| Author | Thread |
|
|
08/26/2005 04:04:02 PM · #1 |
Very disturbing...
Now, I'll be the first to state these guys seem like whack jobs. But somehow giving over a million dollars, including a U.S. citizen's ranch to illegal aliens who were tresspassing seems a bit overboard.
Especially when you read the following...
Mr. MancÃa and Ms. Leiva were caught on a ranch in Hebbronville, Tex., in March 2003 by Mr. Nethercott and other members of Ranch Rescue. The two immigrants later accused Mr. Nethercott of threatening them and of hitting Mr. MancÃa with a pistol, charges that Mr. Nethercott denied. The immigrants also said the group gave them cookies, water and a blanket and let them go after an hour or so.
NYT Article...
This is sadly only going to greatly increase the problems along the border. And probably result in an increased loss of life.
:( |
|
|
|
08/26/2005 04:36:38 PM · #2 |
|
|
|
08/26/2005 04:44:56 PM · #3 |
| I just wonder what they were thinking when they told the judge/jury that they deserved Mr.xxx's ranch because "he hit me on the back of the head for tresspassing...but they did give us cookies, water and a blanket and let us go after an hour or so..." |
|
|
|
08/26/2005 05:29:29 PM · #4 |
Those fine folks on the jury were just returning to them what was rightfully their's , taken from them years ago by Daniel Boone, Davy Crockette and other misguided insurgants. BTW....the lawyer was the one who actually got the land. But that is just the way it works folks.
Message edited by author 2005-08-26 17:31:32. |
|
|
|
08/26/2005 05:46:18 PM · #5 |
| In North Carolina, it was almost passed that illegal aliens could pay in-state tuition at any NC institution of higher learning. Of course, the legal immigrants would still have to pay out of state if they had lived here less than a year. |
|
|
|
08/26/2005 05:55:53 PM · #6 |
Originally posted by David Ey:
Those fine folks on the jury were just returning to them what was rightfully their's , taken from them years ago by Daniel Boone, Davy Crockette and other misguided insurgants. BTW....the lawyer was the one who actually got the land. But that is just the way it works folks. |
These were El Salvadorans....so they NEVER EVER HAD CLAIM TO THE LAND.
|
|
|
|
08/26/2005 05:56:38 PM · #7 |
ALL of the pandering to illegal immigrants could be stopped easily...
QUIT ALLOWING THEM TO VOTE AND REQUIRE SOCIAL-SECURITY CARD or equivalent in order to vote.
|
|
|
|
08/26/2005 06:30:28 PM · #8 |
| excuse me, but Mr Neanderthal seems to be a nasty piece of work. He had no right to go around hitting people. The judgement placed on him is far greater than the worth of his property, so he is saving a few thousand dollars by surrendering it. The article gave other cases where land was surrendered to satisify a judgement so there was a precedent set for such actions. To me this is a case of someone being held responsible for his actions. If he had just detained the illegal aliens and contacted the border patrol to pick them up, he wouldn't have any problems. Because he made the decision to act as a vigilante and was called out for his abuse he should respect the existing laws of the land he chooses to live in and pay the fine. |
|
|
|
08/26/2005 08:20:02 PM · #9 |
The jury did NOT "give the ranch" to the plaintiffs:
"Mr. Sutton settled for $100,000. Mr. Nethercott and Mr. Foote did not defend themselves, so the judge issued default judgments of $850,000 against Mr. Nethercott and $500,000 against Mr. Foote."
The Jury awarded monetary damages after it found that the defendants had violated the law. An example of their attitude towards the immigration issue:
"In April, Mr. Nethercott told an Arizona television station, "We're going to come out here and close the border with machine guns." But by the end of the month, he had started his prison sentence."
The court itself ordered the property transferred to satisfy the judgment. It's not the first time this has happened and it won't be the last time. If you break the law, and damages are awarded, and you can't pay, your property WILL be confiscated to cover the judgment. As well it should be, of course.
It just seems that because these people are "illegals" and they were given the property upon which they were trespassing, it's a hot button for a lot of people. But I'd prefer not to believe that our laws only apply to our own citizens, and that we can treat non-Americans any way we like because they don't have any rights...
Robt.
|
|
|
|
08/26/2005 09:35:47 PM · #10 |
Originally posted by bear_music:
The jury did NOT "give the ranch" to the plaintiffs:
...Mr. Nethercott and Mr. Foote did not defend themselves, so the judge issued default judgments of $850,000 against Mr. Nethercott and $500,000 against Mr. Foote."
