Posted on 06/12/2002 11:57:24 PM PDT by Cultural Jihad
Edited on 04/12/2004 5:38:44 PM PDT by Jim Robinson. [history]
VICTORVILLE, Calif. (AP) - A man described by a judge as "an evil monster" was sentenced to 25 years in prison for using a baseball bat, metal pipe and golf club to attack a 12-year-old Halloween trick-or-treater on his doorstep.
(Excerpt) Read more at sacbee.com ...
You can't you are dead.
Well, obviously you are wrong..
(/sarcasm)
Innocents are often killed in highspeed-pursuits and shootouts between police and suspects. The killings are dismissed as collateral damage and the family of the victims have no recourse.
When innocents are killed by a private bounty hunter in the same manner he is held accountable for his actions.
If you shot at the hoodlum and you hit another person, regardless of wether he was being used as a human shield or was standing 30 feet behind the hoodlum, you would be responsible. The charge would probably be manslaughter since it was unintentional. A jury would have to decide if there was any negligence on your part.
And those are its good points.
Well, it does help keep them put of office.
You don't care about property rights, you support a war on at LEAST two types of property. -- 'Drugs' & guns.
Far, far more often they're brutally murdered by druggies burglarizing and invading homes to get money to score more drugs.
Drug abuse: the "victimless" crime.
Or so say the pro-dopers.
Not true. If you are being fired on there is nothing in the laws that says you must give up your own life to avoid injuring or killing the human shield.
Backwards. Libertarians are the one who advance the absurd position that that drugs should be treated like the right to keep and bear arms.
"He later told authorities he thought Hernandez and two companions were bugs trying to invade his home."
"Prescription is the most solid of all titles, not only to property, but, which is to secure that property, to government. They harmonise with each other, and give mutual aid to one another. It is accompanied with another ground of authority in the constitution of the human mind-- presumption. It is a presumption in favour of any settled scheme of government against any untried project, that a nation has long existed and flourished under it. It is a better presumption even of the choice of a nation, far better than any sudden and temporary arrangement by actual election. Because a nation is not an idea only of local extent, and individual momentary aggregation, but it is an idea of continuity, which extends in time as well as in numbers and in space. And this is a choice not of one day, or one set of people, not a tumultuary and giddy choice; it is a deliberate election of ages and of generations; it is a Constitution made by what is ten thousand times better than choice--it is made by the peculiar circumstances, occasions, tempers, dispositions, and moral, civil, and social habitudes of the people, which disclose themselves only in a long space of time." -- Edmund Burke
During Tuesday's hearing, a videotape of the brain damaged victim was shown. The recuperating youngster struggled to pronounce "mom." "Start with the 'm,'" a therapist coached. "Like a cow: 'm-m-moo.'"
And the libertarians haven't a clue why. The obvious goes right over their pointy heads. Whoooooosh!
Even funnier is to eavesdrop on a tete-a-tete between disgruntled libertarians discussing Harry Browne. They grouse about how he has taken over the Party and made it his own--how he has become an authoritarian and is completely deaf and immune to their criticisms. It's his money-and-petty-power machine and he's not about to surrender control without a fight.
They don't recongize that libertarianism has its own zealots who would be far, far more suffocating and ham-fisted if they gained power than any "statist" presently is. They really believe their ideology is wholly beneficent and self-correcting. In their blind and total confidence in their political ideology they resemble Marxist zealots more than they resemble any other kind of zealot.
Obviously, the authoritarian state you advocate, can.
A free state, based on our constitutional republic, -- could not.
Backwards.
Backwards? -- That's an irrational comment. Post after post you advocate those types of positions.
Libertarians are the one who advance the absurd position that that drugs should be treated like the right to keep and bear arms.
-- They are both types of property that can be ill used, -- and are thus the targets of socialist creeps like you.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.