View Single Post
Old 25-03-2004, 09:09   #15
Pierre
cf.mega poster
 
Pierre's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: floating in the ether
Posts: 13,347
Pierre has a pair of shiny starsPierre has a pair of shiny starsPierre has a pair of shiny starsPierre has a pair of shiny stars
Pierre has a pair of shiny starsPierre has a pair of shiny starsPierre has a pair of shiny starsPierre has a pair of shiny starsPierre has a pair of shiny starsPierre has a pair of shiny starsPierre has a pair of shiny starsPierre has a pair of shiny starsPierre has a pair of shiny starsPierre has a pair of shiny starsPierre has a pair of shiny starsPierre has a pair of shiny starsPierre has a pair of shiny starsPierre has a pair of shiny starsPierre has a pair of shiny starsPierre has a pair of shiny starsPierre has a pair of shiny starsPierre has a pair of shiny starsPierre has a pair of shiny starsPierre has a pair of shiny stars
Re: Should there be a right of unlimited defence of your property?

Quote:
I`m sorry, but that is utter BS
In your humble opinion.

Again this comes down to the person committing the Criminal act having more rights that the victim of the crime.

Why should a person who "knowingly" and "willingly" enters "your home" to cause you harm in whatever way have any rights in our society.

By taking that decision he is stepping outside of our society, he is saying he does not want to be part of our society, he does not want to contribute to our society, he just wants to cause pain and suffering to other members of our society.

Why should our society protect him.

If he chooses not to break into a home then he will not be at risk of being hurt in the process. Seems like a simple choice to me.

I know it may not be acceptable to the bleeding heart liberals amongst us, and it would never become law.

But this country would be a bloody better place if it did.
__________________
The wheel's still turning but the hamsters dead.
Pierre is offline   Reply With Quote