Stand Your Ground
Standing his ground:
Java Bowling III, 43, said he got in an argument with 40-year-old Scott A. Campbell because he was trying to take away his friend’s keys to prevent him from driving while intoxicated.
The two men fought before Campbell shot Bowling in the chest, according to WJW. Campbell reportedly ran from the scene, but was later arrested in Middleburg Heights with the help of the police Aviation Unit. He was still awaiting charges at Central Prision Unit as of Sunday night.
Yes, keep pointing out cases where someone is arrested and charged to show us how easy it is to get away with murder under self-defense laws.
ReplyDeleteAnd you wonder about my have zero tolerance? This dumbass deserves what he gets.
ReplyDeleteI understand why you returned the moderation policy back on, but it is a perfect example of how one person can screw up the whole thing for everyone.
ReplyDeleteIt is the perfect example of why gun owners fight for their civil rights as hard as they do. The actions of the few cause everyone to pay the price for doing nothing wrong.
Instead of banning the few, or the one trouble maker, just makes everyone guilty. Sure makes it hard for a conversation that just gets confusing overall.
Your zero tolerance about drugs and alcohol puts you a lot closer to me than to your fellow gun-rights advocates, don't you think?
DeleteThat may be true in that respect Mike. Like I have said, don't be around me if you decide to use anything that alters reality.
DeleteTexas has a acceptable alcohol level of 0.0000000 while armed for a good reason. And not under the influence of any other drug as well, you will lose your license and the ability to purchase firearms legally as well.
Correct me if I am wrong, Texas Colt Carry. But I'm sure you have a zero tolerance for alcohol while carrying a gun, not for simply owning a gun, as Mike's standards are. I agree. Put the guns away the minute you start drinking.
DeleteAnd the many, many gun owners who don't? Is disarming them appropriate? Or do you turn a blind eye to them since they're fellow gunners?
DeleteCarrying a gun, driving a car, working on the job and so on. If your around me, you traveled to me and your gonna get in trouble with me.
DeleteIf your gonna drink or whatever else, stay home and away from me.
I have no problem taking away the ownership of guns for those that do more than drink alcohol. If you drink, in my opinion, I question a persons ability to lock them up and give the key to someone who wont be around the drinker.
The reason I am the way I am is because of personal experiences when I was much younger. Not in my family but from people down the road from me. Sober this person was a fine a human being you could find. Drunk this guy had his brains knocked out, no reasoning with him as he did stupid things with guns, cars and people around him. He never shot himself or anyone else thank God but did put holes in his house. He did wind up killing himself and two others that were not with him just a quarter mile from his home in a wreck and he was driving. I was eleven at the time and this made a lasting impression on me.
Alcohol is just as mind altering as any other illicit drug. It affects the power to reason among other things. I do not and never have touched the stuff. I do smoke cigars and cigarettes but that's it. So no, I am not perfect either.
I cant say too much about alcohol and gun owners, alcohol is legal. You and your family and friends will have to determine you and your use. If you are responsible to really lock the guns up and stay home giving all your keys to a non drinker that will leave and not come back till your completely sober then OK. Otherwise I have NO trust in ones ability to make sound decisions while even lightly under the influence or "buzzed".
But I will add, if your not responsible enough to do the right thing, the guns need to be removed from anyone who drinks.
I know that my opinion may chap some of the gun owners out there, but I cant help it, its the way I am.
What warranted not posting my comment? Your idea here is nonsense, Mikeb. You claim that gun owners must never drink when there's a loaded gun in the house. That's so silly that it's hard to know where to begin.
DeleteI don't have a problem with it being a crime to carry while intoxicated, or endangers, hurts, kills someone in their home while drunk. You want to disarm people who responsibly separate the two.
DeleteTexas, I think it's now become clear, you ARE on my side of this argument.
Delete"You want to disarm people who responsibly separate the two."
DeleteYou better reread my Famous 50%. I made it very clear the ones who should be disarmed are the binge drinkers, the heavy drinkers and the alcoholics. The others I said cannot consider themselves responsible gun owners, that's all.
