"Youths" kick a man to death on a crowded Antwerp bus

Status
Not open for further replies.
yeah, funny you should mention that...

That was, IIRC, in NYC.

Can one draw some parallels between a US city ruled by a regime dedicated to deprive its citizens of the right to defend themselves, and a European country ruled by ...a regime dedicated to deprive its citizens of the right to defend themselves?
 
re:

Quote:

>I suppose you could call it "Survival of the REMFs".<
****************

heh heh heh heh heh...In the rear with the gear and the beer and the um...the um...Uhhh... :D

Cosmoline..."Blowing" for Columbine? :evil: If that was intended...I like it.
If it was a typo...I still like it.:cool:
 
It is called the "passerby effect" or "the diffusion of social responsibility".
Each person thinks someone else will eventually intervene so there is no need
for them to do so. The more people around the worse it is.

It is also called apathy, CYAO, and/or cowardice.
 
It is called the "passerby effect" or "the diffusion of social responsibility".
Each person thinks someone else will eventually intervene so there is no need
for them to do so. The more people around the worse it is.

It is also called apathy, CYAO, and/or cowardice.

It's also called, "The Gub'mint done took my gun away from me and tole me the Po-lice is supposed to handle stuff like this."
 
It's also called, "The Gub'mint done took my gun away from me and tole me the Po-lice is supposed to handle stuff like this."

True enough. A valuable defense tool has been removed from the field for
them and a certain thought processes encouraged.....

..... but we are talking about adults. Conscious guides a man in these types
of situations not governments.
 
re: kitty genovese

New York shouldn't count as part of the United States. They never wanted to sign the Declaration of Independence in the first place and their mindset is closer to that of France than most of the USA. Plus what can you expect from a bunch of mental invalids that continually re-elects the likes of Hitlery, Schumer, McCarthy and tossed their 30-something electoral votes for a mysterious "John L Kerry" in 2004.
 
Come to think of it, Belgium doesn't sound like it'd be any better than New Jersey, Illinois or Massachusetts.

What's wrong with Massachusetts? I carry all the time here. In fact, there are less restrictions as to where I can carry than there are in Texas.

Check it out (from www.packing.org ):
Off Limits in Massachusetts:
  • Courthouses
  • Correctional Facilities
  • Virtually all Federal Buildings
  • Virtually all Police Departments
  • Any School or College Grounds (unless written permission of the dean or security chief has been obtained)
ADMIN NOTE: There is no statue banning carry in police departments. Some may have rules against it enforced through other statutes, but if you carry in a PD and there is no notification I don't think there is anything they can charge you with.

Not bad at all. Now, compare it to this:

Off Limits in Texas:
  • A place of business that derives 51% or more of its income from the sale or service of alcoholic beverages for on premises consumption
  • On premises of a correctional facility
  • On the physical premises of a school, an educational institution, or a passenger transportation vehicle of a school or an educational institution, whether the school or educational institution is public or private,
  • On the premises where a high school, collegiate or professional sporting event of interscholastic event is taking place, unless the license holder is a participant in the event and a handgun is used in the event
  • On the premises of a polling place on the day of an election or while early voting is in progress.
  • Racetrack; secured area of an airport
  • In any government court or offices utilized by the court, unless pursuant to written regulations or written authorization of the court.
  • *On the premises of a church, synagogue, or other established place of religious worship.
  • *On the premises of a Hospital licensed under the Health and Safety Code
  • *On the premises of a nursing home licensed under the Health and Safety Code
  • *Amusement parks. Amusement Parks means a permanent indoor or outdoor facility or park where amusement rides are available for use by the public that is located in a county with a population of more than one million, encompasses at least 75 acres in surface area, is enclosed with access only through controlled entries, is open for operation more than 120 days in each calendar year, and has security guards on the premises at all times. The term does not include any public or private driveway, street, sidewalk or walkway, parking lot, parking garage, or other parking area.
  • Public or private premises conspicuously posted with this sign do
  • Items above marked * Do not apply if the actor was not given effective notice under Section 30.06.
 
What was the name of the guy, while on the subway in NYC, had some punks give him a hard time? I think it was in the mid 80s. He pulled a gun on them, severely "spanking" them with a little bang bang. I think later on, one or more of these ****ing ********ers sued him.:)
 
I recall the lawyer for the punk appearing on TV to denounce Goetz. The newsman brought up the fact that the punk had analy sodomized an underage girl -- so badly she needed surgery.

The lawyer said, "You can't say that. He hasn't been convicted.":barf:
 
"The police will handle it"

"don't take the law into your own hands"

If the bus passengers had stopped the "youths" it would have been reported by the NYT as a bunch of white supremacist vigilantes beating up on poor disadvantaged minorities
 
Well, the problem simply is that if you resist, then you will be found guilty and prosecuted. People have been so beaten / programmed by the state and then on the other hand by criminals that there are not many alternatives.... I don't know if it is apathy or misplaced zeal.....