The Jury awarded monetary damages after it found that the defendants had violated the law... |
No, a jury didn't award them the ranch nor did a jury award the $850,000. There was no jury, a judge made the award. The judge issued a default judgment which simply means they lost the suit by not responding. It doesn't however mean they actually committed whatever action they were being sued for.
Originally posted by bear_music:
It just seems that because these people are "illegals" and they were given the property upon which they were trespassing, it's a hot button for a lot of people. But I'd prefer not to believe that our laws only apply to our own citizens, and that we can treat non-Americans any way we like because they don't have any rights... |
It may seem that way but, I for one, am less concerned about their immigration status than I am about the fact that trespassers, people in the act of committing a crime, were awarded $850,000 for "post-traumatic stress" when I believe the case should have been thrown out of court. However, it is the defendant's own stupidity in not responding to the suit that got them where they are now.
|
|
|
|
08/26/2005 09:48:36 PM · #11 |
I would consider blaming the US system of punitive damages - $850 000 is a ridiculously large damage award for being hit on he head.
You can argue with the US law on the basis that awarding such a large damages settlement shouldn't be awarded to anyone for a minor injury obtained while trespassing anyway.
Some of the attitudes in this thread however, are slightly reminiscent of your average lynch mob. There seems to be more concern with the fact that the plaintiffs were foreigners then the ludicrous awards regularly handed out under US tort law.
If you break the law, the law will apply to you. It doesn't matter whether the victim is American or El Salvadorian.
Edit: by the way - the link doesn't work for me, so I'm commenting purely on the basis of the accounts of events provided by people in this thread who may have downplayed the seriousness of the assault.
Message edited by author 2005-08-26 21:51:00. |
|
|
|
08/26/2005 09:48:41 PM · #12 |
'Shroom:
Well, Sutton settled, a real-world admission of guilt. That the other two did not defend themselves tends to point in the same direction, actually, since Sutton had already admitted fault? Regardless, I do agree with you that when we have people burgling a home, for example, and suing the (absent) homeowners when they fall down the stairs and do themselves grievous bodily harm, is risiculous.
However, I don't really think that "trespassing" is a crime that justifies such extreme measures. Face it, these people trespass all the time, it's the only way theyhave of making their crossing. What scares ME is when citizens take it upon themselves to organize groups like these guys did and take the law into their own hands. They are picking on these people because they are powerless victims and the vigilantes don't expect ever to be called to accountability for their actions.
Illegal immigration is a serious problem, for sure, but it doesn't justify that sort of outside-the-law behavior and apparently there was a real track record in the background here. It won't have been the first time these guys pulled shit like this. And they have no right. They simply don't.
I'm not standing up for illegal immigrants here, I'm standing up for human beings and human dignity.
R.
Message edited by author 2005-08-26 21:49:22.
|
|
|
|
08/26/2005 09:52:29 PM · #13 |
| Bear... you're a sensible sort. In other words... I agree. |
|
|
|
08/26/2005 11:03:11 PM · #14 |
We have an even bigger problem in South Africa, the illigal immigrants, illigal yes, can work, join unions are protected from their victims(yip, I know what I am saying here), etc etc. As they 'do not exist' they run drugs, kill, are the fraudsters and gangsters. But so what? They are illigal and must be protected, they take food from the mouths of the citizens, use the citizens's benefits and abuse the citizen's resources. And they legally run havoc protesting their 'conditions'. Oh yes, there are many reasons for this. And even more reasons for the reasons.
(Thinking to myself if it makes sense? Look at this analogy; In my country if you drive without being licenced and you are involved in, not make, just involved, in a car accident, you are automatically guilty. You should not have been there in the first place.)
Again, this problem is not only our problem, it is the worlds problem. The answer? I wish I knew how one could balance the right and wrong, how to turn on the dark at noon and breed fish in the desert sands. I wish I could know how to balance the rights of the victim and the rights of the villian. I wish I had the recipy to turn politicians into honest animals with integrity. I wish I could take the easy way out.... go live on the moon.;-)
Message edited by author 2005-08-26 23:04:24. |
|
|
|
08/27/2005 04:13:13 PM · #15 |
Originally posted by bear_music:
It just seems that because these people are "illegals" and they were given the property upon which they were trespassing, it's a hot button for a lot of people. But I'd prefer not to believe that our laws only apply to our own citizens, and that we can treat non-Americans any way we like because they don't have any rights...