And that's why you fail, Mikeb. Americans don't like being told by someone demanding control that they are irresponsible for doing something that harms no one. A person can drink alcohol while a gun is in the house without causing any harm. It's not hard. While involved with one thing, stay away from the other.
DeleteI know exactly what you want. I said you want to disarm people who responsibly separate the two- that even means heavy drinkers. Someone is young, they like to party. They go out on Friday nights and drink til the bars close down. But they are smart about it. They take public transportation, cabs, use designated drivers, and they sure as hell don't come home and fondle their guns before passing out. As usual, you don't want to just disarm people who do something wrong, you want to disarm people who might do something wrong. And do you realize that we Basically wouldn't have military or police with your ideas?
DeleteAnd you're right, Texas Colt Carry is closer to you on this topic.
To be PERFECTLY CLEAR! I am ONLY ADVOCATING DISARMING those that PROVE to be irresponsible drinkers!!! Any conviction relating to alcohol is a big indication you have a problem with it. For me, I will not allow it around ME! In the same way I am also advocating the removal of your drivers license, registration from your car, not this breath-a-lizer thing-a-ma-bob that's used instead.
DeleteTS re-read my comment. If you can be a responsible drinker then OK. Its just that in my experience I have not met one. And it may be because I WILL NOT allow anyone that drinks or any alcohol around me. I will not take even the slightest chance of being around anyone that does, no offense meant.
There is Texas law that will disarm you for various reasons, sometimes for life. There is Texas law that will remove your driving ability, sometimes for life.
Then there are MY rules, you WILL follow them around me and mine or I WILL disarm and separate you from your car and take you home. You will not get back either until your sober. Your property may also get turned over to the local police and let them decide if and when you get them back. I do NOT believe in the concept of not being responsible for your actions resulting from being drunk. You have a clear frame of mind before you popped that top and then getting into your car or holstering that weapon. If you drink and harm someone resulting from a vehicle crash or firearm then you should face the same punishment just as if you were sober.
So far I have never had to do any of that, those that know me know better than to do anything around me. Also those that I know, both friends and family don't do any of that anyway.
If you are a drinker and we meet, never mention that you drink to me. Never ask me to join you for a drink. I don't know any of you personally and probably never will. I don't approach law makers on this subject, probably never will, Texas already has good laws and enforce them.
I do approach law makers on the return to the original Texas constitution and Federal constitution of the second civil right, you know "Shall not be infringed". But like all civil rights that are protected human rights not given by the government, they are ultimately limited to legal citizens and protected for those that don't abuse those rights. If you abuse ANY civil rights, they can be severely limited or removed by the constitution as well, read the constitution, its explained in there.
Irresponsible people who abuse their rights protected by the constitution, criminal activity and wanton disregard are among the things that curtail your rights. Think about that.
Again, TO BE CLEAR, I am only concerned about those around me. Mike, like I said before "SIDES" build fences, I don't like fences. I have no "side", only my convictions and beliefs. I don't include the entire population, that's what you do. I advocate laws to be enforced for the individual responsible for his or her actions, not making everyone else pay for something that he or she had nothing to do with or has done anything wrong.
TS, do you understand?
Greg, do you as well?
Mike, I know its a long stretch, but do you understand as well?
NO SIDES!
Texas, I understand.
DeleteTS and Greg, the problem with the fantasy world you live in is many people who have a few too many say "fuck it" and break the very rules they set out for themselves before they started drinking.
Even with guns in the home, you guys are always talking about that proverbial home invasion by masked men, well how does drinking fit into that picture? Is having a few going to make you better able to handle a bad situation?
I understand, Texas Colt Carry. And with that, I am back to thinking you are closer to my views on government's role in disarmament. Being drunk is not reason enough for disarmament, it's what they do while drunk that matters.