I wonder why, Goetz for example, didn't SUE the NYPD for dereliction of duty and conspiracy or something like that. I mean, if someone can be held liable for their gun being stolen and then used in a crime, why can't the police be held liable FOR SOMEONE HAVING TO USE THEIR GUN for defense? Maybe if more folks did things like that, there would be some laws passed that allow for the carrying of weapons and their use in self defense and the defense of others AND THE PROSECUTION OF CRIMINALS… REAL HONEST TO GOODNESS CRIMINALS.
 
What's wrong with Massachusetts? I carry all the time here. In fact, there are less restrictions as to where I can carry than there are in Texas.

Wow, I didn't know that. I guess there are trade-offs everywhere you go, though. We do have more restrictions on where we can carry, but on the other hand...

In Massachusetts...You will be required to state, in writing, why you have "reason to fear injury to your person or property."...Try to move beyond a "generalized fear of crime" and be as specific as possible.

I also see a requirement what they call a Firearm ID card to purchase a gun...is that just for the gun owner, or both the gun owner and the gun?
 
I doubt there's a genetic element seriously in play.

I don't doubt it. That's natural selection.

There are also unintended consequences of war which can affect society. For example research was done after the war on French women who were pregnant during the war. The conculsion was their offspring had a higher percentage of homosexuality than normal. They theorize hormones produced in the mother were altered due to the stress of the war.
 
What I cannot stand is the fact that the others fled the bus. Why do people stand around and watch events such as this transpire and not help a man in need? It's like that video floating around the internet of the guy in the pizza shop getting beat down and every person in the shop just stands there and watches. Disgusting. :rolleyes:
 
What I cannot stand is the fact that the others fled the bus. Why do people stand around and watch events such as this transpire and not help a man in need?

I think we've answered that question:

1. People are conditioned not to help. "Let the police handle it."

2. People who do help are often held liable, and sometimes prosecuted.

3. It's a bit much to expect unarmed people to rush in where cops go armed.
 
Vern...Bingo! In Great Britain, I've read that you could possibly find yourself in trouble for defending yourself, let alone a stranger. How did everything get so fugasi?

There are two kinds of people in this world -- those who mind their own damn' business, and those who mind everyone else's.

Guess which kind goes into politics and government bureauracy?:barf:
 
There are two kinds of people in this world -- those who mind their own damn' business, and those who mind everyone else's.

Vern,

I'm going to take that statement in reference to the government sticking it's
nose into everything (warranted or not) rather than people watching an
innocent person getting beat to death as simply minding their own business.

Please correct me if I am wrong.
 
I just returned from 2 and a half weeks in London and Berlin, and ate dinner nightly with locals.

Surprise, surprise -- in both locations, guns came up as a topic of conversation. I was asked if there was any scenario where I would "shoot to kill."

I said yes, for example if an intruder was in my home in the middle of the night. He would have broken past door locks, disabled/ignored an alarm, and represents a threat to my wife and two children. I like to think that I would not hesitate, I explained.

You would have thought from the expressions from those around the table that I had just bitten the head of a live panda bear. They were in utter disbelief at my "lack of respect for human life."

This is the mentality of most I encountered in Europe, though by no means all. It's a different world out there, folks.

Rich
 
I'm going to take that statement in reference to the government sticking it's
nose into everything (warranted or not) rather than people watching an
innocent person getting beat to death as simply minding their own business.

Those people who want to control you are more likely to be in government than those who expect you to rely on yourself and make your own decisions.

The more government you have, the more passive and helpless the people are.
 
I just returned from 2 and a half weeks in London and Berlin, and ate dinner nightly with locals.

Surprise, surprise -- in both locations, guns came up as a topic of conversation. I was asked if there was any scenario where I would "shoot to kill."

I said yes, for example if an intruder was in my home in the middle of the night. He would have broken past door locks, disabled/ignored an alarm, and represents a threat to my wife and two children. I like to think that I would not hesitate, I explained.

You would have thought from the expressions from those around the table that I had just bitten the head of a live panda bear. They were in utter disbelief at my "lack of respect for human life."

A Brit asked me, "If someone came into your house at 3 AM, would you blow his head off?"

I said, "No. I'd aim for center of mass.":D
 
Those people who want to control you are more likely to be in government than those who expect you to rely on yourself and make your own decisions.

The more government you have, the more passive and helpless the people are.

Just wanted to make sure we were moving in the same direction.

BTW, I liked your "center of mass" response.
 
hso:
You have to go back over 40 years to dredge up Kitty Genovese? I'd say that's a big point in the USA's favor, when you have to go back decades and decades. And BTW, that incident set off a furious national debate about the DUTY to interviene to save a victim being attacked.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top