Post: #1

It's pretty obvious that I defend cops, as they're doing a job that most of us (myself included) don't want to do. But they can't be everywhere at once and sometimes, when it's an emergency, they may show up too late. In this case, a man was able to stop an armed robbery by shooting the robber. Good news right - a bad guy was stopped, and it wasn't a cop. This should make leftists happy too since this isn't the authority they're so against.

Think again:

Quote:Local news media seemed stunned that it is perfectly legal to defend the life of a third party without being a sworn law enforcement officer.

All of this being ironic because when a police does defend the peace, we all hate him because he's a racist/should have used his taser/sexist/some other leftist excuse.

Mark my words: they want criminals to do whatever they want to you and you have no resource; no police, no guns, no nothing. Some of this is because those in these movements are criminals themselves (pretending to be innocent citizens), so of course, they want you to have no protection. Be skeptical of these people in these movements because the future they want for you is a disaster. Their hatred for authority is because authority limits the crimes they can commit and the same is true for them wanting you to be armed; of course, they want you to have no protection.

This is why we must stand up to these people; it could be our very lives we're standing up for in the end.

Post: #2

Yes, the far left in the west seems to want anarchy and then I suppose a leftist authoritarian state put into place to answer the anarchy chaos.

Post: #3

I'll agree with you, but this isn't new. It probably seems new if you're young, but everything old is new, as they say.

Back in '88 -- when I could throw a pigskin a quarter mile -- debates raged over whether you should be able to shoot an intruder who came onto your property or into your home. The anti-gun crowd wanted people to be charged for murder for this and thought self-defense was an "excuse."

Chief amongst these people was a Washington Post columnist named Carl Rowan. But what happened when someone entered Mr. Rowan's property?

He shot them. Shows you that the SJW crowd says a lot of things only as a way to show how holy they are in public. When it comes to their own reality, they don't believe it.

Here's a source for my facts, from, '88. Try not to laugh, but the article is headlined "SHOOTING DOESN'T CONTRADICT GUN CONTROL STANCE, ROWAN SAYS."

These news reporters say they don't want people to defend themselves, but anyone who has been in a media-related building complex knows how much security there is there. If they really felt this way, why the beefy guy with the badge at the door?

Post: #4

I can kind of see that in the first article he mentions, but the second just seems like standard reporting.

SJWs hate self-defense because in a lot of cases a 'privileged' person kills an 'innocent victim' of our 'white patriarchal system.'

Why do you think they changed George Zimmerman's race to "white hispanic" after they figured out he wasn't some blonde-haired, blue-eyed man of German descent? It's all racial with them.

Basically the Old Left wanted workers to rise up and violently overthrow the government, while the New Left doesn't give a shit about workers and wants to use 'oppressed' minorities as pawns to violently overthrow the government.

This is why they're obsessed with identity politics. It's sick.

Meanwhile when a black man defends himself from white criminals, loses his apartment and everything because he's stuck in jail, they still rally against Stand Your Ground Laws that would've protected him. (Skip to 13:05 to hear the story about Jay Lewis. Or read this article.)

Post: #5

It's because the left doesn't want you to have guns thats all. Nothing more.

If he had defended the other person's life using martial arts or some non-firearm means of engagement then he would be a hero.

Post: #6

Really the SJWs want to defend society by showing criminal cat videos off their Facebook account, a hit of their weed and then put them on disability.

Post: #7

I think the manosphere needs to start an awards council, whereby we issue weekly awards to upright, sane, and testicle-bearing men who haven't received the praise they deserve. The tagline could be "For honourable conduct contrary to the opinions of social-justice fuckwits".

Post: #8

(06-17-2015 09:27 AM)General Stalin Wrote:  It's because the left doesn't want you to have guns thats all. Nothing more.

If he had defended the other person's life using martial arts or some non-firearm means of engagement then he would be a hero.

The left doesn't want you defend yourself period. Do you think they would approve if you used a martial arts sword? Not using a gun just makes it more messy. And there are legions of defense lawyers, mostly liberals, who will look for any flaw in your defense to sue you in civil court. The money assures that. They are not on the side of the innocent.

Post: #9

(06-17-2015 09:35 AM)Sherman Wrote:  

(06-17-2015 09:27 AM)General Stalin Wrote:  It's because the left doesn't want you to have guns thats all. Nothing more.

If he had defended the other person's life using martial arts or some non-firearm means of engagement then he would be a hero.

The left doesn't want you defend yourself period. Do you think they would approve if you used a martial arts sword? Not using a gun just makes it more messy. And there are legions of defense lawyers, mostly liberals, who will look for any flaw in your defense to sue you in civil court. The money assures that. They are not on the side of the innocent.

Your disdain is misplaced. A good defense attorney is your best friend since the prosecutor will be the one coming after your ass and trying to throw you in prison.

Post: #10

(06-17-2015 09:38 AM)TheWastelander Wrote:  

(06-17-2015 09:35 AM)Sherman Wrote:  

(06-17-2015 09:27 AM)General Stalin Wrote:  It's because the left doesn't want you to have guns thats all. Nothing more.

