sigh. I don't feel like there is a parallel IMO. McVeigh was caught after the bombing. At that point, we follow the law, charge and try in court. 100%.
devil's advocate; if someone knew what McVeigh was planning, OR a wannabe bomber walks into a building and makes a bomb threat, is the obligation to protect the bomber or the potential victims of the bomber?
Yeah, not equivalent situations. Obviously any means necessary to stop someone like McVeigh prior to the explosion.
I should have clarified my question with hindsight of the result and looking back upon the situation. I would say the result was the best possible scenario.
A bomb threat is a pretty complex situation than say someone armed with a gun. There are a hell of a lot more bomb threats than actual viable bombs, and those actually capable of making a bomb will have multiple bombs hidden and possibly triggered by their downfall so taking them down may actually trigger the explosion if not removing means of losing knowledge of additional threats. I certa
devil's advocate; if someone knew what McVeigh was planning, OR a wannabe bomber walks into a building and makes a bomb threat, is the obligation to protect the bomber or the potential victims of the bomber?
In theory? Sure, you get to shoot him, clear cut self defense, and obviously, McVeigh had ill intent.
In practice, you're going to die by the business end of your own gun WAY before you get a chance to "defend yourself" from some soft headed moron like the Spokane clown shoe bomber.
Good friend was and still is nicknamed pissboy. His last name is Yurina but that amazing son of a bitch wore it like a royal title. Actually, he lives in your neck of the woods. I gave him my old Yeti SB5 as he was trying to get into real mountainbiking on his decades old Trek hardtail.
sigh. I don't feel like there is a parallel IMO. McVeigh was caught after the bombing. At that point, we follow the law, charge and try in court. 100%.
devil's advocate; if someone knew what McVeigh was planning, OR a wannabe bomber walks into a building and makes a bomb threat, is the obligation to protect the bomber or the potential victims of the bomber?
And no one knew spokane freedom guy had a bomb until aprehending. You want to shoot people just to find out they had a peanut butter and jelly sammich in their backpacks? Can't see anything bad ever happening with that approach.
What you describe is not "justice", it's retribution with hindsight knowledge.
And no one knew spokane freedom guy had a bomb until aprehending. You want to shoot people just to find out they had a peanut butter and jelly sammich in their backpacks? Can't see anything bad ever happening with that approach.
What you describe is not "justice", it's retribution with hindsight knowledge.
I don't want to shoot anybody, dude. Somebody claiming to have a bomb if only to commit suicide by others is an awful result. The "devil's advocate" part was; what is the cost of making the wrong call? Too often people tell us that they're bad and going to do bad things, and nobody believes them.
I don't think it's justice nor retribution, and just because something (like shooting the maker of a false bomb threat) may be considered 'justifiable' doesn't mean it wasn't also preventable.
Oh for sure.
roving, demonstrably violent street gangs bragging for weeks about doing violence, then doing it.......and still being called 'trump supporters' for example?
Sounds like what you need is find your closest john brown gun club.
roving, demonstrably violent street gangs bragging for weeks about doing violence, then doing it.......and still being called 'trump supporters' for example?
I had to look them up, didn't know that was a thing.
what's the saying? "I wouldn't want to be part of a group that would have someone like me as a member."
This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.