[Pnuemagger]

Originally Posted by drunkkoala

if this is the case, i fail to see how double jeopardy in the movie is infact double jeopardy if ford was convicted of murder, then came back and really murdered the guy.

Technically he would have murdered him twice, and got 2 murder charges.

You are derailing this thread dude... enough of the double jeopardy ****. A separate incident on a separate date consitutes a separate trail. Double jeopardy is ultimately there to keep aquitted defendants from being retried and convicted defendants of being rejailed for the same crime.

OJ simpson could make a public address and say he killed his wife. He could not be charged with murder because he was already aquitted.

[drunkkoala]

Originally Posted by graysonp

Manslaughter-n. The unlawful killing of one human by another without express or implied intent to do injury.

Which means the court decides whether or not you could have, or should have prevented it. If it's your fault the person died, it's manslaughter. Which means the courts can theoretically put you in prison for accidently tripping and stabbing someone with a pencil. It's a theoretical possibility. Just like your stupid CCW "situation". It's IDENTICAL to your examples. Now answer the question: Should we ban pencils in churches?

ok, now since your using theoretical situations, why can't i use my theoretical situations to prove a point on CCW on campus?

like i said, your posts are so hippocritical they don't belong here

EDIT: but, whos fault would it be for my tripping? becuase the sidewalk is uneven, shoe-laces untied? was i drunk?

[graysonp]

Originally Posted by drunkkoala

ok, now since your using theoretical situations, why can't i use my theoretical situations to prove a point on CCW on campus?

like i said, your posts are so hippocritical they don't belong here

My point is that hypocritical situations are so ridiculous, that they don't hold water as an argument. So if my argument is irrelevant, so is yours. If you agree, then you need to admit it. If you think you have a valid argument, then you need to answer my question.

[Pnuemagger]

Originally Posted by drunkkoala

ok, now since your using theoretical situations, why can't i use my theoretical situations to prove a point on CCW on campus?

like i said, your posts are so hippocritical they don't belong here

You are being stupid... He his mimicking your argument style to show it doesn't hold water.

At this point you're either
A) Trolling
B) Not mentally developed enough to cotribute to this thread.

[drunkkoala]

Originally Posted by Pnuemagger

You are derailing this thread dude... enough of the double jeopardy ****. A separate incident on a separate date consitutes a separate trail. Double jeopardy is ultimately there to keep aquitted defendants from being retried and convicted defendants of being rejailed for the same crime.

OJ simpson could make a public address and say he killed his wife. He could not be charged with murder because he was already aquitted.

ok, so im aquitted of rape, and i really did rape him. double jeopardy then.




/double jeopardy.




^^^edited post above, please read it


and read this http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Imperfect_self-defense

[timmyt]

[Swerve22]

Originally Posted by drunkkoala

while the chances are low, it can still happen.

are you denying that fact?

So let's look at your line of thinking here:

Some group of gun-haters could collaborate against a CCW holder, all tell a story about how he was waving around some guns, and get him put in jail. Because of this possibility CCW holders should not be allowed on college campuses, as they are putting themselves at risk of being falsely incriminated.

Dude, are you serioius? I mean are you actually for real? Is there any grey matter sloshing around between those SETI sattelite sized ears of yours? I could care less if a bunch of gun haters are planning on bearing false witness against me because you know what? THEY'LL NEVER KNOW I'M EVEN CARRYING A GUN. I guess we should ban sea-travel also because the loch ness monster could escape from Scotland swallow an ocean liner too, right? I guess Guns in general shouldn't be allowed because we all know there's the possiblitiy that the Predator could show up on the planet and start hunting everybody with a weapon for sport, right? I guess we shouldn't allow desks on campus because a group of students could simultaniously band-together and claim that some completely innocent guy was waving one around over his head and shouting "GIVE ME YOUR MILK MONEY" in the cafeteria.

Honestly, a McDonalds ball pit couldn't fit the amount of dodgies that deserve to be posted after every one of your "arguments". You need to apologize for wasting everybodies time with your childish ways, leave this thread, and report yourself.

The guy that was in here talking about kids trading "deagles" like pokemon cards made more sense than you, give it a rest.

Oh yah I forgot, we shouldn't be posting on the internet either because there's a chance that SKYNET could be monitoring our IP's and sending Hunter Killer drones to vaporize our families! Better give away everything you own and go live in a remote cave (but not one that could possibly collapse or house a bear!)

[timmyt]

I had a t-1000 on my *** last night.

[graysonp]

Originally Posted by drunkkoala

EDIT: but, whos fault would it be for my tripping? becuase the sidewalk is uneven, shoe-laces untied? was i drunk?

It's your fault. You're clumsy. Stop nit-picking. This is theoretically possible, just like your argument. It is theoretically possible to serve prison time for accidently stabbing someone with a pencil.

Now assuming that your argument makes sense (which you are doing), then so does mine. Answer the question or admit that hypothetical arguments hold no water without data to back them up.

[drunkkoala]

Originally Posted by graysonp

It's your fault. You're clumsy. Stop nit-picking. This is theoretically possible, just like your argument. It is theoretically possible to serve prison time for accidently stabbing someone with a pencil.