Robt. |
I was assaulted worse than these illegals were....
Had these been citizens they never would have gotten the land. We are giving more catering to illegals then our own citizens... THAT IS WRONG!!!! |
|
|
|
08/27/2005 04:27:54 PM · #16 |
As much as I think that our immigration laws and border enforcement need a radical revision, and I think civil juries can get way out of control in general.....
It's a good message that a bunch of yahoos and good old boys can't just appoint themselves border patrol and do as they please. Paul Revere is long dead and his world no longer exists. |
|
|
|
08/29/2005 10:02:15 AM · #17 |
The guy would be in jail anyways, that's a good message...
This to me is a dangerous message. Now, if a rancher who is repeatedly having his lands tresspassed by illegals and repeatedly having goods and equipment stolen apprehends tresspassers and holds them till they can determine if anything has been stolen will now have their ranch placed in jeopardy.
If this type of seizure continues to happen. And these ranchers continue to feel unprotected. What do you think it going to happen...it's going to get bloody.
And frankly, I do not have an issue with vigilantism. Vigilantism is necessary when the government fails. Example: where I live, the last three times I've called 911 the police have failed to arrive. One of those times the neighborhood believed there was a possibility that someone had been killed. Two of the events happened on a particular day of ethnic celebration.
What do you think my neighborhood should do next year? If we mounted an citizen's patrol would that be so wrong? what if it was armed and an incident occurred in which the use of force was believed to be necessary....was it wrong if the neighborhood protected itself when the paid police force is refusing to do so?
Sure you can say vote out the mayor, fire the police chief, etc. But those take a lot of time and also are chosen by the region as a whole and not a single neighborhoo.d |
|
|
|
08/29/2005 10:18:23 AM · #18 |
Here's a contrary view - for the sake of discussion:
- this country (and many others) was founded on the basis of people coming along from elsewhere and siezing property from the incumbents. Ok, things have moved on a bit since then - but still worth remembering that
- an open and welcoming approach to immigration is what made this country great (remember the huddled masses?). I think it's a shame that doors to immigration are being slowly and inexorably pushed closed. It's not good for any country
- that everyone has legal rights is one of the virtues that many countries can only still aspire to
|
|
|
|
08/29/2005 10:39:01 AM · #19 |
Originally posted by gibun:
The answer? I wish I knew how one could balance the right and wrong, how to turn on the dark at noon and breed fish in the desert sands. |
This sounded so poetic I googled it to see where it was from but I couldn't find anything! Very nicely spoken...
As for the issue being discussed...I'll stay out of it, it's a tough one and as gibun said it's hard to find the right answer. I do know that it's neither black or white but a beautifully complicated shade of gray. |
|
|
|
08/29/2005 10:55:28 AM · #20 |
Originally posted by theSaj:
And frankly, I do not have an issue with vigilantism. Vigilantism is necessary when the government fails. Example: where I live, the last three times I've called 911 the police have failed to arrive. One of those times the neighborhood believed there was a possibility that someone had been killed. Two of the events happened on a particular day of ethnic celebration.
What do you think my neighborhood should do next year? If we mounted an citizen's patrol would that be so wrong? what if it was armed and an incident occurred in which the use of force was believed to be necessary....was it wrong if the neighborhood protected itself when the paid police force is refusing to do so?
|
Anyone that goes onto the streets armed, is saying they are prepared to kill someone and that shouldn't be allowed in any situation, unless you are a trained police officer who can judge situations and whether it is one that requires action that could result in death.
Are you saying you feel your lives are in danger because of this ethnic celebration? Are people invading your homes? Couldn't you just stay inside your home if you feel threatened?
In London there is an annual ethnic carnival at Notting Hill which hundreds of thousands attend with little crime problems. The police are in evidence but rarely need to do more thqan join in and they are certainly not armed.
If you are in danger then perhaps the celebration ought to be stopped.
P
|
|
|
|
08/29/2005 11:06:25 AM · #21 |
The group Ranch Rescue sounds more like a militia than just a local community patrol group. From the Southern Poverty Law Center "They conduct paramilitary operations and equip themselves with high-powered assault rifles, handguns, night-vision devices, two-way radios, observation posts, flares, machetes, all-terrain vehicles, and trained attack dogs." Citizen's patrol groups work with the local authorities and have direct communications with the police. Doesn't sound like this group works with the authorities.