If he had defended the other person's life using martial arts or some non-firearm means of engagement then he would be a hero.

The left doesn't want you defend yourself period. Do you think they would approve if you used a martial arts sword? Not using a gun just makes it more messy. And there are legions of defense lawyers, mostly liberals, who will look for any flaw in your defense to sue you in civil court. The money assures that. They are not on the side of the innocent.

Your disdain is misplaced. A good defense attorney is your best friend since the prosecutor will be the one coming after your ass and trying to throw you in prison.

You beat me too it. I was going to change that. I meant the lawyers who sue people in court for civil liability.

Post: #11

Self defense, and the defense of others are masculine traits that must be eradicated.

Post: #12

Here in Canada there has been a large "war" on self defence by crown prosecutors and police. Defence of any property whatsoever seems to draw their ire like no other sin. Matt Gurney from the National Post has done a lot of work in this area and it is clear he is one of the more self defence friendly journalists in Canada: http://news.nationalpost.com/tag/self-defence

I do not think the drive to narrow self defence was exclusively or originally a social justice warrior agenda (although the SJWs seem ready to sign on). I think it is actually a hard leftist-statist agenda. The reasoning being that only the great and powerful benevolent state and its elite agents (i.e. the police and prosecutors) should have the right to exert force in defence of life or property or to decide when to exert such force. In other words, tax-serfs being able to defend themselves against unlawful uses of force against their person on property is a significant threat to state power. Either indirectly, because it allows individuals more freedom from state influence of control (if only for brief moments as they defend themselves from unlawful activities of other citizens), or directly, as it theoretically may allow individuals to resist unlawful applications of force by the state itself.

I also think incidents of self defence, particularly of property, tend to act as an uncomfortable reminder to hard core statists that the police and surveillance state wet dream they all seem to have is something less than 100% effective.

In Canada the police and prosecutors have been running into problems securing convictions for "excess use of force" in self defence cases because Courts (and juries) seem to think, rightfully, that self defence is a fundamental principle of justice in our common law system. That has not deterred the cops and prosecutors from arresting and charging people who have done nothing other than use force to defend their property. Legal fees, stigma, time and stress of defending oneself, even when the state cannot secure a conviction, could be significant enough a deterrent to start conditioning people not to fight back when their property is unlawfully attacked.

Our current "conservative" Federal Government recently amended the Criminal Code to simplify self defence laws (going from several sections of the Code down to just two). The idea was to make the defence EASIER to access and clarify that reasonable force can be used to defend both person (including a third person) and property. So at least our current government gives lip service to the principle, even if some of its agents do not. That said, a potential future "progressive" government will likely sympathize more with the statist view.

Post: #13

The "you can't defend yourself" agenda has actually been going on for quite a while at our public schools. If two kids end up fighting, they both get equally punished, even if one of them was merely defending himself.

Post: #14

(06-17-2015 10:25 AM)vinman Wrote:  Self defense, and the defense of others are masculine traits that must be eradicated.

Completely agree with this. At the heart of white knighting (which I agree is wrong), is the heart of wanting to help someone in need. While there are a few bad men in the world, the vast majority of men love to help someone who needs it. A simple example of this is someone getting a flat tire (I've experienced 5 in my life). The people who stop to help are ALWAYS men.

Post: #15

(06-17-2015 09:11 AM)It_is_my_time Wrote:  Yes, the far left in the west seems to want anarchy and then I suppose a leftist authoritarian state put into place to answer the anarchy chaos.

It's the Hegelian dialectic - Thesis, Antithesis, Synthesis - except you create both the thesis and antithesis as an artificial construct to force the synthesis you wanted from the beginning.

Ordo ab Chao. The chaos is manufactured to force totalitarianism.

Post: #16

You cannot defend your life in the UK if a violent perp breaks into your home and threatens your family without severe consequences.

What man here would stay calm and calculated with a weapon in his hands after seeing his family brutalised?

This is a shit test perpetrated not just by SJWs but by the law. I personally would lose it and end up with a longer sentence than the guy(s) would get. They would either be dead or seriously wounded at the least.

Post: #17

You may remember the Zimmerman trial, where they were making a big deal trying to overturn Florida's stand your ground law. However, stand your ground was never a defense in the trial. They want to overturn these laws because many of them also provide immunity from civil suits. Even if you are innocent, a leftist lawyer can bankrupt you by forcing you to spend all your savings defending yourself. Keep in mind that these liberals have perverse financial incentives to believe their ideologies. SJW is also a racket.

Post: #18

(06-17-2015 09:38 AM)TheWastelander Wrote:  

(06-17-2015 09:35 AM)Sherman Wrote:  

(06-17-2015 09:27 AM)General Stalin Wrote:  It's because the left doesn't want you to have guns thats all. Nothing more.

If he had defended the other person's life using martial arts or some non-firearm means of engagement then he would be a hero.