DeletePersonal convictions are another matter, and I'm generally not interested in changing someone's personal convictions, so long as they limit it to their personal lives, which is what you're doing. It's fine that you don't want to be around anyone who drinks even a little, though I don't think it is reasonable. That's similar to someone who walks out of the room as soon as they found out you are carrying. Now If someone is out-of-control drunk, I wouldn't want to be around them either, just like I would leave the room if someone muzzles me with their gun.
To give you a little background on my situation, I would say I drink about 5 days a week. Usually it is a glass of wine or beer with dinner. I also work in the wine industry, and tasting and knowing wines is part of my job. Sometimes I've tasted 100+ wines over a few hours. I'm spitting in those cases, but even still enough is absorbed through the tongue to feel some effects of the alcohol. A few times a year in social situations I drink enough to be intoxicated, but never to the point of pass-out or vomit. I don't drive drunk, and I have never even touched a gun after consuming so much as a drop of alcohol. Mike calls me "irresponsible", but I hope you wouldn't consider me a person you wouldn't be around because I bet we'd have some pretty good conversations. I Don't like cigars, but if we're outside around the campfire, puff away.
Now for you, Mike. If someone breaks the rules and does something wrong, then punish them. The problem with your ideas is what about the people who DON'T say "fuck it"?
DeleteTo your second point, why are you trying to make arguments that we know you don't believe?
TS, in my opinion someone who drinks like you do, in spite of all your protestation to the contrary, cannot be considered a responsible gun owner. Even small amounts of alcohol impair your ability to react and to think. Your decision making process is not what it should be. The same exact rationale is used by people who get high on pot and other drugs. And many who do overindulge say they don't, just like you did.
DeleteEven though I have never in my whole life laid a finger on a gun with even the slightest bit of alcohol in me? Whatever. Keep showing your readers how reasonable you are.
DeleteIs it ok for me to own a car?
So you completely abstain from alcohol yourself, Mike?
DeleteTexas, you've made a personal decision, and that's good for you. I respect the choices that people make for themselves.
DeleteMikeb, the problem is that you want to make choices for other people. That's my key problem with you. Guns are secondary. You believe that whatever choices make sense to you must be the ones imposed on everyone.
You want this because, as you demonstrate time and time again, you have a dismal view of humanity. You see human beings as fundamentally wicked creatures who are hanging about waiting to make bad decisions at the slightest provocation. Of course someone who holds that view would want an outside force to impose order.
The problem is that if your view is correct, that outside force will be as wicked as the people that it's trying to control. And if your view is wrong, there's no justification for the force you demand.
"Mikeb, the problem is that you want to make choices for other people." Yeah, Greg, that's right. I think murder and stealing should be illegal for everybody. I also think misuse of guns should be too.
DeleteTS, I don't drink. Was that an attempt at a gotcha? Like when I blasted hunters and you asked me if I eat meat?
Yes it was. You blocked me (but I never asked if you eat meat).
DeleteThe thing is you blast hunters and gun owners, but do you blast your omnivore friends and car driving friends for the same reason? I can’t imagine you have many friends in Italy if you go around calling everyone “sconsiderato” who enjoys a glass of Brunello or “disgustoso” when they eat Bistecca alla Fiorentina.
Nice strawman, Mikeb.
DeleteNo, Greg, you're the one who made the straw man, or perhaps it was just a ridiculously stupid argument, that I want to make rules for other people. I suppose you think all gun control activity should be a personal choice.
DeleteSo we really don't know anything about this event other than Campell in awaiting charges while the gun loon police argue over ways to reduce his sentence to a misdemeanor after tracking him down with a helicopter.
ReplyDeleteHmm, a misapplication of stand your ground laws--one of Madam Jade's favorite deceptions, followed by highlighted text noting that a person hasn't been charged yet, as of, N.B., Sunday night. Ah, yes, this Obviously shows that the cops are going to let the drunk murderer off with a stand your ground defense, otherwise they'd clearly have dragged in a D.A. over the weekend to draw up charges instead of letting the guy rot in jail until the next day people were at work and in court.
ReplyDeleteJade, Nobody listens to you because your arguments are based upon sophistry and shit logic.