I think the scary thing is when the line is crossed from protection of property to outright mob rule and lynchings. Thousands of African-American citizens lost their lives brutally and horrifically in the south from lynch mobs that included men, as well as, women and children. Do we need to harbor this kind of mentality again in this country? Btw, I don't remember reading anywhere that these Salvadoran men who treasspassed were any kind of threat. It sounds more like they were just walking through the property, probably oblivious to the fact they were treaspassing. |
|
|
|
08/29/2005 11:57:55 AM · #22 |
- this country (and many others) was founded on the basis of people coming along from elsewhere and siezing property from the incumbents. Ok, things have moved on a bit since then - but still worth remembering that
[[[Correction ALL countries were founded on such a basis.]]]
- an open and welcoming approach to immigration is what made this country great (remember the huddled masses?). I think it's a shame that doors to immigration are being slowly and inexorably pushed closed. It's not good for any country
[[[ I am actually pro-immigration, and support increased immigration. I believe immigration is the lifeblood of our nation. However, I believe that illegal immigration is a problem.
My only issue with the latino immigrants is that there is a trait that has grown to which they adamantly refuse to learn the common language and in fact instruct their children not to speak it. And in many shops if you do not speak Spanish you are charged higher prices. But that is not an issue of immigration. But rather another matter in and of itself. So please, do not try to make my point be one of anti-immigration. It is simply regarding illegal immigration.
- that everyone has legal rights is one of the virtues that many countries can only still aspire to
[[[Yes, and one of those rights is that the punishment of a crime is to be equivalent to the crime at hand. These men should have been punished for assault. Which they were and are currently serving jail time. Had this been done to a U.S. citizen these men would not have lost their ranch. That is my point. An illegal immigrant should not have higher status than a tax-paying citizen.
]]]
Originally posted by "riponlady":
Anyone that goes onto the streets armed, is saying they are prepared to kill someone and that shouldn't be allowed in any situation |
Riponlady, IMHO, this is a foolish statement and exceeding naive. In a perfect world...it'd be true. This is NOT a perfect world.
I remember seeing a photo of L.A. after the riots. A small Asian shop stood intact all other around him were devastated. It just happened to be that this shop owner owned a gun. And when the racists came (and I say racist because they preyed strongly on the asian merchant immigrants) came to ravage his shop he fired back and they moved on elsewhere. Both his shop and family were spared...
Was it wrong for that man to have a gun? If he had killed another human being would that have been wrong (sad yes) but wrong? He was defending his home, his family and his livelihood. Where were the police...???
Sorry, your view is very very nice but fails miserable when put into action in this world.
"Are you saying you feel your lives are in danger because of this ethnic celebration? Are people invading your homes? Couldn't you just stay inside your home if you feel threatened?"
First off, I and my neighbors, should NOT have to retreat and hide in our homes in order to be safe. Second, yes, the our lives and the lives of loved ones were put in jeopardy.
The first example,...I was visiting my mom and neighbor. The daughter of my friend was playing in front of their house. When I arrived she came up to greet me. Less than 5 minutes later a jeep with crazed celebrators pulls around. One guy standing up holding the roll bar and girl laughing she stops. Hit's the gas and starts weaving the jeep back and forth. She nearly hit 6 cars and almost rolled the jeep over. Had she weaved just a couple more feet they would have careened into the front of the yard and had it been a few minutes earlier killed my friend's daughter.
This was just one of several incidents, and not the worst either. I have no issue with ethnic celebrations. But they need to be limited and contained and respectful of other ethnicities. You can't disrespect others and then demand respect.
"If you are in danger then perhaps the celebration ought to be stopped."
It should be stopped, but this particular celebration is NOT contained to an area. It is not a sanctioned celebration. Rather it consumes the whole city and surrounding areas. This particular ethnic groups rides around en masse, cars painted, flags waiving, running red lights, causing accidents, driving 50mph+ through the streets. The police force is over-whelmed. More so, those in authority are fearful to do or say anything against this group because it's a minority group. One who tends to have a tenacity at this time for violent retaliatory acts. And if one were to criticize the action they are quickly labelled a racist.
No, this behavior is not all of this ethnic group. Far from it. But tens of thousands participate in which for that time they become barbarians. One of my friends said in response to that day "Argh....I was so ashamed of my people."
Originally posted by "olyuzi":
The group Ranch Rescue sounds more like a militia than just a local community patrol group.
