Do you mean such a confrontation or attack happened to you?
People With whom you commute are usually attempting to kill people?!
No. When I said “I have to be me” I meant a smartass.
I have once won a 6 on 1 fight.
We really kicked the crap out of that guy.
Yup. Texting and driving. See it everyday. Be all for some vigilantee law there.
As a misanthropist do you have empathy for anyone? Or perhaps think that one or more persons in this thread has experienced such an attack? I’m being serious.
I don’t think people texting and driving are intending to kill people.
I am certain they have. I personally know many that have.
There is no way they can not know that is the outcome of distracted driving. It is probably one of the most selfish things one can do, and demonstrates valuing your entertainment over a human life. That is some Roman Emperor level stuff.
I equate it to firing a weapon into a crowd. Maybe you don’t intend to hit anyone when you do it, but you are dumb if you think it won’t happen.
That’s a fair point. I’ve also witnessed tailgating that can sure end in death or handicapping if the lead driver happened to abruptly brake.
Any feeling on such an event, perhaps for the innocent victim?
Why would you fight someone six on one?
That is a joke Brick. It’s predicated upon the ironic twist that, typically, when one shares a story of winning a many on one fight, it’s about being part of the 1. The reveal of being in the 6 is the irony that the punchline depends upon.
Beating up people is bad.
Yes, I actually thought that take on it was funny.
Beating up those who prey on the innocent, like what me and my brothers did to the guy who harassed us for 20 minutes on the bus while the bus driver did nothing to intervene, intentionally spat a huge glob on my little brother, and knocked my tooth out with his baton, that is not a bad thing.
I see what you’re doing here, when justice is in one’s own hands it becomes open to interpretation
Same, but ALSO for people that text and drive. Speeders too. They put ALL our lives at risk for their own selfish interest.
Before we go any further gents, I want point out my screenname here is a reference to Marvel Comic’s “The Punisher” and that I have the skull emblem tattooed on my body. I am familiar with the merits of vigilantism.
Read that and this popped in my head
I don’t get the argument. The determination was that the first round was fired in self defense, the victim was not considered to have been in the wrong.
Allegheny County Deputy District Attorney Ilan Zur said the first set of shots were self-defense, but the last two round she fired were not:
“We’re not unsympathetic to Miss Alston’s situation. She did not ask for this. She was targeted. And when she shot those first five shots, she was acting in self defense. But after that, when both of the attackers dispersed and were running away, it was no longer in that realm and she was now tracking them,” Zur was quoted by WTAE as saying.
Once it’s not self defense, you can’t then shoot someone as vigilante justice. Do you really think a law saying so would make sense?
No one is saying the law was wrongly applied. They are saying the law is wrong.