4 police officers shot/killed in coffee shop near mchord AFB.

[Scotaku]

YES YOU CAN!!!

Killing the shooter before he killed officers is justified because it would have prevented their deaths!

Killing after the fact would not have prevented their deaths and therefore is not justified. The only purpose it serves to execute him would be as punishment and IMO I think throwing him in solitary confinment for life is a better punishment

ITS SIMPLE FUCKING LOGIC!

If you can't comprehend the point I am making then you need to go back to Kindergarten.

Dude... you want to kill a killer before he/she kills an innocent?

Minority Report was a fucking MOVIE!

[Scotaku]

It "jives" perfectly. A bullet through this low lifes head is pallatable because if someone were at the scene of the crime and would have shot this guy, it would have possibly prevented the deaths of all or some of the officers (the burden of proof is 100%). However, now that the crime is over and done with, the deaths of these cops can no longer be prevented and the man should be given a trial and thrown in solitary confinement. Given the fact that capital punishment is actually more expensive than jail, he should be jailed instead of executed. Executing him would only lower us to his level and justify killing when we as a society have condemned it. Also there are countless flaws in the justice system which have currently and in the past allowed innocent men to be jailed and executed. The burden of proof is simply not large enough to justify capital punishment. So, in conclusion, killing is justifiable in cases of self defense or in cases in which it would have prevented deaths of innocents. Now that the killing of innocents is over and can no longer be prevented, killing is no longer justified. This is perfectly coherent and compatible with what I have said in the past.

Now my question to you is, how is your reading comprehension?

Pretty good, I'd say. You just wrote that, in the heat of the moment, it's okay with you to off a criminal. However, if said scum manages to escape capture for a while but is eventually cornered, THEN, he/she should get showered with money instead. Justice, for you, is all about the timing. Then again you'd probably glom onto the killers skin color, if only weed was legal, or how Bush is to blame somehow. Nazi alien abduction get rich quick diet?

You're too easy to bait. I think it's the weed that makes you bite.

[mrsleeve]

DVS:

I know what you were up too, just had to throw some actual laws that are out there in to the mix

[LBJefferies]

no i agree he should be killed if he pulls a gun. you know what playing devils advocate is right?

the point im making is that if you deem him worthy of death at one point, and the only thing that has changed is time, nothing has changed, he's just as guilty as he was when he had the gun in his hand and deserves to die.

By that logic he should have been killed the moment he was born.

Also, plenty has changed. At one point there was intent to kill and at another there wasn't intent to kill. And did you completely forget about the fact that the officers that were alive at one point and are at this point they are not alive? I would call that change over time.

[dvs909]

no i agree he should be killed if he pulls a gun. you know what playing devils advocate is right?

the point im making is that if you deem him worthy of death at one point, and the only thing that has changed is time, nothing has changed, he's just as guilty as he was when he had the gun in his hand and deserves to die.

[LBJefferies]

i know you could, and if i was in the situation i would blow him away. im just playing devils advocate to point out the crazy argument he just made.

How is my argument crazy? By "blowing him away" you are agreeing with the argument...

[Farbin Kaiber]

Sidenote...

[dvs909]

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^6

yeah but you could, if you see the gun, and especially if the guy is threatening you or others lives.

Disclaimer: Please check your local state laws as they are all different from state to state

In most states, if you have reason to fear great bodily harm or death, Deadly force to neutralize the threat is justifiable

i know you could, and if i was in the situation i would blow him away. im just playing devils advocate to point out the crazy argument he just made.

[LBJefferies]

your saying its ok to kill him when he hasnt hurt anyone, but its not ok to kill him after hes murdered 4 people.

no really. thats what you just said.

If someone is running towards you with a knife or is raising their gun with an intent to shoot you, are you going to wait till they hurt you or are you going to shoot them before they do? Cops take people down all the time before they have actually hurt anyone. Surely you, Mr. Conservative, wouldn't regard THIS as murder.

[mrsleeve]

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^6

yeah but you could, if you see the gun, and especially if the guy is threatening you or others lives.

Disclaimer: Please check your local state laws as they are all different from state to state

In most states, if you have reason to fear great bodily harm or death, Deadly force to neutralize the threat is justifiable

In this case in WA state a bystander with a CCW would be fully justified in shooting this guy. I would venture to guess a person with a ccw and armed could have ended this as the shooter was preoccupied with the cops (the guys he targeted and knows have guns) a person could have "gotten the drop on him" so to speak, and ended it there.

This is also a prime example why you cant rely on the cops for your safety

[dvs909]

your saying its ok to kill him when he hasnt hurt anyone, but its not ok to kill him after hes murdered 4 people.

no really. thats what you just said.

[LBJefferies]

you can't kill the shooter before he killed the officers. that would be murder.

If he raised his gun towards the officers with intent or if he shot one officer and had not yet shot the others then it is not murder

[dvs909]

YES YOU CAN!!!

Fucking A. Is this website just some big joke or something? Are you really that fucking retarded?

Killing the shooter before he killed officers is justified because it would have prevented their deaths!

Killing after the fact would not have prevented their deaths and therefore is not justified. The only purpose it serves to execute him would be as punishment and IMO I think throwing him in solitary confinment for life is a better punishment

ITS SIMPLE FUCKING LOGIC!

If you can't comprehend the point I am making then you need to go back to Kindergarten.

you can't kill the shooter before he killed the officers. that would be murder.

[LBJefferies]

You cannot say that its justified at one point but not at another.

YES YOU CAN!!!

Killing the shooter before he killed officers is justified because it would have prevented their deaths!

Killing after the fact would not have prevented their deaths and therefore is not justified. The only purpose it serves to execute him would be as punishment and IMO I think throwing him in solitary confinment for life is a better punishment

ITS SIMPLE FUCKING LOGIC!

If you can't comprehend the point I am making then you need to go back to Kindergarten.

[FredK]

O.k., point taken, you are not anti-gun. Maybe I can make it up to you with a bongload?

Farbin's JONESIN!

He's probably smoked every single piece of vegetation on his property in hopes it will put him in an altered state of mind.

:p