but sports like judo are based on the idea that you can use someone’s size/strength to your advantage even if you are smaller/weaker. It relies more on smarts/technique than strength.
There are violence prone men of all races as well... it just happens, unfortunately.
One thing for sure: if enough looters were shot and killed while in the act of looting, it would cut way down on looting. Right now there are no consequences at all. No arrest, no criminal charges, and the looter gets to keep whatever he took.
If there was a solid possibility of being killed instead of enjoying a free big screen, a lot of those looters would reconsider the benefits vs costs.
Arson ( except during rioting) is more of a mental illness so isn't going to have a rational response.
exactly,
but since there is barley a slap on the wriosts, well, whats happend is self explanatory
That question can only be answered by a person who was actually faced with making such a decision.
I will say this however, I will protect the contents of my home and property by whatever force is required, and I do mean by whatever force is required. Should someone be stupid enough to break in my home while I am here, they will not leave on their own. When it comes to protecting myself or family, my reaction will be immediate and lethal.
You don’t always need physical strength. Certainly in some respects it is helpful, but sports like judo are based on the idea that you can use someone’s size/strength to your advantage even if you are smaller/weaker. It relies more on smarts/technique than strength.
There are violence prone men of all races as well... it just happens, unfortunately.
Men are indeed more naturally physically aggressive, women are not. It's a part of nature just as is race. A smaller, weaker man can possibility take on and beat a larger man but seldom, if ever, does a smaller, weaker woman (let's say 5'2 120 lb female) win an all out fight against a 6'2 240 pound man, especially since most boys and men, at least in the US, have gone through at least some sort of extensive athletic training/recreation throughout their schooling.
In many states (and Texas for sure) you can justify using deadly physical force to stop a physical force attack if there is sufficient disparity of physical force.
A woman can use gun against an attacking adult male, a man over 65 can use a gun to defend against a younger adult male, an adult male can use deadly force to defend against multiple adult males.
Yes, as the physical force attack has become a deadly physical force attack. Difference in age, size, physical ability, etc., all have a role in determining when this takes place. And then all the shooter has to do is convince the prosecutor that the use of force was justified.
There was rioting, destruction, and looting in Spokane, just across the border. Protests were organized for Coeur d'Alene, ID.
Protesters arrived to find a line of heavily armed citizens, who announced they were there to stop the hijacking of the protest.
Protesters protested for 3-4 hours, armed citizens stood quietly by watching, and the protesters went home with no shooting, no rock throwing, no burning, and not a single window broken.
They are unhappy. Fine. It's their constitutional right to let everyone know they are unhappy. As long as they are peaceful about it. The legitimate protesters did their thing and the trouble makers looked at the guns and decided to go make trouble elsewhere. I can only assume it wasn't worth it to them to try to loot stores that had armed citizens standing in front of them.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