I think the scary thing is when the line is crossed from protection of property to outright mob rule and lynchings.
|
Oh I agree very much, and I think these men should have been locked away. My issue is with the property exchange. Had the illegals not been tresspassing and illegally crossing the border this incident never would have occurred. Order of precendence falls to them. They should not be rewarded for their wrong actions.
Likewise, these freaks should be (as they now are) in jail - but they should only suffer the punishment of the crimes they committed. They were charged with felony possession of weapons, assault, etc. They will spend close to a decade in prison. Our law dictates such for committing such crimes.
This land transfer is truly unheard of, and much different than the case they acted on prior in which a mother lossed her son and permanent injury was sustained. In that case, the son had not been in the act of a criminal/illegal deed. Had he been shot while robbing a house than I would likewise think the decision wrong.
But in this situation, you have criminal act (and yes tresspassing is a criminal act - I should know I was prosecuted for it for dumpster diving in a parking lot - much less heinous act). You have one accusing and one denying. (So the entire case is based on circumstantial evidence...though it is very likely true. But setting such a precedence leads to a situation in which an illegal can just walk into someone's barn on their ranch. Have a friend tie them up and punch them to give them a black eye. Then have his friend call police on a cell phone. Then accuse the rancher of a similar act (he said vs they said). And then seize that rancher's property and give it to the illegals thus making them millionaires.
That is not justice....and sounds extremely dangerous. Justice was served in this case when the men were sent to prison.
"Btw, I don't remember reading anywhere that these Salvadoran men who treasspassed were any kind of threat. It sounds more like they were just walking through the property, probably oblivious to the fact they were treaspassing."
[[[Doesn't matter...it's tresspassing. I was prosecuted for tresspassing for digging in a dumpster for scrap wire and cardboard. No threat. The police did not see any malicious intent. But the land owner (actually, not even the land owner) prosecuted. The result, I now have a criminal record. For much less than these two El Salvadorans. Second, how can you tell the difference between malicious and non-malicious? Thousands of dollars of equipment and goods are stolen from border ranchers every year as illegal migrants cross their ranches. You don't know when someone is malicious until after the fact. A rancher can't wait till they cross to survey if they stole stuff.
I find it interesting that the El Salvadoran states that after an hour or so they gave them cookies, water and a blanket and sent them on their way. I don't know...that part seems very odd. I mean, why give them water and blanket? *shrug* That seems a very confusing part of the story. Thus, one could question if they were simply detained and forced to be searched to see if they had stolen anything. And force was used to allow the search. And then seeing as nothing was stolen they sent them on their way, gave them water, blanket and some food. Had they found stolen goods or contraband perhaps they would have called the authorities.
*shrug*
Either way, this all opens up a pandora's box...
- The Saj
|
|
|
|
08/29/2005 12:04:03 PM · #23 |
Originally posted by Olyuzi:
The group Ranch Rescue sounds more like a militia than just a local community patrol group. From the Southern Poverty Law Center "They conduct paramilitary operations and equip themselves with high-powered assault rifles, handguns, night-vision devices, two-way radios, observation posts, flares, machetes, all-terrain vehicles, and trained attack dogs." Citizen's patrol groups work with the local authorities and have direct communications with the police. Doesn't sound like this group works with the authorities.
I think the scary thing is when the line is crossed from protection of property to outright mob rule and lynchings. Thousands of African-American citizens lost their lives brutally and horrifically in the south from lynch mobs that included men, as well as, women and children. Do we need to harbor this kind of mentality again in this country? Btw, I don't remember reading anywhere that these Salvadoran men who treasspassed were any kind of threat. It sounds more like they were just walking through the property, probably oblivious to the fact they were treaspassing. |
Ignoring the merits of the case, it is virtually impossible that "they were just walking through the property, probably ovlivious to the fact they were trespassing". They were NOT U.S.citizens, a fact that they MUST have been aware of, and they did NOT have permits or visas to enter the U.S., another fact that they MUST have been aware of, hence they were TRESPASSING the moment they crossed the border into the U.S., another fact that they MUST have been aware of.
And, just for my own edification, what would be your response if you found two such "oblivious" men, who you don't remember reading anywhere were any kind of threat, walking thru your apartment? |
|
|
|
08/29/2005 12:27:58 PM · #24 |
Originally posted by theSaj:
Originally posted by "riponlady":
Anyone that goes onto the streets armed, is saying they are prepared to kill someone and that shouldn't be allowed in any situation |
Riponlady, IMHO, this is a foolish statement and exceeding naive. In a perfect world...it'd be true. This is NOT a perfect world.
