Welcome login | signup
Language en es fr
OccupyForum

Forum Post: Query : Do you think that if you buy a license to shoot varmints that it would allow you ( us ) to shoot two legged predators ( vermin ) ?

Posted 10 years ago on Dec. 14, 2011, 11:18 a.m. EST by DKAtoday (33802) from Coon Rapids, MN
This content is user submitted and not an official statement

Or is that a whole different license that I'm thinking of?

52 Comments

52 Comments


Read the Rules
[-] 1 points by DKAtoday (33802) from Coon Rapids, MN 10 years ago

No comment???

[-] 1 points by kingscrossection (1203) 10 years ago

What two legged predators are you referring to exactly?

[-] 1 points by DKAtoday (33802) from Coon Rapids, MN 10 years ago

You know! Those vermin who rape or abduct and murder children and other defenseless beings. Those that set off bombs in public spaces etc. You know .. vermin!

[-] 1 points by GirlFriday (17435) 10 years ago

Is that you, Nancy Grace?

[-] 1 points by DKAtoday (33802) from Coon Rapids, MN 10 years ago

Again sorry? I'm pretty sure I should be embarrassed if that was a reference to some one I should know. But if she is someone I should know I'm afraid that I must admit then that I am currently at a loss.

[-] 1 points by GirlFriday (17435) 10 years ago

:/

We don't randomly shoot people unless someone walks in your house uninvited and it is self defense.

[-] 1 points by DKAtoday (33802) from Coon Rapids, MN 10 years ago

Sorry if you are taking this seriously. I probably should not do it. But I'm trying to inject some humor while trying to get people to think seriously about a serious problem. The catching and releasing of predators.

[-] 1 points by GirlFriday (17435) 10 years ago

Oh, it is a serious problem. You either have evidence or you do not. Pretty simple stuff.

[-] 1 points by DKAtoday (33802) from Coon Rapids, MN 10 years ago

OK. So. How many times should a predator be allowed out of jail to re-offend? How many victims and how many convictions are too many?

[-] 1 points by GirlFriday (17435) 10 years ago

OK, so, do you have evidence or do you not have evidence?

[-] 1 points by DKAtoday (33802) from Coon Rapids, MN 10 years ago

We are talking about a legitimately guilty individual. No doubts. Guilty! Not a scape goat to sooth the public, an actual absolutely guilty individual.

[-] 1 points by GirlFriday (17435) 10 years ago

Which one? You are trying to play a hypothetical scenario here.

Either way, you cannot randomly shoot people based on how you feel.

[-] 1 points by DKAtoday (33802) from Coon Rapids, MN 10 years ago

Of coarse it is a hypothetical case, to a real problem!

Again your taking me too literally with the hunting license. As I said, perhaps inappropriate but intended as humor while forwarding a real serious issue for consideration and debate.

[-] 1 points by GirlFriday (17435) 10 years ago

I'm debating the serious issue.

[-] 1 points by DKAtoday (33802) from Coon Rapids, MN 10 years ago

Sorry. My Bad !! I thought you might be beginning to chase your tail.

Again My Bad.

[-] 1 points by kingscrossection (1203) 10 years ago

Ok vermin. I understand. I don't think you need a special license. I think you just need to prove that you were defending yourself. However, if the other guy is dead then you can say whatever you want. Its a double edged sword.

[-] 1 points by DKAtoday (33802) from Coon Rapids, MN 10 years ago

I don't think being concerned about defending myself should be a concern. I mean vermin are included on a varmint hunting license aren't they???

[-] 1 points by kingscrossection (1203) 10 years ago

Yes but they are still human are they not? You will always have to worry defending yourself. Its not a particularly large deal is it?

[-] 1 points by GirlFriday (17435) 10 years ago

lolwut?

[-] 1 points by DKAtoday (33802) from Coon Rapids, MN 10 years ago

Well perhaps it is that they are a protected feces I mean specie.

But why aren't they extremely toxic?

[-] 1 points by GirlFriday (17435) 10 years ago

lulz.

[-] 1 points by DKAtoday (33802) from Coon Rapids, MN 10 years ago

Wha-Huh??? I'm sorry I'm not up on text speak, guess I'm gettin old.

[-] 1 points by DKAtoday (33802) from Coon Rapids, MN 10 years ago

I don't believe that they are an endangered species. So that shouldn't be a consideration.

[-] 1 points by GirlFriday (17435) 10 years ago

You don't have the right to randomly shoot people because of how you feel.

[-] 0 points by kingscrossection (1203) 10 years ago

In that case let me make another posting. Sexual predators, pedophiles, and murder's should be put to death when convicted. And yes, that is a Texan view but I don't really care and formed it on my own before I new very much about Texas at all.

[-] 1 points by AndyJ0hn (129) 10 years ago

what about if you were wrongly accused of any of those things? change your mind?

[-] 1 points by kingscrossection (1203) 10 years ago

I accept my cards and then just like in hearts I play them the best I can in order to get as little shit back on me as I can.

[-] 1 points by GirlFriday (17435) 10 years ago

Cameron Todd Willingham: Wrongfully Convicted and Executed in Texas Cameron Todd Willingham was executed in Texas in 2004 for allegedly setting a fire that killed his three young daughters 13 years earlier. He always claimed his innocence, and the arson investigation used to convict him was questioned by leading experts before Willingham was executed. Since 2004, further evidence in the case has led to the inescapable conclusion that Willingham did not set the fire for which he was executed.

