ROG62 Posted February 20 Share Posted February 20 5 hours ago, slideman said: Your OP is a f****** lie Article came out nov 19... Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Imgreatagain Posted February 20 Author Share Posted February 20 8 minutes ago, ROG62 said: Article came out nov 19... Friend sent to me . Could be Quote Link to post Share on other sites
kfools Posted February 20 Share Posted February 20 5 hours ago, slideman said: https://www.reuters.com/article/uk-factcheck-terry-meza-castle-doctrine/factcheckdemocratictexas-rep-terry-meza-wants-to-amend-castle-doctrine-not-repeal-it-posts-feature-satirical-quotes-idUSKBN28L1ZB I don't really see your link being that much better. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Imgreatagain Posted February 20 Author Share Posted February 20 4 minutes ago, kfools said: I don't really see your link being that much better. Meh. I could I have done better here and did a little more research. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Zaro Posted February 20 Share Posted February 20 56 minutes ago, Imgreatagain said: Friend sent to me . Could be You got suckered again Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Zaro Posted February 20 Share Posted February 20 43 minutes ago, Imgreatagain said: Meh. I could I have done better here and did a little more research. Should have trusted your gut - are you kidding me Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Str8tEdge Posted February 21 Share Posted February 21 19 hours ago, Imgreatagain said: Are You Kidding Me? Is it possible for someone to be dumber than AOC??? In Texas, State Representative Terry Meza (D-Irving) has introduced HB196. Her bill would repeal the state's "Castle Doctrine." This doctrine allows a homeowner to use deadly force against an armed intruder who breaks into his home. Now listen to what she has to say... "I'm not saying that stealing is okay," Meza explained. "All I'm saying is that it doesn't warrant a death penalty. Thieves only carry weapons for self-protection and to provide the householder an incentive to cooperate. They just want to get their loot and get away. When the resident tries to resist is when people get hurt. If only one side is armed fewer people will be killed." Meza was quick to reassure that her bill would not totally prevent homeowners from defending themselves. Under her new law, “… the homeowner's obligation is to flee the home at the first sign of intrusion. If fleeing is not possible, he must cooperate with the intruder. But if violence breaks out it is the homeowner's responsibility to make sure no one gets hurt. The best way to achieve this is to use the minimum non-lethal force possible because intruders will be able to sue for any injuries they receive at the hands of the homeowner. "In most instances the thief needs the money more than the homeowner does," Meza reasoned. "The homeowner's insurance reimburse his losses. On balance, the transfer of property is likely to lead to a more equitable distribution of wealth. If my bill can help make this transfer a peaceful one so much the better. That is one of the dumbest fucking things I've EVER heard. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
king of the county Posted February 23 Share Posted February 23 On 2/20/2021 at 4:40 PM, Imgreatagain said: Meh. I could I have done better here and did a little more research. Are you back tracking? Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Imgreatagain Posted February 23 Author Share Posted February 23 5 minutes ago, king of the county said: Are you back tracking? The premise is relevant. The source was dated Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Skans Posted February 23 Share Posted February 23 Quote "I'm not saying that stealing is okay," Meza explained. "All I'm saying is that it doesn't warrant a death penalty." I tend to sympathize with this. While I do not advocate killing someone who busts into your house with intent to rob and/or harm you, I do wonder whether it would be better to allow homeowners to capture these invaders, sever their arms at the shoulders, sever their legs at the hips, rubber-band their balls and lobotomize them with icepicks instead? It's just a question, what do y'all think? Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Imgreatagain Posted February 23 Author Share Posted February 23 5 minutes ago, Skans said: I tend to sympathize with this. While I do not advocate killing someone who busts into your house with intent to rob and/or harm you, I do wonder whether it would be better to allow homeowners to capture these invaders, sever their arms at the shoulders, sever their legs at the hips, rubber-band their balls and lobotomize them with icepicks instead? It's just a question, what do y'all think? This is a novel idea. Kidnapping seems like a lot of work though. holding someone hostage for breaking into your house would be interesting. Most of these criminal types wouldn’t be missed for a while- if at all Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Skans Posted February 23 Share Posted February 23 4 minutes ago, Imgreatagain said: This is a novel idea. Kidnapping seems like a lot of work though. holding someone hostage for breaking into your house would be interesting. Most of these criminal types wouldn’t be missed for a while- if at all Their parts could be useful and might even save worthy individual's lives. I believe that once someone breaks into your home, your "castle", they should become your property just like a ceramic dish, and you should be absolutely free to do whatever you want with your property, so long as it does not harm others. Lots of people break dishes intentionally, throw them away, bounce them off of concrete floors, severe their limbs, castrate them and even lobotomize their dishes. I see nothing wrong with this at all. 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites
king of the county Posted February 26 Share Posted February 26 Cortez serving up lunches in Texas Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.