For the record, I am fine with arsonists being shot on-sight. Setting a building on fire is the same as using a "weapon of mass destruction" and there is no way to know the number of people who are exposed to its potentially lethal danger.
In ERJ's universe, it is always "open season" on people in a mobs who light Molotov Cocktails. No bag limit. No license required.
Ditto for home invaders who torch the place.
I don't know about being shot on sight, but according to one report I've read, arsonists in 3rd world countries caught on on the spot are bound and thrown into the fire they started in the 1st place. Poetic justice and one heckuva deterrance if you ask me.
ReplyDeleteYeah, that person's elevator doesn't appear to go all the way to the top floor. Something tells me an insanity plea is already being drafted up.
If you are in the act of lighting a bottle with a rag stuck in the neck seemingly filled with combustable liquid in front of my house, neighbor's house or my place of business you will receive a speedily delivered gift from me. Depending on what is in the back ground, I my just aim at the bottle.
DeleteThankful that we don't practice savage public executions like that here (for now). Let's not regress our justice system.
DeleteIf you're going to take matters into your own hands, shooting them is enough. Any time you do that, you take on all the responsibility of judge, jury and executioner. It should be an absolute last resort.
Who let Gary in?
DeleteActually, I found Gary's position to be quite reasonable. He is advising us to not throw people into fires...that shooting them is enough.
DeleteIt is certainly easier on the back!!!
With regard to the "...regressing..." comment, I hope Gary understands that the criminal justice system protects the accused and that excessive leniency will break the social contract and people WILL resort to vigilantism. It is like the Buddhist concept of Middle Way. Put the thumb too much on one side or the other and the system loses the legitimacy and authority it requires to function.
Spoken from the comfort and security of a developed nation. In villages in Guatemala gang members trying to lure young women into prostitution or selling drug, were warned… once.
DeleteIf their warning wasn’t heeded, next came the towns men with a tire, gasoline and a match. After awhile the cartels quit sending people. The police were corrupt so drastic measures were called for.
That's the point though, ERJ. You'd think someone wary of government overreach would understand the value of protections against unjust / hasty punishment. It's easy to advocate for aggressive forms of justice until you're the one on the receiving end. It is not a good thing when individuals take justice into their own hands. You've denounced the BLM riots (rightfully so) while minimizing Jan 6th (calling it a panty raid) - so it's clear your stance is biased and emotional rather than principled and logical.
DeleteThrowing people into pits of fire would certainly be a 'regression' of the justice system, that is not something you're going to be able to debate.
At least the barrel looks as empty as his conscience. Man, I had no idea what Anon said above. That is poetic and sounds right. I like your idea too. If one was a great shot, maybe like a 1950's cowboy, he could shoot the rioter's bottle and give him a chance to shine... and dance. I seem to remember a scene like that in "Clayton and Krystal".
ReplyDeleteEar is the same. Head shape the same. Hair suggest recently recoving from being shaved.
ReplyDeleteDuring the initial days of the Rodney King riots, quite a bit of footage aired in the heat of the moment, was never subsequently rebroadcast.
ReplyDeleteOne clip that stood out at the time was an interaction between a shotgun-wielding defender and the guy winding up to lob a lit molotov towards the defended premises.
Hilarity did not ensue.
The other videos that have never resurfaced show how aggressive Rodney King was at the beginning of the traffic stop. He got the beatdown because he attacked a cop but the other occupants of the car weren't touched.
DeleteWithout attacking you Gary but your position seems to indicate you think it is okay for the attacker to act as judge, jury, and executioner against the defender? I don't think you'll get a lot of support for the position from the defenders.
ReplyDeleteThose two pictures could be the same guy or not. We don't see the same ear, head positions are different, nose is covered by the pistol, different facial hair, etc. In British terms: Not Proven.
ReplyDeleteAgreed!
ReplyDeleteIn Kentucky attempted arson of building, occupied or not, allows deadly force to be used. The current governor of PA is a leftist Democrat so I am a bit surprised his residence was attacked.
ReplyDeleteHe also happens to be Jewish. Unfortunately, antisemitism seems to be fashionable across the political spectrum.
DeleteIn Texas, arson is one of the modifiers that allows prosecution to seek the death penalty. Assuming they're alive long enough to be arrested, tried and convicted.
ReplyDeleteSummary execution is an appropriate response to some crimes. Unfortunately the vast majority of Prosecutors don't think so. In fact many of them firmly support the criminals and happily imprison anyone who defends themselves.
ReplyDeleteIt would put them out of their jobs.
Delete