The left doesn't want you defend yourself period. Do you think they would approve if you used a martial arts sword? Not using a gun just makes it more messy. And there are legions of defense lawyers, mostly liberals, who will look for any flaw in your defense to sue you in civil court. The money assures that. They are not on the side of the innocent.

Your disdain is misplaced. A good defense attorney is your best friend since the prosecutor will be the one coming after your ass and trying to throw you in prison.

A man came into our house when I was younger and attempted to murder my brother over a woman. My big brother had never been arrested ,was just accepted to medical school, and my whole family plus my childhood best friend were all in the house when this criminal cocksucker rushed in with a gun and a baseball bat and emptied his gun grazing my brother with several bullets, my brother slept with a gun under his pillow and put five right in that asshole's chest. The police charged my brother with Murder.
Let me clarify, a man came into a family home with a fucking gun and a bat missed his intended target, got laid the fuck down because my father did not raise any victims-and the State charged his intended victim with murder. They searched our home, cost us thousands in legal fees, and put my brother through hell. Do not think prosecutors are here to serve you they are out for themselves and their career, The less state involvement in reasonable peoples lives the better.

Post: #19

I have never thought prosecutors are good people by default. Prosecutorial misconduct is a huge problem in this country. Prosecutors can go after people and ruin their lives for no good reason. A lot of them know the process is the punishment.

I don't know where you got the impression that I thought that, Atlanta Man.

Post: #20

Atlanta Man, sorry your family went through that. But your brother did not get convicted I hope.

Post: #21

(06-17-2015 12:51 PM)TheWastelander Wrote:  I have never thought prosecutors are good people by default. Prosecutorial misconduct is a huge problem in this country. Prosecutors can go after people and ruin their lives for no good reason. A lot of them know the process is the punishment.

I don't know where you got the impression that I thought that, Atlanta Man.

I was not coming after you my friend, I am just a man like you and I agree with a lot of what you say. I was just relating a story that shaped my view of the State and how they treat citizens that choose to defend themselves instead of becoming victims. For the record TheWastelander I think you are pretty intellectually consistent and I have a lot of respect for you. You are not a troll, and you always make legitimate comments. Please do not take offense to anything I wrote, and no I did not have the impression that you were putting prosecutors on a pedestal.

Post: #22

(06-17-2015 02:09 PM)Atlanta Man Wrote:  

(06-17-2015 12:51 PM)TheWastelander Wrote:  I have never thought prosecutors are good people by default. Prosecutorial misconduct is a huge problem in this country. Prosecutors can go after people and ruin their lives for no good reason. A lot of them know the process is the punishment.

I don't know where you got the impression that I thought that, Atlanta Man.

I was not coming after you my friend, I am just a man like you and I agree with a lot of what you say. I was just relating a story that shaped my view of the State and how they treat citizens that choose to defend themselves instead of becoming victims. For the record TheWastelander I think you are pretty intellectually consistent and I have a lot of respect for you. You are not a troll, and you always make legitimate comments. Please do not take offense to anything I wrote, and no I did not have the impression that you were putting prosecutors on a pedestal.

Ah, I gotcha. Your post was a little confusing.

Post: #23

(06-17-2015 12:52 PM)samsamsam Wrote:  Atlanta Man, sorry your family went through that. But your brother did not get convicted I hope.

They put him through 3 years of bullshit until they declined to prosecute and dead docked the case. When he got his medical license he had to jump through more fucking hoops to explain to the to the Medical Board what happened before they gave him his license. Thank god this shit happened in the 1980's or google results for his name would be a nightmare. That is why I keep telling you guys arm yourselves and do not depend on the state to protect you, especially if you are gaming these women. The broad this man was willing to kill for was not even my brother's main concern she was just a piece of ass out of many, my brother did not even know that chick's last name. One man's random piece of ass is a weak man's entire world. Before it all came out and the fucking news trucks were at our house and all of it was all over the television my brother did not even know who this guy was or why he was at our house shooting, he thought he was a criminal just out to rob us.

Post: #24

"First, we need to define left and right. In my opinion, obviously a controversial one, the explanation for this mysterious asymmetric dimension is easy: it is political entropy. Right represents peace, order and security; left represents war, anarchy and crime."

http://unqualified-reservations.blogspot...ified.html

I can't get this line out of my head, every damn thing seems to prove this.

Post: #25

(06-17-2015 12:09 PM)Foolsgo1d Wrote:  You cannot defend your life in the UK if a violent perp breaks into your home and threatens your family without severe consequences.

What man here would stay calm and calculated with a weapon in his hands after seeing his family brutalised?

This is a shit test perpetrated not just by SJWs but by the law. I personally would lose it and end up with a longer sentence than the guy(s) would get. They would either be dead or seriously wounded at the least.

Talk about an unholy alliance. Seriously, I previously dared a couple of them to "catch a grenade for" me a la Bruno Mars, but alas. They failed. EACH. AND. EVERY. SINGLE. TIME.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SR6iYWJxHqs