Conquer Club

Vincent M wrote:

Vincent M wrote:Guess who live in that town and county

me

Seriously and to top it all off I know the chief of police

That's nice, really. But I'd rather talk about how cool your avatar is.

luns101 wrote:

Vincent M wrote:

Vincent M wrote:Guess who live in that town and county

me

Seriously and to top it all off I know the chief of police

That's nice, really. But I'd rather talk about how cool your avatar is.

I smell a pun somewhere

Vincent M wrote:

luns101 wrote:

Vincent M wrote:

Vincent M wrote:Guess who live in that town and county

me

Seriously and to top it all off I know the chief of police

That's nice, really. But I'd rather talk about how cool your avatar is.

I smell a pun somewhere

nope. I've always liked Dennis Leary.

The exposure that I have had to USA cops is a very positive one.

I mean, I dont think I would personally get along with any of these guys, but they are extremely good at what they do, and they do not take risks that will endanger either themselves or the innocent public.


Fucking right too. If a battalion of policeman tell you to drop the weapon, you drop the fucking weapon or die, no attitude, no fucking about.

I admire the cops in USA, but as I say would prob never like to encounter them.

Iz Man wrote:

Stopper wrote:

Iz Man wrote:On the contrary, that is exactly what Stopper is suggesting, that the all powerful, almighty government should protect us all. Which is true to an extent, but not at the cost of having citizens run for cover at the first sight of a crime being committed.

In the case of a crime being committed, it would generally mean calling the police.

Iz Man wrote:I'm not asserting that you are a coward. I'm glad to hear you would step in to help granny. Hopefully you live near Stopper as he apparently would not.

You didn't get that from anything I said. It's pretty cheap to suggest that I'm a coward, and it would be cheap of me to retort, so I won't bother.

Very well Stopper.
You come across granny getting assaulted. You have 4 choices:

1) Run away, hopefully the perpetrator doesn't see you.
2) Ignore the situation, its not your problem. Granny was in the wrong place at the wrong time.
3) Call the police, hopefully they'll get there in time.
4) Try to intervene and hopefully you save granny from immediate harm.

I know what I would do.
Do you?

Your first two questions can only be answered "yes" by nihilists and moral weaklings. The third can quite reasonably be answered by "yes" by the vast majority of people.

I know what I would do - which is to try to intervene. During, or after, I'd have the police called. But that's not the point.

I'm 30 years old, male, and reasonably strong and fit, as you'd expect. But I'm also in a small minority of the population.

To take it to extremes, if you live in a society where people are all expected to ultimately defend themselves with lethal force, who is supposed to protect all the weaker people in society - the children, the old, the disabled, the women? Or are they all supposed to be escorted by young (or in the case of Lovell, quite old, but elite) men with guns all the time?

Most countries function very well with women, children and old people operating with relative freedom, and free from the fear of young and violent men. The government make sure these men don't terrorise the rest of society.

luns101 wrote:

Bertros Bertros wrote:I smell a cop out. Come on luns you can do better than, you don't want to understand me so I'm not going to bother. Just because I don't believe in God doesn't mean I am disinterested in or would be unable to understand how you comfortably reconcile an awkward contradiction between the central doctrine of your faith and your belief in the second amendment.

Absolutely not, you would wait for a couple of posts before labeling me as someone who acts "obtuse". Let's just skip to that part right now, shall we?

No, I'd label you as acting "obtusely".



No, I'm just joking.



Bertros made the point I'd have made. I don't know why you're so defensive.

heavycola wrote:

OnlyAmbrose wrote:

Stopper wrote:What I find really striking, and I'm not saying this simply to try and get a cheap shot in at Christians, is OnlyAmbrose's and luns101's attitude towards this. I can accept that a practicing Christian might say killing in the way of self-defence could be acceptable, but neither of you has even expressed the slightest bit of regret that a human being - one presumably capable of being "saved" - got killed in this incident.

It's a valid point you bring up.

Best answer I can give you is this. No I don't really feel remorse. Hearing about a bad guy getting capped gives me about the same amount of remorse as that my dear great great aunt Susan's second cousin eight times removed died in a car accident.

I didn't know the guy, and from what I hear he had it coming.

I don't think anyone is going to shed tears over this dead guy, but that's a world away from whooping for joy to hear that someone was shot dead. It's weird and a little bloodthirsty.

