Location: Let the creamy goaltending season begin! - EK Joined: 08.31.2014
Feb 13 @ 12:49 PM ET
I don't know what's so hard to understand.
They don't go on to his property, nobody get's shot, there's no story.
Is that so hard to figure out? - pete26
Because that is not exactly what occurred, that cut and dry. But like I said, when people look at things through a "wrong" or "right" only lens, you end up with the inability to differentiate levels of culpability and appropriate judicial punishments.
Yes, there was more nuance to the situation, but stepping on someone's property, simple trespassing, is not grounds to shoot someone in the head.
Because that is not exactly what occurred, that cut and dry. But like I said, when people look at things through a "wrong" or "right" only lens, you end up with the inability to differentiate levels of culpability and appropriate judicial punishments.
Yes, there was more nuance to the situation, but stepping on someone's property, simple trespassing, is not grounds to shoot someone in the head.
Nothing you say can convince me otherwise - Mashadar
Location: Isn't Cooley 5"11? You know who else is 5"11? Sydney Crosby. - Scabeh Joined: 04.06.2011
Feb 13 @ 12:54 PM ET
Because that is not exactly what occurred, that cut and dry. But like I said, when people look at things through a "wrong" or "right" only lens, you end up with the inability to differentiate levels of culpability and appropriate judicial punishments.
Yes, there was more nuance to the situation, but stepping on someone's property, simple trespassing, is not grounds to shoot someone in the head.
Nothing you say can convince me otherwise - Mashadar
Location: Let the creamy goaltending season begin! - EK Joined: 08.31.2014
Feb 13 @ 12:55 PM ET
Are you sure?
*wink wink, nudge nudge* - Pat1993
Well, according to Pete's philosophy, he is fully justified in shooting someone in the head if they walk up his driveway to his house asking for him to call 911 to help after being in a car accident.
Well, according to Pete's philosophy, he is fully justified in shooting someone in the head if they walk up his driveway to his house asking for him to call 911 to help after being in a car accident.
no one has a gun, no one dies.
no one leaves their keys in their quads, no quad is stolen. if everyone was smoking pot, everyone is happy and chill - 2gals1dane
no one has a gun, no one dies.
no one leaves their keys in their quads, no quad is stolen.
if everyone was smoking pot, everyone is happy and chill - 2gals1dane
Always seems to be the main issue, let's forget about the criminal(s)..
Location: The Slovakian Jagr, QC Joined: 02.25.2007
Feb 13 @ 2:00 PM ET
Because that is not exactly what occurred, that cut and dry. But like I said, when people look at things through a "wrong" or "right" only lens, you end up with the inability to differentiate levels of culpability and appropriate judicial punishments.
Yes, there was more nuance to the situation, but stepping on someone's property, simple trespassing, is not grounds to shoot someone in the head.
Nothing you say can convince me otherwise - Mashadar
You do realize that's not what occured in the discussed situation?
I hate it when people look at things like they're all black or white!