arma virumque cano (et alia)
Death by firing squad.
I said that warning shots are rarely appropriate. You should wait a while before you lie.
And I asked you to explain when they might be appropriate. You dodged.If you had any integrity, you'd admit they are NEVER appropriate.
No, Mikeb, integrity is telling the truth, which I did. I told what I know. You insist that the truth must be what you believe, but you could be wrong, and you fail to see the difference between a judgement and a fact. As I and TS showed you, there are times when a warning shot might be appropriate. You won't even consider that possibility.
This liar won't even admit to his own words.
As I told TS on the other thread, his bizarre examples of when a warning shot might be appropriate are so rare we can discount them entirely. You like to discount accidental deaths because they're so rare, well this is something even rarer.
What do you mean by "discount them entirely"? I'm not talking about statistical analysis, I just talking about not arresting people who did no wrong. One of my bizarre examples was an actual case that we discussed here.
They're so rare we can discount them entirely in our discussions of what's the proper behavior when handling a gun. Warning shots are a bad idea except for the one-in-a-million cases you described. Your point is not that warning shots are now to be considered a proper part of SYG? Is that a good idea in you view?
No, it's not a good idea to say, "warning shots are allowed". It's also a bad idea to make all warning shots criminal. Existing law is adequate.But notice, this is a response to your side making a big stink about SYG and trying to claim "racism" regarding the Marissa Alexander case. Had you Gus instead focused on the details of the case, and what separates it from the Zimmerman case, we probably wouldn't be having this debate.
And since some of the commenters here can't figure out how to link to the source of a comment, here's an illustration. My discussion of warning shots can be found here:http://mikeb302000.blogspot.com/2014/01/florida-to-expand-stand-your-ground-to.html
A weak blog that compares its intellectual correctness to a lying criminal coward. This is your standard? To prove you are more correct than a lying criminal coward? You need to up your game and dump lying criminal cowards.
A warning shot was to convey that if a criminal doesn't stop, they will be shot and killed. Our generation of gun loons just wants to kill. No matter if the stranger entering the home is their son, or daughter returning from a night out; shoot first and find out later you just killed a family member.
"A warning shot was to convey that if a criminal doesn't stop, they will be shot and killed. Our generation of gun loons just wants to kill." Anon, are you suggesting that pro gun people are arguing against warning shots because we would rather just get straight to killing someone? If this is the case, then I'm sure we'll soon be hearing from the MOMs and MAIG, and their fellow travelers in support of this proposed bill on the grounds that warning shots will save lives.
Warning shots have been taught to police for decades.
Yes, and people like Greg and you prove it everyday on sites like this.
I'm not really understanding how warning shots are germane to this post. He was both drunk and angry. He intentionally fired into the air or at the house, it appears more likely. He gets responsibility for the rounds fired.
Joe Biden says warning shots are appropriate.