That, and ignoring the fate of the dead guy, while lionizing our gun-totin' hero, seems to be having your cake and eating it, considering that you did not know either of them.

The guy probably shouldnt have shot the guy in the head, but he did the right thing.
This is slightly off topic but some of the posts i read(I didnt read it all) were saying its wrong to have the right to bear arms. Listen to this scenario(My personal favorite but there are more)

USA ticks sum country off. They decide to invade. Are they going to just march in with pistols like they could in any country while the people called for help. Or are they gunna get the sh*t blown out of them by us hunters? Armed civilains against an army isnt great odds. But i would rather go down with a fight...

Stopper wrote:No, I'd label you as acting "obtusely".

No, I'm just joking.

Bertros made the point I'd have made. I don't know why you're so defensive.

I don't think I'm being defensive at all. I've had my share of discussions with many UK atheists and my experience has been that most of you are not actually interested in "understanding" the Christian position...whether it be on the 2nd amendment, capital punishment, or whatever the latest subject is.

If I thought for one moment that people on your side of the argument were actually interested in finding out what our positions were, I would make a comment. But I don't believe that's the case based on previous experience.

So, I just simply put out that I am happy that the fellow used his constitutional rights and protected himself, and in the process killed the would-be robbers (and possibly murderers).

Ok luns, i'm not an atheist, and i believe the Bible is the Word of God, which is why i despise hypocrites like yourself. I tried to like you for a while there, but when i saw how you try to conform the Bible to your way of thinking (like you're doing on this thread) instead of conforming your thinking to the Bible, i realized you're just another organized religion phony. I don't follow the teachings of the Bible, which leaves me 2 choices - admit that i'm a failure there, or follow your example and take scriptures out of context to make it look like i'm not that bad. I let the utter hypocrisy of the organized church overthrow my faith, and i hate myself for it, so pardon me if some of that hate and disgust goes your way - you are part of the problem.

I think anybody who doesn't become born again isn't a real Christian (I fit in this category), since they didn't make the decision, the religion is just as real as anything else.

b.k. barunt wrote:Ok luns, i'm not an atheist, and i believe the Bible is the Word of God, which is why i despise hypocrites like yourself. I tried to like you for a while there, but when i saw how you try to conform the Bible to your way of thinking (like you're doing on this thread) instead of conforming your thinking to the Bible, i realized you're just another organized religion phony. I don't follow the teachings of the Bible, which leaves me 2 choices - admit that i'm a failure there, or follow your example and take scriptures out of context to make it look like i'm not that bad. I let the utter hypocrisy of the organized church overthrow my faith, and i hate myself for it, so pardon me if some of that hate and disgust goes your way - you are part of the problem.

Sorry you're so bitter about life.

b.k. barunt wrote:Ok luns, i'm not an atheist, and i believe the Bible is the Word of God, which is why i despise hypocrites like yourself. I tried to like you for a while there, but when i saw how you try to conform the Bible to your way of thinking (like you're doing on this thread) instead of conforming your thinking to the Bible, i realized you're just another organized religion phony. I don't follow the teachings of the Bible, which leaves me 2 choices - admit that i'm a failure there, or follow your example and take scriptures out of context to make it look like i'm not that bad. I let the utter hypocrisy of the organized church overthrow my faith, and i hate myself for it, so pardon me if some of that hate and disgust goes your way - you are part of the problem.

Tool - Opiate

luns101 wrote:

Vincent M wrote:

luns101 wrote:

Vincent M wrote:

Vincent M wrote:Guess who live in that town and county

me

Seriously and to top it all off I know the chief of police

That's nice, really. But I'd rather talk about how cool your avatar is.

I smell a pun somewhere

nope. I've always liked Dennis Leary.

Luns your a badass!!

Stopper wrote:

heavycola wrote:

OnlyAmbrose wrote:

Stopper wrote:What I find really striking, and I'm not saying this simply to try and get a cheap shot in at Christians, is OnlyAmbrose's and luns101's attitude towards this. I can accept that a practicing Christian might say killing in the way of self-defence could be acceptable, but neither of you has even expressed the slightest bit of regret that a human being - one presumably capable of being "saved" - got killed in this incident.

It's a valid point you bring up.

