I also love who you call everyone stupid/ got every other insult.
You know you wouldn't dare say anything like that to anyobdy in real life, because, after all, familly IS first, and you wouldn't want to start a pointless fight that could potentially get you killed.
Fine, I'll give you that.
But, once again, they are trained and paid to do this.
98% of America is not trained to do any of that, and they are not paid to do any of that.
But, you still consider them to be pussies.
It must be great to be you.
By the way, when are you going to sign up to help the poor, defenseless people of Iraq and Afganistan. Surely a heroic, Rambo-like person such as yourself would have already done that.
This is what I've been trying to argue this whole time YOU ING IDIOT.Fine, I'll give you that.
Yea, this all makes sense.
Me arguing with people on the internet is the exact same thing as intervening in a fight between two complete strangers where one of them, if not both of them, is probably packing heat.
It all makes sense.
The biggest point I can make about the professional aspect of being a public hero is that these guys have put a value on what they do.
If you take away the money and the benefits you'd have next to no fireman, policeman, ambulance drivers and so forth. Its a risk yes but for those people they feel its either adaquate conpensation for the risk or the compensation plus the love for doing it out weigh the risk.
Take the money out of the equation and you have a load less hero's
No, you idiot, you've been arguing that to not interven is to be a pussy.
Do I really have to go back and quote where you've said that over and over again?
By the way, answer my previous question:
Are you a cop, fireman, or soldier?
You really are an idiot.
You are presuming that there are extenuating cir stances. There are none. The hypothetical is it is just a random agrument you encounter, not one where a guy had gun with the intent to kill you beforehand.
And:
So you are saying you've never querrelled with anyone in real life?
My argument was the the first post you quoted. I answered back, adn you just arely figure th out waht I've been ing saying this whole god damn fcuking time you got piece of idiot sucking
By the way I just wanted to see how badass it must feel like to be you.
I figured maybe i'd orgasm or something.
A smart man always will.
You're assuming that they don't have a weapon.
Who's smarter, someone who will dive into an altercation that doesn't involve him thinking that no one has a weapon, or the guy who is cautious and calls the cops to intervene?
So, you didn't say that?
You didn't say that it's pussy not to get involved?
Oh, and you still haven't answered my previous question.
I wonder why.
I'm glad you got it out of your system.
Now, go out and intervene in arguments, my super hero friend.
So, to the people who say they should never intervene in one of these situations, what if it was you child was being beaten up to death by a stranger, and you know other grown men were at the scene but decided not to stop the beating because, you know, God forbid you go out of your way to help others . . .
How the would you feel if your kid was pemanently injured or dead becuase of the beating?
That's already been covered.
Melmart brought it up.
Go back a few pages.
But, would you seriously spend all your energy blaming people who could've intervened instead of concentrating on the person who actually did it?
I'd be one pissed off dude!!I'd be shocked if anyone wouldn't be. Sounds like a natural response to me. But there is no law that says one must "intervene" in such situations and even if there was it wouldn't do anything and couldn't really be prosecuted.
I wouldn't "blame" them. I'd hope their own conscious is doing that.
That's right.
I'd be going after the person who actually did it.
Irrelevant to the point I'm making.
And you did not answer the question.
True. No human law.
On the other hand, there is a moral law.
And given that you are a Christian, there is a Higher Law.
That is beyond discussion and irrelevant with regards to the topic of the thread.
If you'd be pissed off, then those witnesses that did not intervene did something wrong, I would pressume.I'd be one pissed off dude!!
Otherwise, you would not be pissed off at them.
I did answer the question.
I wouldn't be pissed at them.
I'd be pissed at the person who commited the crime.
I plainly stated that.
And, it is relevant.
Why spend time and energy on people who had nothing to do with the crime instead of the actual person who commited the crime?
No it's not.
Why blame people who had nothing to do with the crime?
Why?
I think he meant, and I'm assuming here, that he would be pissed off at the person who commited the crime.
You would not be pissed at the person who could've stopped the murder of your child?
Ok
When did I ever say that?Why spend time and energy on people who had nothing to do with the crime instead of the actual person who commited the crime?
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