I remember seeing a photo of L.A. after the riots. A small Asian shop stood intact all other around him were devastated. It just happened to be that this shop owner owned a gun. And when the racists came (and I say racist because they preyed strongly on the asian merchant immigrants) came to ravage his shop he fired back and they moved on elsewhere. Both his shop and family were spared...
Was it wrong for that man to have a gun? If he had killed another human being would that have been wrong (sad yes) but wrong? He was defending his home, his family and his livelihood. Where were the police...???
Sorry, your view is very very nice but fails miserable when put into action in this world.
"Are you saying you feel your lives are in danger because of this ethnic celebration? Are people invading your homes? Couldn't you just stay inside your home if you feel threatened?"
First off, I and my neighbors, should NOT have to retreat and hide in our homes in order to be safe. Second, yes, the our lives and the lives of loved ones were put in jeopardy.
The first example,...I was visiting my mom and neighbor. The daughter of my friend was playing in front of their house. When I arrived she came up to greet me. Less than 5 minutes later a jeep with crazed celebrators pulls around. One guy standing up holding the roll bar and girl laughing she stops. Hit's the gas and starts weaving the jeep back and forth. She nearly hit 6 cars and almost rolled the jeep over. Had she weaved just a couple more feet they would have careened into the front of the yard and had it been a few minutes earlier killed my friend's daughter.
This was just one of several incidents, and not the worst either. I have no issue with ethnic celebrations. But they need to be limited and contained and respectful of other ethnicities. You can't disrespect others and then demand respect.
"If you are in danger then perhaps the celebration ought to be stopped."
It should be stopped, but this particular celebration is NOT contained to an area. It is not a sanctioned celebration. Rather it consumes the whole city and surrounding areas. This particular ethnic groups rides around en masse, cars painted, flags waiving, running red lights, causing accidents, driving 50mph+ through the streets. The police force is over-whelmed. More so, those in authority are fearful to do or say anything against this group because it's a minority group. One who tends to have a tenacity at this time for violent retaliatory acts. And if one were to criticize the action they are quickly labelled a racist.
No, this behavior is not all of this ethnic group. Far from it. But tens of thousands participate in which for that time they become barbarians. One of my friends said in response to that day "Argh....I was so ashamed of my people."
|
Saj - I am not naive, or foolish or speaking rhetoric or saying things for effect as you have accused me in other threads!
I am a parent, an educator, well travelled, well educated, worldly and pretty cynical at times. I am also very candid and say what I think!
Yes I do believe that anyone who carries a gun must be prepared to use it. Anyone who carries a gun must therefore be prepared to kill. Anyone who carries a gun must be ready to justify using it and anyone who carries a gun must understand that they hold another's life in their hands.
What you suggest is anarchy. The authorities aren't doing what you want so look after number1. Let's all carry guns and defend ourselves from percieved threats. I wonder how many innocent people would die?
If your neighbour had come out when the car was in the street and discharged a gun a) does someone deserve to get shot for bad driving ?((albeit I agree this was awful) and b) what if your friends child had been shot accidently in the process?:
If the police aren't good enough or undermanned, then do something about it! Get out and go to your local authorities and change things.
Don't make yourself as wrong as the hooligans by equally breaking the law.
By the way the area that the Notting Hill carnivaltakes place is very big although it is concentrated.
Can't you go to the leaders of this ethnic community for help if they are worried about the behaviour of probably a minority of their people?
Pauline
|
|
|
|
08/29/2005 12:33:17 PM · #25 |
Originally posted by Riponlady:
Yes I do believe that anyone who drives a car must be prepared to use it. Anyone who drives a car must therefore be prepared to kill. Anyone who drives a car must be ready to justify using it and anyone who drives a car must understand that they hold another's life in their hands.
|
("Owns a gun" has been replaced by drives a car to make the point below)
Just to be fair, the same statements that you made also apply to driving a car...we know when we get in a car and drive that we hold people's lives in our hands. We know that cars kill people every day and yet we consider ourselves responsible enough to use the car wisely.
Both guns and cars can be used responsibly, right?
I'm not pro or anti gun, just bringing some perspective to the above argument.
Message edited by author 2005-08-29 12:34:53. |
|
