Proud Boys assaulting a couple for ~90 seconds nsfw

Rob Roy

Well-Known Member
Yes, because he is using a deadly weapon with intent, and had plenty means of escape (not imminent danger), but he chose to shoot instead.
Using your loose definition of murder would you say soldiers that kill are mostly murderers ? Just curious.
 

Mr_X

Well-Known Member
Using your loose definition of murder would you say soldiers that kill are mostly murderers ? Just curious.
if it was intentionally and there was no danger or threat, yes. For example: if a soldier intentionally shot and killed a civilian, who is sitting at a table eating, that would be murder. There are rules of engagement and international laws that limit the targets of soldiers and tactical goals during a time of war.
 
Last edited:

DIY-HP-LED

Well-Known Member
Using your loose definition of murder would you say soldiers that kill are mostly murderers ? Just curious.
Trump meets the criteria for second degree mass murder under federal law according to expert legal opinion. This is not a philosophical discussion, but one of law and facts. One that I can back up with expert opinion and he will quote you the relevant law from the USC if you wish and can comprehend it.
 

hanimmal

Well-Known Member
if it was intentionally and there was no danger or threat, yes. For example: if a soldier intentionally shot and killed a civilian, who is sitting at a table eating, that would be murder. There are rules of engagement and international laws that limit the targets of soldiers and tactical goals during a time of war.
I can think of someone.
Screen Shot 2020-12-13 at 7.21.14 PM.png
 

PadawanWarrior

Well-Known Member
Yes, because he is using a deadly weapon with intent, and had plenty means of escape (not imminent danger), but he chose to shoot instead.
That guy had plenty of opportunities to leave, but he chose to pull out a knife, which is also considered a deadly weapon. He's fucked.
 

DIY-HP-LED

Well-Known Member
Using your loose definition of murder would you say soldiers that kill are mostly murderers ? Just curious.
No, they are soldiers who are doing their duty and enemy soldiers recognize that and they have a Geneva convention on POWs for that reason.

Calling someone who defends your miserable ass a murder means you are an ingrate as well as an asshole. I guess the US military contains too many minorities for you, its a meritocracy of racial equality and an example to the country of what it should be, the modern US military is a social leader. That's why so many of these militia types have no military training, some do, but they are military rejects for the most part and could not survive the social conditions. Many good old boys would like to serve, like guns and uniforms, but can't take orders from a black female drill sergeant who is better, smarter and tougher than them and she proves it everyday in their face. Sure when there's a war standards drop and the white trash gets in when Uncle Sam needs more warm bodies and many of them with training are leftovers from that.
 

Rob Roy

Well-Known Member
if it was intentionally and there was no danger or threat, yes. For example: if a soldier intentionally shot and killed a civilian, who is sitting at a table eating, that would be murder. There are rules of engagement and international laws that limit the targets of soldiers and tactical goals.

So the term "collateral damage" is just a bullshit term for "oops we murdered some innocent people" ?
 

DIY-HP-LED

Well-Known Member
All politics is systemically based in violence or the threat of it for noncompliance.
100,00 years ago the chief of the tribe would have given you a death sentence by turfing your ass out and you would have died alone in the wilderness, humans cannot survive outside of a social context. That's what they did for antisocial behavior, if you were an outcast all the neighboring tribes knew what you were. There are no real individuals, that is a myth, there are communities, individuals are lonely and unhappy and exist outside the circle of caring and sharing that most normal humans crave and need. The cult of the individual is just libertarian bullshit, not a real thing, hermits live alone the spiritual ones have a plan, a practice and lead disciplined lives, others like those in the west are just mentally ill.
 

Mr_X

Well-Known Member
That guy had plenty of opportunities to leave, but he chose to pull out a knife, which is also considered a deadly weapon. He's fucked.
He was THREATENED, cornered, punched, and surrounded by more people hitting him. In order to charge someone, you need intent. The guy verbally threatened him, and intentionally punched him in the head, then the other guy had to defend himself from imminent danger. But yes, each of those individuals who were involved committing a crime are fucked.
 

DIY-HP-LED

Well-Known Member
So the term "collateral damage" is just a bullshit term for "oops we murdered some innocent people" ?
Shit happens when you drop bombs, it could be worse, like the Russians and not give a fuck about it, just bullshit it away with propaganda.

You imagine yourself a free thinker, but you are really a non thinker. An excellent example of a mind feeding on itself until it consumes itself.
 

DIY-HP-LED

Well-Known Member
He was THREATENED, cornered, punched, and surrounded by more people hitting him. In order to charge someone, you need intent. The guy verbally threatened him, and intentionally punched him in the head, then the other guy had to defend himself from imminent danger. But yes, each of those individuals who were involved committing a crime are fucked.
He has an excellent case in court, if he shot a half dozen of them he'd have as good a case, but would just be charged for having the gun in DC, not using it in such circumstances. Good luck getting a conviction out of a DC jury over that one, the DA won't even try.
 
Top