Should it be legal to run over peaceniks?

[Bill_Thompson]

Bill, did you even notice my post, sandwiched between Halcyon Dayz and yours on the previous page? I think I made a valid point (in response to your comment re. firefighters rushing to put out a blaze). Here is a followup:

For the second time this month, United States border practices are being criticized after an ambulance from Windsor, carrying a heart patient en route to emergency surgery in Detroit, was stopped at U.S. customs by border guards.

On Nov. 11, volunteer firefighters from Quebec were held up at the U.S. border when they tried to help fight a fire in Upper New York State.

[umop ap!sdn]

Don't make the mistake of assuming Bill is looking for a substantive dialog.

Yep.

[KLA2]

^^ Sometimes Bill cracks me up. Bill, I think discussions with you would be more interesting and productive if you acknowledged other posters' points even when they do not support your position. That is part of the difference between a reasoned discussion (good) and a rant (not so good) ... :wink:

[Dragon Star]

Bill, did you even notice my post, sandwiched between Halcyon Dayz and yours on the previous page? I think I made a valid point (in response to your comment re. firefighters rushing to put out a blaze). Here is a followup:

For the second time this month, United States border practices are being criticized after an ambulance from Windsor, carrying a heart patient en route to emergency surgery in Detroit, was stopped at U.S. customs by border guards.

On Nov. 11, volunteer firefighters from Quebec were held up at the U.S. border when they tried to help fight a fire in Upper New York State.

From what I hear, his feelings apparently operate off of the same process.

[Bill_Thompson]

^^ Sometimes Bill cracks me up. Bill, I think discussions with you would be more interesting and productive if you acknowledged other posters' points even when they do not support your position. That is part of the difference between a reasoned discussion (good) and a rant (not so good) ... :wink:

You are talking about firemen not allowed to cross the border into another country? I don't know what that has to do with anything. Maybe you should start a seperate thread of discussion.

[Dragon Star]

Or, perhaps you should honestly participate in your own, Bill.

[troubleagain]

^ WHY does that kid keep whacking himself in the face with a stick??

Is there ANY substantiation as to where that picture came from? Or that it is in any way connected with BT's arguement? Or that it is not photoshopped?

just asking. 8)

That photo came from the site I linked to about this woman taking her kid to a protest and putting it down in front of a semi. There were other photos on the site. I can't vouch for their authenticity (or the bias of the author of the article) but have no reason to think they're fakes.

[Blue Monster 65]

Not innocent of what? Excercising their right? Even if they're doing something this stupid, I don't see them doing something illegal, other than - if they in fact did this - endangering a child. Then I'd say let Child Protective Services have at them (and they should).

But what are they guilty of? Having an opinion different than yours? Please explain.

Woof! - Scott

[KLA2]

Not innocent of what? Excercising their right? Even if they're doing something this stupid, I don't see them doing something illegal, other than - if they in fact did this - endangering a child. Then I'd say let Child Protective Services have at them (and they should).

But what are they guilty of? Having an opinion different than yours? Please explain.

Woof! - Scott

BM65, I am not sure who you are responding to. No quote to reference.

At any rate, (if true) as reprehensible as endangering a child (who cannot make such a decision) is, this demonstrates the absolute confidence the parent must have in the honour, integrity, compassion and driving skills of the American military. {insert flag-waving icon here :wink: }

Or, maybe they just wanted to get rid of the kid.

[Bill_Thompson]

Or, perhaps you should honestly participate in your own, Bill.

Or perhaps you should post complete sentences that present an idea. Honestly, what are you talking about?

[Bill_Thompson]

Not innocent of what? Excercising their right? Even if they're doing something this stupid, I don't see them doing something illegal, other than - if they in fact did this - endangering a child. Then I'd say let Child Protective Services have at them (and they should).

But what are they guilty of? Having an opinion different than yours? Please explain.

Woof! - Scott

No, silly, they are guilty of preventing the shipment of aid to innocent women in children in another country as well as aid to those who are helping them. No, they are not just exercising free speech. No, having a different opinon is not part of the equation here. Yes, it is ethical to just run them over, if it wasn't for the fact that they are using thier kids as tire grease. Yes, someone should take their kids away.

[Superluminal]

I just remembered this, Capt. Kirk allowed a peacenik to be run over. It prevented the Nazi's from winning WWII. So, yes, run over 'em all.

[Blue Monster 65]

In Olympia, Washington, some peaceniks have tried to block the military sending supplies to Iraq

Hmmm ... I think the operative word here is "tried" as in they "tried to block" the shipment during their little demonstration. Did they succeed? Apparently not. Best to not run them over, as, regardless of how stupid their actions are or how much fun you think it would be to run them down, that sort of action would undoubtably backfire upon the military. They may be fuckwads, but killing them just because they are fuckwads we don't like is not ethical under our American way of life.

It would be under Sharia Law or Facist rule. It also is the rule of the day under Chavez, too (see here: http://www.economist.com/world/la/displ ... d=10136480).

We do have those who do such things (killing doctors, etc.) but, by and large, our general public does not. I, for one, am glad for that, even though I disagree with the actions of the protesters. I have no intention of living in that sort of society.

I'm sure you'll argue this point some more. Good luck with that.

Woof! - Scott

[Lance]

They may be fuckwads, but killing them just because they are fuckwads we don't like is not ethical under our American way of life.

...

I'm sure you'll argue this point some more. Good luck with that.

I think this is a point Bill would support.

[KLA2]

That photo came from the site I linked to about this woman taking her kid to a protest and putting it down in front of a semi. There were other photos on the site. I can't vouch for their authenticity (or the bias of the author of the article) but have no reason to think they're fakes.

Right, sorry TA. That looks like a highly politicized site. Pictures can be very manipulative and manipulated. As can the stories behind them.

To sum up, if all this is factually correct, I condemn what these people did. But I would not condemn them to death.

[Bill_Thompson]

I know it is all cute and fun to delude yourself into thinking that those evil war-loving neocons are the problem and all we have to do is join hands and sing anti-war songs from the 1960's.

But the real world is not so simple. No, people who are for the war are not for the war because the love war. No, all the anti-war movements during the Vietnam war had nothing at all to do with ending the USA's longest war. No, you are not going to make any difference. Yes, all you are doing is providing moral support to our enemies and consequentially getting more people killed. Yes, you are holding up live-saving supplies to innocent people. Yes, you have to be border-line mentally retarded if this is the only way you can convince yourselves that your life has any meaning or purpose.

The troop surge has brought peace and stability to the region. If the peaceniks would sprout a collective working brain and think for themselves they would find that out.

I found a couple of videos:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iVASp4CGh94
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dgi5ESpu ... re=related

Of course, I am delighted at how the second video turned out.

Pepper spray is a non-violent use of ending a life-threatening situation. The police used free-speech.

[Bill_Thompson]

You know, you were right.

The truth is they were blocking equipment that was coming back from the war. That's right it was coming back.

Stupidity is its own reward.

[KLA2]

You know, you were right.

The truth is they were blocking equipment that was coming back from the war. That's right it was coming back.

Stupidity is its own reward.

Maybe they were warmongers instead, and wanted it sent back into action.

[Bill_Thompson]

I guess the answer is that there is no need to deal with these people. They will thankfully deal with themselves. One day they will walk in front of oncoming traffic; take the wrong dose of medicines; take the wrong combinations of medicines; try to go save the already-saved grizzly bear from Alaska; become a human shield for an incoming Side Winder or Hell Fire missile; or do any number of things that will give them nomination for The Darwin Prize.