Best answer I can give you is this. No I don't really feel remorse. Hearing about a bad guy getting capped gives me about the same amount of remorse as that my dear great great aunt Susan's second cousin eight times removed died in a car accident.

I didn't know the guy, and from what I hear he had it coming.

I don't think anyone is going to shed tears over this dead guy, but that's a world away from whooping for joy to hear that someone was shot dead. It's weird and a little bloodthirsty.

That, and ignoring the fate of the dead guy, while lionizing our gun-totin' hero, seems to be having your cake and eating it, considering that you did not know either of them.

Stopper this is ridiculous.

Bad guy goes and tries to rob a place with a gun. He gets shot by an old man.

No kidding I'm not going to cry over it!

And if I was going to cry over SOMETHING is wouldn't be that the Marine shot the guy, it would be that the guy was dumb/desperate/poor enough to try to threaten someone with a gun.

Iz Man wrote:In response to the thread about those "people" walking over a stabbing victim to continue shopping, here's one that'll brighten your day.
Good thing we have the 2nd Amendment, otherwise this 71 yr old hero couldn't have saved the day:
http://www.sun-sentinel.com/news/local/ ... 2093.story

This guys my new hero.

luns101 wrote:

Bertros Bertros wrote:I smell a cop out. Come on luns you can do better than, you don't want to understand me so I'm not going to bother. Just because I don't believe in God doesn't mean I am disinterested in or would be unable to understand how you comfortably reconcile an awkward contradiction between the central doctrine of your faith and your belief in the second amendment.

Absolutely not, you would wait for a couple of posts before labeling me as someone who acts "obtuse". Let's just skip to that part right now, shall we?

Wow, I must have really hit a nerve with that comment. In the context it was used during the brokeback thread I believed (and still do) you were deliberately ignoring some of the facts to help support your position and as such used it fairly. We all do it sometimes and should be big enough to admit it. I also labelled you as such due to your comments on HIV not anything to do with your religious beliefs. So I don't believe your assessment of me is in any way fair; I don't as a rule bandy insults around, I'm not one of those people who makes wise crack unicorn/spaghetti monster remarks and I certainly don't discredit anything you say because of your beliefs. However I will call you out if you make a weak argument or justify your position with incomplete evidence and would expect the same in return.

You're a smart guy and I'm really very interested in how smart people think and hwo they accept contradiction of beliefs. I have a good friend who is a post grad physics researcher specialising in optics and yet is also probably the strongest believer I know, we talk for hours on such matters and it is never anything other than fascinating. His innate objectivity derived from years of academic study allows him to acknowledge when his faith contradicts what he would refer to as empirical evidence and as such adds weight to his beliefs which just isnt present when the alternative of massaging the facts to support a position is used.

So will you enter into a discussion with me on this or not?

luns101 wrote:nope. I've always liked Dennis Leary.

Always been more interested in Timothy Leary myself...

Bertros Bertros wrote:So will you enter into a discussion with me on this or not?

no thanks

Based on a PM I just got, I think luns is taking a well-deserved break from Funny Farm debates for awhile. I'm sure he'll be back eventually

Well thats fair enough luns, can't say I'm surprised but I am a tad disappointed.

So whats with all this PMing over a forum... people PMing luns to tell him how much they are upset by Guiscard, luns PMing Ambrose to tell him he doesn't want a debate with me (or presumably anyone for that matter)... I hope somebody somewhere is PMing someone to tell them what an arsehole they think I am, it would make my day!

Bertros Bertros wrote:Well thats fair enough luns, can't say I'm surprised but I am a tad disappointed.

So whats with all this PMing over a forum... people PMing luns to tell him how much they are upset by Guiscard, luns PMing Ambrose to tell him he doesn't want a debate with me (or presumably anyone for that matter)... I hope somebody somewhere is PMing someone to tell them what an arsehole they think I am, it would make my day!

Its a sign of popularity, mate... Glad you made it into the club.

Expect to be notified by a lightning bolt to the head at some point... God will smite thee if you upset the Christians!

Guiscard wrote:

Bertros Bertros wrote:Well thats fair enough luns, can't say I'm surprised but I am a tad disappointed.