The Texas Forensic Science Commission issued its report on the convictions of Cameron Todd Willingham and Ernest Willis on April 15, 2011 recommending more education and training for fire investigators and implementing procedures to review old cases (the commission issued an addendum to the report on October 28, 2011. http://www.innocenceproject.org/Content/Cameron_Todd_Willingham_Wrongfully_Convicted_and_Executed_in_Texas.php

[-] 1 points by kingscrossection (1203) 10 years ago

Shit happens. And that sounds cold but what about the Goddamned rapists and pedophiles that are released from prison?

[-] 1 points by GirlFriday (17435) 10 years ago

Kansas v Hendricks http://www.law.cornell.edu/supct/html/95-1649.ZS.html

Kansas v Crane http://www.law.cornell.edu/supct/html/00-957.ZS.html

United States v Comstock http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_v._Comstock For the case look here: http://www.law.cornell.edu/supct/html/08-1224.ZS.html

Shit only happens providing it happens to someone else.

[-] 1 points by kingscrossection (1203) 10 years ago

Not true at all. I accept my cards and then just like in hearts I play them the best I can in order to get as little shit back on me as I can.

[-] 1 points by GirlFriday (17435) 10 years ago

'Cept, this isn't a card game we are talking about.

Did you read the cases?

[-] 1 points by kingscrossection (1203) 10 years ago

No it was an analogy. You know what I mean. If that is your only argument then I don't know if I should talk to you. Yes I did, what about them.?

[-] 1 points by GirlFriday (17435) 10 years ago

It means that this: Goddamned rapists and pedophiles that are released from prison?

has already been answered by the Supreme Court and these people can and are held indefinitely.


What this boils down to is that you are willfully and intentionally obtuse. Don't bother replying. I sure as hell don't want to talk to anyone that is willing to sell the American people down the river.

[-] 1 points by kingscrossection (1203) 10 years ago

These people pleaded insanity.

[-] 1 points by DKAtoday (33802) from Coon Rapids, MN 10 years ago

I fully agree with you on that. As long as the individual is truly the guilty asshole and not a victim of Prosecutorial or evidentiary tampering or abuse. Because I think that those who knowingly put an innocent individual on death-row should be sent there as well. That includes police, prosecutors, expert witnesses as well as judges.

[-] 1 points by kingscrossection (1203) 10 years ago

Although you have to admit that sometimes mistakes happen.

[-] 1 points by DKAtoday (33802) from Coon Rapids, MN 10 years ago

If it was not intentional ( malice aforethought ) that should always be taken into consideration. Very few things in life are black & white. And being human no one is perfect and so are bound to make mistakes. That is why a death penalty case should go under a microscope prior to sentencing.

[-] 1 points by kingscrossection (1203) 10 years ago

Agreed. At least a month of intense investigation prior to.

[-] 1 points by DKAtoday (33802) from Coon Rapids, MN 10 years ago

And no time limitation to prosecuting the guilty. Just like an open murder case. Or prosecuting a war criminal.

[-] 1 points by kingscrossection (1203) 10 years ago

Yes. Although there is the problem of proving without any doubt whatsoever.

[-] 1 points by DKAtoday (33802) from Coon Rapids, MN 10 years ago

Again the evidence of malfeasance/wrong doing would have to be black and white as to who was guilty and how they were guilty. Just like the evidence should be on the convicted criminal.

[-] 2 points by kingscrossection (1203) 10 years ago

Ok sounds like we have completely similar ideas on this

[-] 1 points by DKAtoday (33802) from Coon Rapids, MN 10 years ago

Good. It is a difficult topic. Look forward to hearing from you on other issues.

[-] 1 points by GirlFriday (17435) 10 years ago

HR 1540

[-] 1 points by DKAtoday (33802) from Coon Rapids, MN 10 years ago

HR 1540 as in what? Can you be a little more expansive on that?

[-] 1 points by GirlFriday (17435) 10 years ago

YOU: And no time limitation to prosecuting the guilty. Just like an open murder case. Or prosecuting a war criminal.

ME: HR 1540


I was expansive here: Kansas v Hendricks http://www.law.cornell.edu/supct/html/95-1649.ZS.html Kansas v Crane http://www.law.cornell.edu/supct/html/00-957.ZS.html United States v Comstock http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_v._Comstock For the case look here: http://www.law.cornell.edu/supct/html/08-1224.ZS.html Shit only happens providing it happens to someone else.


Is there any reason in particular that you are advocating for the complete and utter destruction of the rights of the American people?

[-] 1 points by DKAtoday (33802) from Coon Rapids, MN 10 years ago

Some how I think you have stepped out into the twilight zone.

[-] 1 points by GirlFriday (17435) 10 years ago

Of course, you didn't read the cases. You are advocating for the complete and utter destruction of the rights of the American people.

Nice job.

[-] 1 points by DKAtoday (33802) from Coon Rapids, MN 10 years ago

You are entitled to your opinion.

That's why this country is still worth supporting. There are all too many places in this world where opinions can't be expressed.

[-] 1 points by GirlFriday (17435) 10 years ago

No, you are entitled to your own opinion, but NOT YOUR OWN FACTS.

[-] 1 points by GirlFriday (17435) 10 years ago

Did you read the cases?