Now assuming that your argument makes sense (which you are doing), then so does mine. Answer the question or admit that hypothetical arguments hold no water without data to back them up.

nit-picking is the name of the game in a court of law.

If it was found that the sidewalk's creators knowingly created the sidewalk not up to standards then i could possibly get off. My theory does hold water, becuase you would be held accountable in a court of law.


"THEY'LL NEVER KNOW I'M EVEN CARRYING A GUN" - it only takes one slip up. carrying concealed is never 100% concealed, there are always ways of people noticing.

what would you do if someone bumped into you and felt your gun? sure, it was concealed, but they know your packing.



im sure murder victims said "it can never happen to me"

[Pnuemagger]

Originally Posted by Swerve22

...
Honestly, a McDonalds ball pit couldn't fit the amount of dodgies that deserve to be posted after every one of your "arguments". You need to apologize for wasting everybodies time with your childish ways, leave this thread, and report yourself.

The guy that was in here talking about kids trading "deagles" like pokemon cards made more sense than you, give it a rest.

Oh my lord - that was epic. I seriously LOLed in my cubicle.

[drunkkoala]

Originally Posted by Pnuemagger

Oh my lord - that was epic. I seriously LOLed in my cubicle.

when you grow up and realize that every action has a consequence(s), tell me.

[graysonp]

Originally Posted by drunkkoala

nit-picking is the name of the game in a court of law.

If it was found that the sidewalk's creators knowingly created the sidewalk not up to standards then i could possibly get off. My theory does hold water, becuase you would be held accountable in a court of law.

Are you seriously trying this hard NOT to defend your argument? I have created an argument using the same logic that you have used, and you're not even trying to defend it.

It is theoretically possible that you could be charged with manslaughter, be held accountable in a court of law, and serve prison time for an accidental murder with pencils. Details do not matter, because this hypothetical situation is completely possible. There are thousands of scenerios we could create with this same outcome. Carrying a pencil could result in prison time, just like carrying a concealed weapon on a college campus. Now does my argument hold water? Should we ban pencils? I want you to actually use some critical thinking and answer this question. Don't change the subject. Don't nit pick. Don't beat around the bush. If your argument is valid, then so is mine. I want a direct answer.

Should we ban pencils for the very same reason that you're against CCW on campus? Or is the argument irrelevant? Does my argument hold water (which would also mean that yours is valid as well)?


EDIT: Keep in mind that you have to answer the previous question first. I will not discuss anything with you until you answer that question. But once we get past that, I'll give you another argument to ponder:

Should we ban cars? Here's a case of homocide via car. Obviously, it's possible. It's happened at least once. So we should ban them, right? We should ban CCWs, cars and pencils, all because it's theoretically possible to serve prison time with these objects.

[Death_Taco]

This thread has turned into the argument of "What if...?" against "This is fact."
I don't see how some of you people manage to keep arguing.

Half the people against this know absolutely nothing about guns, nor the mindset one has when carrying a gun
You don't become John Wayne when you strap a gun on, your training and class time takes over and you become MORE responsible and MORE alert, not the opposite as most of you try to say. Why? Because when you carry you can get into some deep trouble if you react like an idiot and pull your gun for the slightest issue.

People who WANT guns, who go through the CCW process, don't do stupid stuff that will take their passion away forever

[[HRT]Squirrel Master]

Originally Posted by Death_Taco

This thread has turned into the argument of "What if...?" against "This is fact."
I don't see how some of you people manage to keep arguing.

Half the people against this know absolutely nothing about guns, nor the mindset one has when carrying a gun
You don't become John Wayne when you strap a gun on, your training and class time takes over and you become MORE responsible and MORE alert, not the opposite as most of you try to say. Why? Because when you carry you can get into some deep trouble if you react like an idiot and pull your gun for the slightest issue.

People who WANT guns, who go through the CCW process, don't do stupid stuff that will take their passion away forever

That is why you should stop talking to him until he can bring in some facts or has something to say other than what if... life is full of what if's... k... now what?

I would like to gt someone in here who has some valid arguments against CCW

[cyrus-the-virus90]

Will someone give me a good reason as to why they do not like the idea of a 21 year old adult who took the time and effort to get a CWP, from carrying on campus?

[[HRT]Squirrel Master]

Originally Posted by cyrus-the-virus90

Will someone give me a good reason as to why they do not like the idea of a 21 year old adult who took the time and effort to get a CWP, from carrying on campus?

fear and ignorance

[cyrus-the-virus90]

Originally Posted by [HRT]Squirrel Master

fear and ignorance

I guess that works, ok boys round up all the guns.

[Drex17]

wow, this thread was busy while i was at work.

[swsigma9mm]

This thread has went from on side to another over and over again. HRTSquirelmaster you are a good one to have around. Thank you for supporting this side of the argument very intelligently and not backing down at all. Drunkoala my guess has just been back into a corner and now is just throwing out what if this or what if that happens situations. If something goes down around you and your friends or family aren't you just going to be slap happy that maybe just maybe, there will be someone to defend you? The one thing I do know is that only liberals, dictators and criminals fear armed citizens. I hope after everything is said and done with these elections, that I will still have the right to defend myself and my family, and not have to rely on public responders.

[Conqueror]

This thread is done.

CQ