So whats with all this PMing over a forum... people PMing luns to tell him how much they are upset by Guiscard, luns PMing Ambrose to tell him he doesn't want a debate with me (or presumably anyone for that matter)... I hope somebody somewhere is PMing someone to tell them what an arsehole they think I am, it would make my day!

Its a sign of popularity, mate... Glad you made it into the club.

Expect to be notified by a lightning bolt to the head at some point... God will smite thee if you upset the Christians!

I knew you'd come through showing your true colors, Guis. Right on schedule.

Stopper wrote:

Iz Man wrote:Very well Stopper.
You come across granny getting assaulted. You have 4 choices:
1) Run away, hopefully the perpetrator doesn't see you.
2) Ignore the situation, its not your problem. Granny was in the wrong place at the wrong time.
3) Call the police, hopefully they'll get there in time.
4) Try to intervene and hopefully you save granny from immediate harm.
I know what I would do.
Do you?

Your first two questions can only be answered "yes" by nihilists and moral weaklings. The third can quite reasonably be answered by "yes" by the vast majority of people.
I know what I would do - which is to try to intervene. During, or after, I'd have the police called. But that's not the point.

Wrong, its exactly what the point is.

Stopper wrote:I'm 30 years old, male, and reasonably strong and fit, as you'd expect. But I'm also in a small minority of the population.

I wouldn't expect that, but I'll give you the benefit of the doubt.

Stopper wrote:To take it to extremes, if you live in a society where people are all expected to ultimately defend themselves with lethal force, who is supposed to protect all the weaker people in society - the children, the old, the disabled, the women? Or are they all supposed to be escorted by young (or in the case of Lovell, quite old, but elite) men with guns all the time?Most countries function very well with women, children and old people operating with relative freedom, and free from the fear of young and violent men. The government make sure these men don't terrorise the rest of society.

Your scenario of the extreme is ridiculous. You don't expect people to defend themselves?
No one here has advocated armed escorts for everyone. The point is this man stood up to thugs and protected the innocent. Period.
You & others here have chastised him for that, using the "rationale" of a gun-toting society as the blame for this incident. That's just a lame attempt to show your disdain for the U.S.
When in fact the bottom line is everyone who is able should be willing to protect those in need if the situation ever arises.
Ideally, that situation would never arise, but lets take a look at reality, shall we? It may be a foreign concept to you, but please indulge me.
Bad people are everywhere. No matter if you live in a representative republic, a constitutional monarchy, a totalitarian dictatorship, or a hippie commune in the desert.
When (not if) those bad people threaten the innocent, the citizen, armed or not, has a duty, if able and with the means, to try to stop the "bad person" from doing harm.
Your reliance on the government to be everywhere all the time is naive.
I keep repeating myself in this thread and its starting to get frustrating.
ONCE AGAIN,
The government cannot, and should not be everywhere all the time.
It is a weak & lazy individual who relies on his government to take care of every need for him.

The police were not there to save the day for the people in this Subway Restaurant. Thank God an ex-marine was.

luns101 wrote:I knew you'd come through showing your true colors, Guis. Right on schedule.

I'm surprised we didn't get the "end of discussion" declaration.

OK, well I guess I should explain some of the things that have been going on.

1. It is true that I have received many pm's from other players here on CC about Guiscard. Since I regularly clean up my inbox from time to time and delete them, I have no concrete #. I would say that it has been in the range of between 10 - 20. Usually, it is from other people who believe like myself but are still teenagers, and they believe as I do on spiritual matters. There have been a couple who don't believe like I do, but who have just pm'd me because they don't like him and think he's arrogant. If they want to come forward they can.

2. Yes Bertros, I pm'd OnlyAmbrose to warn him of my experiences here discussing things with the UK atheist brigade here on CC. I offered him some advice so he wouldn't be discouraged when the insults came towards him.

3. I don't think that debating or discussing Christian positions with Guiscard, Stopper, or yourself produces anything really positive. I will simply put out my opinions, but I don't feel I owe any person who automatically dismisses the Bible an explanation of how I reconcile social or legal issues with my faith. It's pointless, in my opinion, and that is why I won't engage you in a discussion. The Bible is readily available for you to examine for yourself on such issues - my words aren't going to change your mind. Instead, I believe there will be another parade of cynical remarks about Christ or his followers.

True to form, Guiscard used the first opportunity he could to throw out a spiteful remark about the Christian faith.